APS black student singled out to play cotton picking game

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Any publicly available updates on this after the $10 million demand in early May? The letter sought a response in 30 days, which have now passed. Would like to know how APS is handling this given how much publicity it initially got. Interesting it’s been crickets since then—including no further comments from NAACP.

I heard several people raised the issue about the home address with many of the involved organizations. Apparently they do live in Arlington now but not until recently (they were using the aunts home address for years). It’s quite the conflict.

Any residency fraud is an accusation and really can’t be proven. The important thing that needs to be addressed is this racist incident this young boy suffered.

It’s not hard to check where the parents had their cars registered and filed income taxes over the last ten years. It either matches the address he was registered under for school or it doesn’t.

The actual incident that wasn’t even racially motivated accounts for a very small portion of the kid’s suffering compared to what his mother has done to him with this insane demand letter and publicity.

Mom’s public traffic citations list a Maryland address. Pretty easy.

Ok but do you know where the father lives? or does the child reside with another family member who lives in Arlington?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Any publicly available updates on this after the $10 million demand in early May? The letter sought a response in 30 days, which have now passed. Would like to know how APS is handling this given how much publicity it initially got. Interesting it’s been crickets since then—including no further comments from NAACP.

I heard several people raised the issue about the home address with many of the involved organizations. Apparently they do live in Arlington now but not until recently (they were using the aunts home address for years). It’s quite the conflict.

Any residency fraud is an accusation and really can’t be proven. The important thing that needs to be addressed is this racist incident this young boy suffered.

It’s not hard to check where the parents had their cars registered and filed income taxes over the last ten years. It either matches the address he was registered under for school or it doesn’t.

The actual incident that wasn’t even racially motivated accounts for a very small portion of the kid’s suffering compared to what his mother has done to him with this insane demand letter and publicity.

Mom’s public traffic citations list a Maryland address. Pretty easy.

Ok but do you know where the father lives? or does the child reside with another family member who lives in Arlington?

They are married.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:If the residency issue turns out to be nothing but hot air, I say the family walks away with a nice sum, but probably not all of what they requested. “C’est la vie” as they say in Quebec.

I don’t expect it to be public either. The family will be happy and APS frees itself from a costly legal fight.

A sum for what? There’s no colorable claim.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Any publicly available updates on this after the $10 million demand in early May? The letter sought a response in 30 days, which have now passed. Would like to know how APS is handling this given how much publicity it initially got. Interesting it’s been crickets since then—including no further comments from NAACP.

I heard several people raised the issue about the home address with many of the involved organizations. Apparently they do live in Arlington now but not until recently (they were using the aunts home address for years). It’s quite the conflict.

Recently - likely means a week or
two before the lawyer sent the letter

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Any publicly available updates on this after the $10 million demand in early May? The letter sought a response in 30 days, which have now passed. Would like to know how APS is handling this given how much publicity it initially got. Interesting it’s been crickets since then—including no further comments from NAACP.

I heard several people raised the issue about the home address with many of the involved organizations. Apparently they do live in Arlington now but not until recently (they were using the aunts home address for years). It’s quite the conflict.

Recently - likely means a week or
two before the lawyer sent the letter

If that’s the case – and they were not Arlington residents at the time of the incident, moving to Arlington after the fact shouldn’t count for residency.

[Anonymous]

Had the school district received prior complaints about this game being racially insensitive? I don’t see it as racially insensitive, so it’s easy for me to believe that APS viewed it as a harmless team building exercise. I’m not trying to say it’s unreasonable for others to perceive it differently - I’m merely pointing out that the game isn’t on its face racially biased or insensitive, unless we accept the premise that it is inherently biased to use cotton in a school setting, which is absurd. If they disregarded prior complaints, then they’re on notice and I can see a legal case building, but if APS voluntarily discontinued the game after receiving this complaint - isn’t that the remedy? Acknowledge that the game is perceived by some as problematic and therefore stop using it?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Had the school district received prior complaints about this game being racially insensitive? I don’t see it as racially insensitive, so it’s easy for me to believe that APS viewed it as a harmless team building exercise. I’m not trying to say it’s unreasonable for others to perceive it differently - I’m merely pointing out that the game isn’t on its face racially biased or insensitive, unless we accept the premise that it is inherently biased to use cotton in a school setting, which is absurd. If they disregarded prior complaints, then they’re on notice and I can see a legal case building, but if APS voluntarily discontinued the game after receiving this complaint - isn’t that the remedy? Acknowledge that the game is perceived by some as problematic and therefore stop using it?

I agree….This is the remedy which is why it’s obvious this family just wants a payday.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:If the residency issue turns out to be nothing but hot air, I say the family walks away with a nice sum, but probably not all of what they requested. “C’est la vie” as they say in Quebec.

I don’t expect it to be public either. The family will be happy and APS frees itself from a costly legal fight.

I would want any settlement to be public. Taxpayers have a right to know and this family made the issue public. I would also want to know if there is no settlement. If there was residency fraud, a reasonable settlement might be zero payment on both sides to resolve all claims.

I just find it interesting there was so much initial publicity from the family and NAACP and now not a peep.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Had the school district received prior complaints about this game being racially insensitive? I don’t see it as racially insensitive, so it’s easy for me to believe that APS viewed it as a harmless team building exercise. I’m not trying to say it’s unreasonable for others to perceive it differently - I’m merely pointing out that the game isn’t on its face racially biased or insensitive, unless we accept the premise that it is inherently biased to use cotton in a school setting, which is absurd. If they disregarded prior complaints, then they’re on notice and I can see a legal case building, but if APS voluntarily discontinued the game after receiving this complaint - isn’t that the remedy? Acknowledge that the game is perceived by some as problematic and therefore stop using it?

I do think it is racially insensitive (not because it is biased to use cotton in a school sensitive but because of how racists have used cotton balls as a weapon of racism coupled with the history of enslaved people picking up cotton), and I agree that the remedy is just to stop using the game. And I don’t even think it’s *that* racially insensitive. I think it’s even less racially insensitive than a white person saying the n word when quoting somebody, which was considered fine before the OJ Simpson trial.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Had the school district received prior complaints about this game being racially insensitive? I don’t see it as racially insensitive, so it’s easy for me to believe that APS viewed it as a harmless team building exercise. I’m not trying to say it’s unreasonable for others to perceive it differently - I’m merely pointing out that the game isn’t on its face racially biased or insensitive, unless we accept the premise that it is inherently biased to use cotton in a school setting, which is absurd. If they disregarded prior complaints, then they’re on notice and I can see a legal case building, but if APS voluntarily discontinued the game after receiving this complaint - isn’t that the remedy? Acknowledge that the game is perceived by some as problematic and therefore stop using it?

I do think it is racially insensitive (not because it is biased to use cotton in a school sensitive but because of how racists have used cotton balls as a weapon of racism coupled with the history of enslaved people picking up cotton), and I agree that the remedy is just to stop using the game. And I don’t even think it’s *that* racially insensitive. I think it’s even less racially insensitive than a white person saying the n word when quoting somebody, which was considered fine before the OJ Simpson trial.

It's cute seeing county residents who demand extreme adherence to DEI consultants think the county will dismiss this claim without paying a huge settlement. Dismissing this claim would not be very inclusive and definitely would not be "hearing" what the victim is saying about living under Arlington's modern and historical systemic racism. I'd guess a $1mil confidential settlement that includes new DEI positions as well as seminars on the mental anguish caused by cotton.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Had the school district received prior complaints about this game being racially insensitive? I don’t see it as racially insensitive, so it’s easy for me to believe that APS viewed it as a harmless team building exercise. I’m not trying to say it’s unreasonable for others to perceive it differently - I’m merely pointing out that the game isn’t on its face racially biased or insensitive, unless we accept the premise that it is inherently biased to use cotton in a school setting, which is absurd. If they disregarded prior complaints, then they’re on notice and I can see a legal case building, but if APS voluntarily discontinued the game after receiving this complaint - isn’t that the remedy? Acknowledge that the game is perceived by some as problematic and therefore stop using it?

I do think it is racially insensitive (not because it is biased to use cotton in a school sensitive but because of how racists have used cotton balls as a weapon of racism coupled with the history of enslaved people picking up cotton), and I agree that the remedy is just to stop using the game. And I don’t even think it’s *that* racially insensitive. I think it’s even less racially insensitive than a white person saying the n word when quoting somebody, which was considered fine before the OJ Simpson trial.

It's cute seeing county residents who demand extreme adherence to DEI consultants think the county will dismiss this claim without paying a huge settlement. Dismissing this claim would not be very inclusive and definitely would not be "hearing" what the victim is saying about living under Arlington's modern and historical systemic racism. I'd guess a $1mil confidential settlement that includes new DEI positions as well as seminars on the mental anguish caused by cotton.

troll

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Had the school district received prior complaints about this game being racially insensitive? I don’t see it as racially insensitive, so it’s easy for me to believe that APS viewed it as a harmless team building exercise. I’m not trying to say it’s unreasonable for others to perceive it differently - I’m merely pointing out that the game isn’t on its face racially biased or insensitive, unless we accept the premise that it is inherently biased to use cotton in a school setting, which is absurd. If they disregarded prior complaints, then they’re on notice and I can see a legal case building, but if APS voluntarily discontinued the game after receiving this complaint - isn’t that the remedy? Acknowledge that the game is perceived by some as problematic and therefore stop using it?

I do think it is racially insensitive (not because it is biased to use cotton in a school sensitive but because of how racists have used cotton balls as a weapon of racism coupled with the history of enslaved people picking up cotton), and I agree that the remedy is just to stop using the game. And I don’t even think it’s *that* racially insensitive. I think it’s even less racially insensitive than a white person saying the n word when quoting somebody, which was considered fine before the OJ Simpson trial.

It's cute seeing county residents who demand extreme adherence to DEI consultants think the county will dismiss this claim without paying a huge settlement. Dismissing this claim would not be very inclusive and definitely would not be "hearing" what the victim is saying about living under Arlington's modern and historical systemic racism. I'd guess a $1mil confidential settlement that includes new DEI positions as well as seminars on the mental anguish caused by cotton.

PP here and I agree that there is a wide gulf between what should happen and what will happen. One million dollars makes me sick. I would hope the settlement amount would be discoverable by FOIA. Anybody know?

[Anonymous]

Justin Fairfax still has a blurb about this case on his law firm’s website as an example of his firm’s civil rights work. I can only assume that means he’s still representing the family. I find his involvement in the dispute to be one of the most interesting aspects of the case. He’s a serious attorney with a reputation to uphold. Maybe he knows something significant about his client’s case that’s not visible to the public? I can’t see him taking on something frivolous and yet the publicly available facts make the claims sound frivolous. I hope J. Fairfax or APS eventually make some kind of statement about the status of the case. It received enough initial publicity that there has to be some kind of update, right?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Justin Fairfax still has a blurb about this case on his law firm’s website as an example of his firm’s civil rights work. I can only assume that means he’s still representing the family. I find his involvement in the dispute to be one of the most interesting aspects of the case. He’s a serious attorney with a reputation to uphold. Maybe he knows something significant about his client’s case that’s not visible to the public? I can’t see him taking on something frivolous and yet the publicly available facts make the claims sound frivolous. I hope J. Fairfax or APS eventually make some kind of statement about the status of the case. It received enough initial publicity that there has to be some kind of update, right?

Also, he stands to keep 33% of any 7 figure settlement he gets out of Arlington which he appears confident he will get.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Justin Fairfax still has a blurb about this case on his law firm’s website as an example of his firm’s civil rights work. I can only assume that means he’s still representing the family. I find his involvement in the dispute to be one of the most interesting aspects of the case. He’s a serious attorney with a reputation to uphold. Maybe he knows something significant about his client’s case that’s not visible to the public? I can’t see him taking on something frivolous and yet the publicly available facts make the claims sound frivolous. I hope J. Fairfax or APS eventually make some kind of statement about the status of the case. It received enough initial publicity that there has to be some kind of update, right?

Is he, though?