School Shooting in Michigan. 3 Teens DEAD. 1 15-yr old suspect in custody.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Interesting article about Shannon Smith, one of the lawyers for the parents.

https://www.google.com/amp/s/www.newsweek.com/who-shannon-smith-larry-nassars-attorney-reps-alleged-oxford-shooters-parents-1655983%3famp=1

Another one. Wonder if she took the case pro bono, apparently she does periodically:

https://www.mlive.com/news/2017/11/attorney_shannon_smith.html

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Did the shooter HAND IN the paper that said, "I can't stop the thoughts. Blood everywhere. I want help" or did a teacher find/see it?

I did hear those statements were written on an assignment sheet he was supposed to complete.

If he handed it in before the crime, then I actually think he was hoping an adult would stop him.

Not sympathetic view, I am sure. But there was a moment in time that morning when everyone was still alive.

Okay, now that I have read the letter from the school, I no longer think the kid wanted to be stopped.

It seems he lied and said the drawings were for a videogame he was designing!

That poor counsellor, who apparently did not elevate this case. What a difficult job they have!!

[Anonymous]

I actually decided NOT to be a pediatric therapist because I thought it would be so frustrating to know that (in many, not all) cases, the parents are driving the kid's problems...but you can't fix them!

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Interesting article about Shannon Smith, one of the lawyers for the parents.

https://www.google.com/amp/s/www.newsweek.com/who-shannon-smith-larry-nassars-attorney-reps-alleged-oxford-shooters-parents-1655983%3famp=1

Another one. Wonder if she took the case pro bono, apparently she does periodically:

https://www.mlive.com/news/2017/11/attorney_shannon_smith.html

Not pro bono. They actually cited the amount of their retainer as proof that the parents were not a flight risk and intended to defend the charges.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Interesting article about Shannon Smith, one of the lawyers for the parents.

https://www.google.com/amp/s/www.newsweek.com/who-shannon-smith-larry-nassars-attorney-reps-alleged-oxford-shooters-parents-1655983%3famp=1

Another one. Wonder if she took the case pro bono, apparently she does periodically:

https://www.mlive.com/news/2017/11/attorney_shannon_smith.html

This makes her sound like she has some kind of intellectual interest, which she does not. She's a braggart with a rich social media presence and those posts are clear that she's in it for money and that's about it.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Interesting article about Shannon Smith, one of the lawyers for the parents.

https://www.google.com/amp/s/www.newsweek.com/who-shannon-smith-larry-nassars-attorney-reps-alleged-oxford-shooters-parents-1655983%3famp=1

Another one. Wonder if she took the case pro bono, apparently she does periodically:

https://www.mlive.com/news/2017/11/attorney_shannon_smith.html

This makes her sound like she has some kind of intellectual interest, which she does not. She's a braggart with a rich social media presence and those posts are clear that she's in it for money and that's about it.

Here's a Tweet compiling the posts: https://twitter.com/R_Denhollander/status/1467205226252107776?s=20

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:WaPo now reporting the letter sent by the superintendent yesterday to parents outlining the chronology of events with this kid at the school. Apparently, the report by the teacher and meeting with parents that day all stayed at the guidance counselor level. The principal and VP were never looped in. Wow.

Such obvious CYA bullshit.

Regardless, it's shocking that this didn't rise to the P and VP's attention. I don't think that covers the school district's *ss at all.

[Anonymous]

One of the interesting points in the letter from the school is that after questioning the boy about the drawing and self-harm/harm to others, they decided to let him go back to class rather than return home to an "empty house" because his parents refused to take him. It makes it sound as though they thought he would be safer in school -- which means they (justifiably) didn't trust his assurances that he would not harm himself or others.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Interesting article about Shannon Smith, one of the lawyers for the parents.

https://www.google.com/amp/s/www.newsweek.com/who-shannon-smith-larry-nassars-attorney-reps-alleged-oxford-shooters-parents-1655983%3famp=1

Another one. Wonder if she took the case pro bono, apparently she does periodically:

https://www.mlive.com/news/2017/11/attorney_shannon_smith.html

This makes her sound like she has some kind of intellectual interest, which she does not. She's a braggart with a rich social media presence and those posts are clear that she's in it for money and that's about it.

Here's a Tweet compiling the posts: https://twitter.com/R_Denhollander/status/1467205226252107776?s=20

Wow. She seems like a piece of work. But that was obvious from her trying to pretend her clients weren’t fleeing when they obvious were.

[Anonymous]

This quote is for the PP who was trying to insist that troubled kids don’t have “more rights” than everyone else. So, literally the only reason he remained at school was because they didn’t want to send him, a teenager, home to an empty house. What were they afraid of? Teens are allowed to be home alone, so they clearly worried about something.

If they weren’t MORE worried about this kid, than the rest of the kids, then 4 children would still be alive. His rights superseded theirs.

"Given the fact that the child had no prior disciplinary infractions, the decision was made he would be returned to the classroom rather than sent home to an empty house," Throne said.”

[Anonymous]

The poor, and those with poor judgment, will always be with us …

When will enough be enough and the US get federal gun safety laws to protect us and our children from the mentally unwell and criminals?

Even moderate gun enthusiasts who promote sensible gun laws are harassed by gun lobbyists.

We need a new amendment to the second amendment that was written in a very different era …

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:The poor, and those with poor judgment, will always be with us …

When will enough be enough and the US get federal gun safety laws to protect us and our children from the mentally unwell and criminals?

Even moderate gun enthusiasts who promote sensible gun laws are harassed by gun lobbyists.

We need a new amendment to the second amendment that was written in a very different era …

Yes, absolutely. This is where the focus should be, no matter how hard it is.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:The poor, and those with poor judgment, will always be with us …

When will enough be enough and the US get federal gun safety laws to protect us and our children from the mentally unwell and criminals?

Even moderate gun enthusiasts who promote sensible gun laws are harassed by gun lobbyists.

We need a new amendment to the second amendment that was written in a very different era …

Yes, absolutely. This is where the focus should be, no matter how hard it is.

I agree (and for decades, the 2nd amendment was NOT interpreted as protecting INDIVIDUAL gun rights, as it is now).

Unfortunately, the twisted Republicans (who are more about subjecting the majority to THEIR conservative world view than maintaining the United States' as a democracy) played a brilliant long game in stacking the Supreme Court. So, it will take a very long time for sane gun laws or human rights or women's rights or voters' rights to be preserved in this country again.

If ever...

[Anonymous]

Narrowing the timeline to Monday and Tuesday is misleading. There was a "dark cloud" hanging over the school for weeks and months leading up to this. The district wrote letters about the "rumors", see: https://oxfordhigh.oxfordschools.org/parents___students/building_communications/november_12__concerns_and_rumors

The district's administrative brass is a mile long list of six-figure salary highly credentialed "experts". Sorry, I'm not buying it that two uneducated low-life parents persuaded or successfully pushed back against the brass. The professionals failed the community, there is no other way to put it.

The superintendent was a deer in headlights at the very first press conference on Tuesday afternoon; he looked very "off". I suspected then he was fully aware he and his colleagues screwed up.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:The poor, and those with poor judgment, will always be with us …

When will enough be enough and the US get federal gun safety laws to protect us and our children from the mentally unwell and criminals?

Even moderate gun enthusiasts who promote sensible gun laws are harassed by gun lobbyists.

We need a new amendment to the second amendment that was written in a very different era …

How many were killed by guns in schools this year verse how many teens were killed by drug overdoses and auto accidents to and from school?