Winston Nguyen, 37, a former “Jeopardy!” champion who once held a prestigious teaching position at the elite Saint Ann’s School in Brooklyn, New York, found himself under the intense scrutiny of a Manhattan courtroom this month. Nguyen, who had gained national recognition for his quiz show success, is now at the center of a scandal that has sent shockwaves through the community. Nguyen, who was once celebrated for his intellect and teaching prowess, is facing severe allegations that he manipulated and exploited some of the most vulnerable members of society. The former math teacher, who was hired by Saint Ann’s despite a troubling criminal past, is accused of posing as a teenager online to solicit explicit images from children as young as 13. The case has drawn considerable attention, not only because of the gravity of the accusations but also because of the questions it raises about the school’s hiring practices.
The courtroom was tense on Monday, August 5, 2024, as Judge Josh Hanshaft reviewed Nguyen’s history and the disturbing new allegations against him. “First it was the elderly [referring to Nguyen’s past offense], now it’s children,” Hanshaft remarked, highlighting the stark shift in Nguyen’s alleged targets. The judge’s concern was palpable as he considered the accusations that Nguyen had preyed upon students at four prestigious private schools in Brooklyn, including Saint Ann’s, by catfishing them on social media platforms like Snapchat. Nguyen’s legal troubles began years earlier when he was convicted of stealing more than $300,000 from an elderly couple he was supposed to be caring for as a home health aide. He served a four-month jail sentence for that crime in 2019. Despite this conviction, Saint Ann’s School hired him as a math teacher, a decision that has since come under intense scrutiny, especially in light of the current charges. “My concern here is the allegations of him preying upon the most vulnerable citizens,” Judge Hanshaft stated during the hearing, reflecting the deep unease surrounding the case. Nguyen’s legal team, led by attorney Frank Rothman, argued that their client had taken steps to address his issues, including enrolling in a treatment program known as the Mustard Seed Program, months before his arrest. Rothman revealed that Nguyen had voluntarily joined the program on the advice of his therapist, citing a need for “self-awareness.” The Mustard Seed Program, which specializes in the treatment of individuals who have committed sexual offenses, became a focal point in the hearing. Rothman insisted that Nguyen’s enrollment in the program had nothing to do with the impending child images case. Instead, he argued, it was a proactive measure taken long before the arrest in an effort to confront and manage his issues. Despite these arguments, Judge Hanshaft remained unconvinced that Nguyen should be allowed any leeway. During the hearing, the judge threatened to jail Nguyen for violating the terms of his probation from the earlier theft conviction. However, after much deliberation, Hanshaft decided against immediate incarceration, opting instead to impose strict probation conditions that effectively confine Nguyen to his Harlem apartment. Under these conditions, Nguyen is subject to electronic monitoring and is restricted from using a cellphone or computer except for his twice-weekly virtual therapy sessions. “If you have any complications, you’ll be waiting inside of a cell,” Hanshaft warned Nguyen during the hearing, underscoring the seriousness of the situation. The judge’s decision reflects a cautious approach as the legal process continues, with a potential plea deal in the new case hinging on whether authorities find incriminating materials on Nguyen’s devices.
Nguyen’s arrest and the ensuing legal battles have also reignited anger from the family of the elderly couple he previously defrauded. “It’s incredible to me that no one did their due diligence,” the couple’s son told the press, expressing his disbelief that Saint Ann’s would hire Nguyen despite his criminal record. This sentiment has been echoed by many in the community who are grappling with the implications of Nguyen’s actions and the school’s apparent oversight. As Nguyen awaits further legal proceedings, the case continues to draw widespread attention, not only for the shocking nature of the allegations but also for the broader questions it raises about the responsibility of educational institutions in vetting their employees.
The next steps in the case will be closely watched, as the community seeks answers and accountability in the wake of this disturbing scandal.
