Police records state the employee was provided access to information regarding the allegations before administrators realized she was allegedly the adult involved in the relationship.
A sexual misconduct investigation involving an Olympia High School employee has been reopened after a student who previously refused to identify the staff member allegedly involved in the relationship reportedly named her during a follow-up interview with investigators. The case, which was initially declined for prosecution earlier this year due to insufficient cooperation from the student, has now reportedly been resubmitted to the Thurston County Prosecutor’s Office for renewed review.
According to police records obtained by OSD Rescue, Olympia School District administrators first contacted law enforcement on May 15, 2025, after allegations surfaced that an administrative assistant at Olympia High School had engaged in a sexual relationship with a sophomore student. Assistant principals Mallory Wilson and Elizabeth Cornelius told investigators their administrative assistant “had intercourse with one of the students.”
The allegations reportedly originated after the student disclosed details of the relationship to a SeaMar therapist assigned to the school. According to investigative records, the student indicated the woman warned him not to tell anyone because she could lose her job.
The therapist and school social worker informed the student that they were mandatory reporters and would be required to disclose the information. Despite the seriousness of the allegations, records indicate school administrators initially handled the matter internally before contacting police. Between approximately May 8 and May 15, administrators reportedly conducted their own inquiry, including asking the staff member later accused in the case to monitor school surveillance footage for suspicious behavior involving the student.
Police records state the employee was provided access to information regarding the allegations before administrators realized she was allegedly the adult involved in the relationship.
Investigators noted: “Until staff later learned that (AA) was the alleged adult involved in a relationship with (the student), (AA) had been privy to all the conversations regarding the allegations that (the student) was involved in a relationship with an adult female”.
Family members reportedly identified the employee to school staff early in the investigation. The student’s sister allegedly told school officials her brother disclosed that he met with the woman on Sundays and that the pair engaged in sexual activity multiple times. The student’s mother similarly told administrators she initially believed her son was dating someone his own age before discovering the relationship allegedly involved a school employee. The employee was placed on administrative leave the same day police were formally notified.
Investigators later attempted to interview the student multiple times, but he reportedly refused to identify the woman involved, despite allegedly admitting the relationship was sexual and that the woman was more than a decade older than him. A forensic examination of the student’s phone uncovered messages investigators believed were linked to the accused employee, allegedly instructing the student not to tell anyone, even his therapist. Police wrote in their report, “It appeared that (AA) was attempting to keep (student) from reporting their relationship further, as she had been privy to information related to the school’s suspicions up until now”.
Investigators also discovered AI-related searches on the student’s phone referencing “School Admin Roles” and “(AA’s full name) Overview.” Police records say the student told investigators he was “trying to understand the full extent of their relationship because people kept telling him it was bad because she was older.”
During a September 2025 interview with detectives, the accused employee denied all allegations. The employee further claimed the student may have been “texting a burner phone, fabricating all of this,” and suggested the family was “looking for a payout.” She also questioned why the school district had become involved before law enforcement, reportedly asking investigators why “her school district was involved and not the police because she was being accused of having sex with a student.”
A forensic search of the employee’s phone reportedly found no incriminating evidence or deleted communications involving the student. In January 2026, prosecutors declined to file charges, citing the student’s refusal to cooperate and failure to identify the suspect by name. The prosecutor’s office stated: “There is insufficient evidence to prove the case beyond a reasonable doubt due to the victim’s unwillingness to cooperate with law enforcement’s investigation. The victim would not provide detailed disclosure to law enforcement and did not give the name of the suspect.”
However, in March 2026, according to a supplemental police report dated April 27 obtained by OSD Rescue, detectives returned to Olympia High School after learning the student had identified the employee during discussions with a private investigator hired by the district. Police say the student then told investigators he had been involved in a month-long sexual relationship with the employee and claimed they had sex “five plus times.”
The student reportedly said he previously withheld information because he “did not want anything to happen to AA.” Following the new disclosure, investigators resubmitted the case to the Thurston County Prosecutor for another charging review. The employee has reportedly remained on administrative leave since May 15, 2025.
The case also renewed scrutiny over the Olympia School District’s 2020 decision to end its School Resource Officer partnership. As a result, no SRO was stationed in the district when the allegations first surfaced, and law enforcement did not become involved until administrators formally reported the allegations days later.
