Anonymous wrote:What does it mean that the parent is judgment proof. Because he’s a minor? I thought states were starting to go after parents of shooters… I’ve always heard that if a child is hurt on my trampoline I’m liable. But not in this case?

It means that they have no means to pay a judgment and if pressed will likely file for bankruptcy.

I heard that the parents of other kids are also suing the school and the teacher who was shot. Don’t know if any suit has been filed.

What does it mean that the parent is judgment proof. Because he’s a minor? I thought states were starting to go after parents of shooters… I’ve always heard that if a child is hurt on my trampoline I’m liable. But not in this case?

Anonymous wrote:https://www.msn.com/en-us/news/crime/mom-of-6-year-old-who-shot-his-teacher-will-plead-guilty-to-new-charges-lawyer/ar-AA1caXWa

wow they should also cut her welfare

Anonymous wrote:Does anyone know if parents of the classmates are filing suit against shooter’s parents or the school? I have never been involved in litigation but would absolutely pursue this. Why wouldn’t they?

They have no damages. The parent is judgement proof, and a claim against a municipality is usually not worthwhile without a great case

Does anyone know if parents of the classmates are filing suit against shooter’s parents or the school? I have never been involved in litigation but would absolutely pursue this. Why wouldn’t they?

Anonymous wrote:100% parent's fault? I'm pretty sure the school has some responsibility here.

No they created the child and gun

100% parent's fault? I'm pretty sure the school has some responsibility here.

100% parents fault, she was a drug user addict and got a gun illegally

What a terrible person

https://www.13newsnow.com/amp/article/news/local/mycity/newport-news/deja-taylor-newport-news-federal-charges/291-5a6e4dcf-726a-4b95-b789-bfbe58252e1f

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I hope this whole awful situation does one thing - that it shakes the tree to find out exactly WHO is responsible for violent students in the classroom. Is it the school admin? The government due to crappy laws? Or the parents (even if the kid doesn’t bring a gun to school - obviously this situation is even worse in that regard).

Everyone will point the finger at everyone else at first, but hopefully after this case we’ll have more clarity about what we need to do as a country to get order back into our schools and get the violent kids out.

It’s your local school administrators who have chosen to interpret federal laws in a whole new way. Allowing viciously violent kids to stay in your child’s classroom is a recent phenomenon. Parents certainly don’t have that power.

Now who exactly appoints the school administrators?

Actually I would place blame other places. There is a severe shortage of placements for violent kids and none that I know of for violent six year olds. The stay put laws and parental consent for services requirements give parents a lot of power and parents abuse power, which prevents schools from moving kids. And the IEP process that is unwaveringly bureaucratic takes too much time to develop a plan even when everyone is on the same page.

There are issues with schools not giving services and not developing and implementing IEPs. But when it comes to violent kids, it’s not typically the school that causes the problems. I would not necessarily say the same if we were discussing dyslexia or ADHD services. But violence is a different story.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I hope this whole awful situation does one thing - that it shakes the tree to find out exactly WHO is responsible for violent students in the classroom. Is it the school admin? The government due to crappy laws? Or the parents (even if the kid doesn’t bring a gun to school - obviously this situation is even worse in that regard).

Everyone will point the finger at everyone else at first, but hopefully after this case we’ll have more clarity about what we need to do as a country to get order back into our schools and get the violent kids out.

It’s your local school administrators who have chosen to interpret federal laws in a whole new way. Allowing viciously violent kids to stay in your child’s classroom is a recent phenomenon. Parents certainly don’t have that power.

Now who exactly appoints the school administrators?

The Superintendent. And who appoints them; I think the School Board?

Anonymous wrote:I hope this whole awful situation does one thing - that it shakes the tree to find out exactly WHO is responsible for violent students in the classroom. Is it the school admin? The government due to crappy laws? Or the parents (even if the kid doesn’t bring a gun to school - obviously this situation is even worse in that regard).

Everyone will point the finger at everyone else at first, but hopefully after this case we’ll have more clarity about what we need to do as a country to get order back into our schools and get the violent kids out.

It’s your local school administrators who have chosen to interpret federal laws in a whole new way. Allowing viciously violent kids to stay in your child’s classroom is a recent phenomenon. Parents certainly don’t have that power.

Now who exactly appoints the school administrators?

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I hope this whole awful situation does one thing - that it shakes the tree to find out exactly WHO is responsible for violent students in the classroom. Is it the school admin? The government due to crappy laws? Or the parents (even if the kid doesn’t bring a gun to school - obviously this situation is even worse in that regard).

Everyone will point the finger at everyone else at first, but hopefully after this case we’ll have more clarity about what we need to do as a country to get order back into our schools and get the violent kids out.

There have been violence kids in school for forever. The Columbine mass shooting happened in 1999. Parkland happened. Neither of those mass killings done by high school students provided us with clarity and I doubt this case with a six year old boy whom the school system has barely even had the opportunity to get to know is going to make any difference in sorting this out. But maybe it will shed some light on the need for services for very young kids.

You are incorrectly conflating mass murder in the form of school shootings with the issue at hand with this case, which is how special education in the US operates in a way that puts students and staff at risk of children whose needs are too extreme for a public school setting but who are left there anyway. This is a case of systemic negligence and oversight , not a mass murder and it’s different.

Not necessarily. The Parkland shooter had serious special needs and was famously failed by the public schools.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I hope this whole awful situation does one thing - that it shakes the tree to find out exactly WHO is responsible for violent students in the classroom. Is it the school admin? The government due to crappy laws? Or the parents (even if the kid doesn’t bring a gun to school - obviously this situation is even worse in that regard).

Everyone will point the finger at everyone else at first, but hopefully after this case we’ll have more clarity about what we need to do as a country to get order back into our schools and get the violent kids out.

There have been violence kids in school for forever. The Columbine mass shooting happened in 1999. Parkland happened. Neither of those mass killings done by high school students provided us with clarity and I doubt this case with a six year old boy whom the school system has barely even had the opportunity to get to know is going to make any difference in sorting this out. But maybe it will shed some light on the need for services for very young kids.

You are incorrectly conflating mass murder in the form of school shootings with the issue at hand with this case, which is how special education in the US operates in a way that puts students and staff at risk of children whose needs are too extreme for a public school setting but who are left there anyway. This is a case of systemic negligence and oversight , not a mass murder and it’s different.

Both involve guns so they can be conflated. When the kid only had a belt people weren’t badly hurt. When the kid had a gun: hospital and near death. See how that works? Same “bad guy” different weapon different outcome. Crazy kid with a belt= alive and well victims. Crazy kid with a gun= hospitalization permanent injury.

It is the GUNS

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I hope this whole awful situation does one thing - that it shakes the tree to find out exactly WHO is responsible for violent students in the classroom. Is it the school admin? The government due to crappy laws? Or the parents (even if the kid doesn’t bring a gun to school - obviously this situation is even worse in that regard).

Everyone will point the finger at everyone else at first, but hopefully after this case we’ll have more clarity about what we need to do as a country to get order back into our schools and get the violent kids out.

Amen.

I don’t think it will though. In the end the only thing that will be proven is that by going to a public setting we are all risking every single day in every single errand that we could be the victim of a shooting. There is no safe place. So by being a U.S. citizen we are saying that we are okay with getting shot at anywhere outside of our homes.

That is kind of where the school system is coming from with the workers comp lawsuit.