|
Post by gatormom on Feb 26, 2009 9:09:49 GMT -5
The family waited until late January to make an issue of this which really does give a measure of credibility to Dr. D's message. That is INCORRECT. I stand corrected, the family waited until late January to go public with this issue.
|
|
|
Post by warriormom on Feb 26, 2009 9:14:22 GMT -5
I stand corrected, the family waited until late January to go public with this issue. Thank you. They waited until Jan. to go 'public' because they felt they had no other option.
|
|
|
Post by justvote on Feb 26, 2009 9:20:20 GMT -5
The family waited until late January to make an issue of this which really does give a measure of credibility to Dr. D's message. That is INCORRECT. You're right - that is incorrect. They made a huge issue of it beginning the day after it happened. Those of us from the community are very well aware what transpired duriing that time. At that time they were working with Gregory and the Administration in an attempt to find a workable solution (or should I say just Gregory, because they received no response from Dr. D, no matter what he tries to claim in his message). Gatormom - how did you come to that conclusion based on my statement? We both know that there are other ways "to make an issue of it" that doesn't include going public. They attempted to work within the system and ONLY went public when they exhausted all attempts. ETA: I see you corrected your statement. I guess that renders my point "moot"
|
|
|
Post by justvote on Feb 26, 2009 9:26:34 GMT -5
Thank you. They waited until Jan. to go 'public' because they felt they had no other option. Really? Did they also feel it was necessary to relate the details of the attack at a school board meeting? Did they feel that emotions were not high enough? Will this help their child recover from the horror of what happened to him? Honestly, the decision to relay those details leads some to question what the purpose of this media blitz. I honestly wonder if it is even about their child anymore. We agree on this issue. I saw no value to relating the gory details at the SB meeting other than to inflame the emotions of an already emotionally charged group of people. It does seem that the issue is becoming bigger than their child, but I don't think that was their intent. I think it's more the result of the media blitz.
|
|
|
Post by warriormom on Feb 26, 2009 9:29:13 GMT -5
Bottom line, the parents wanted to protect their child's innocence as best they could so they didn't go "public" right away.
In addition, their child was beaten up by one of the accused when the accused found out the boy "told". Put yourself in their shoes and then decide how you would have handled things when you have a child who is scared to death and just experienced what he did.
The policy change needed will serve us all in the end by allowing the board to remove students accused of a felony from school and prevent them from rendering any further harm to their victim or others.
|
|
|
Post by wvhsparent on Feb 26, 2009 9:31:15 GMT -5
I stand corrected, the family waited until late January to go public with this issue. Thank you. They waited until Jan. to go 'public' because they felt they had no other option. Well legally there was really no other option.....The SD did all it could-Legally....I know many seem to think otherwise, but everyone needs to check their emotions at the door. Yes I despise what happened, but I also know the legal options and the way the juvenile system works. As much as everyone wishes differently, the accused still has Constitutional rights that cannot be ignored - The BIGGIE - Presumption of innocence cannot be usurped. Change the juvenile laws if you must, but be prepared for long and arduous challenges to any laws made. It has been my experience from 23 in Law enforcement that laws made while in a heightened emotional state usually get overturned. We will never have the COMPLETE story about this from either the parents or the school dist for various reasons. I urge everyone to allow this to play out in the Court of Law before any more action is taken. WE ARE THE ADULTS HERE!!!!! Start acting like it!!!!!
|
|
|
Post by gatordog on Feb 26, 2009 9:57:42 GMT -5
..... We will never have the COMPLETE story about this from either the parents or the school dist for various reasons. I urge everyone to allow this to play out in the Court of Law before any more action is taken. No, we will never have the complete story. Nor should we, its none of our business to have complete story of this particular, terrible incident. And yes, its time to let the Court take over. I believe with one of the accused moved out of the district, and with the other mandated to remain beyond 100 ft from the victim, the parents initial request (a very understandible request) has been in concept addressed. The victim will not be near the accused. What we can do is delibrately discuss and consider future policy. To applied to future issues. I think CB is off to a good start with this, at the SB level. I think its become counter-productive for all involved if we remain hyper-focused on this terrible incident.
|
|
|
Post by warriormom on Feb 26, 2009 10:00:11 GMT -5
Thank you. They waited until Jan. to go 'public' because they felt they had no other option. Well legally there was really no other option.....The SD did all it could-Legally....I know many seem to think otherwise, but everyone needs to check their emotions at the door. Yes I despise what happened, but I also know the legal options and the way the juvenile system works. As much as everyone wishes differently, the accused still has Constitutional rights that cannot be ignored - The BIGGIE - Presumption of innocence cannot be usurped. Change the juvenile laws if you must, but be prepared for long and arduous challenges to any laws made. It has been my experience from 23 in Law enforcement that laws made while in a heightened emotional state usually get overturned. We will never have the COMPLETE story about this from either the parents or the school dist for various reasons. I urge everyone to allow this to play out in the Court of Law before any more action is taken. WE ARE THE ADULTS HERE!!!!! Start acting like it!!!!! I agree with everything you wrote with the exception of your last sentence. I don't see how people's concern for these kids means they are not acting like adults. Like you said, it is an emotional topic.
|
|
|
Post by asmodeus on Feb 26, 2009 11:02:01 GMT -5
Two problems with your argument. First, there are hundreds if not thousands of people in jail who have not yet been convicted. Maybe we should let them all out since they are presumed innocent.
Secondly, you have stated that even if convicted, the child cannot be removed (assuming he does not go to detention/prison)-- so accordingly to that logic, the innocence or guilt is a moot point.
|
|
|
Post by justvote on Feb 26, 2009 11:37:05 GMT -5
Thank you. They waited until Jan. to go 'public' because they felt they had no other option. Well legally there was really no other option.....The SD did all it could-Legally....I know many seem to think otherwise, but everyone needs to check their emotions at the door. Yes I despise what happened, but I also know the legal options and the way the juvenile system works. As much as everyone wishes differently, the accused still has Constitutional rights that cannot be ignored - The BIGGIE - Presumption of innocence cannot be usurped. Change the juvenile laws if you must, but be prepared for long and arduous challenges to any laws made. It has been my experience from 23 in Law enforcement that laws made while in a heightened emotional state usually get overturned. I thought we effectively established on this board that this is not the case. The SB attorney's OWN legal assessment on Monday night was that both boys could have been transferred to another school within the district with EQUAL offerings. Dr. D did not choose that legal option for reasons known only to him.
|
|
|
Post by wvhsparent on Feb 26, 2009 11:51:17 GMT -5
Two problems with your argument. First, there are hundreds if not thousands of people in jail who have not yet been convicted. Maybe we should let them all out since they are presumed innocent. Secondly, you have stated that even if convicted, the child cannot be removed (assuming he does not go to detention/prison)-- so accordingly to that logic, the innocence or guilt is a moot point. You are correct we do have many people in our jail who have not been convicted......So they are considered innocent, and have most of their constitutional rights. They are in jail because a judge set their bond at a level they could not post or have no-bond. I will tell you for every 1 of the jail "residents" there are probably 5 or more who are out on bond. And yes if convicted, the judge could do many things - It's all up to him/her - This is the last I am going to comment on this case. I await the SB's new policy and will be glad to discuss that.
|
|
|
Post by wvhsparent on Feb 26, 2009 12:04:17 GMT -5
Well legally there was really no other option.....The SD did all it could-Legally....I know many seem to think otherwise, but everyone needs to check their emotions at the door. Yes I despise what happened, but I also know the legal options and the way the juvenile system works. As much as everyone wishes differently, the accused still has Constitutional rights that cannot be ignored - The BIGGIE - Presumption of innocence cannot be usurped. Change the juvenile laws if you must, but be prepared for long and arduous challenges to any laws made. It has been my experience from 23 in Law enforcement that laws made while in a heightened emotional state usually get overturned. We will never have the COMPLETE story about this from either the parents or the school dist for various reasons. I urge everyone to allow this to play out in the Court of Law before any more action is taken. WE ARE THE ADULTS HERE!!!!! Start acting like it!!!!! I agree with everything you wrote with the exception of your last sentence. I don't see how people's concern for these kids means they are not acting like adults. Like you said, it is an emotional topic. Maybe my last sentence was a bit strong....my apologies if offended.
|
|
|
Post by gatordog on Feb 26, 2009 12:50:02 GMT -5
I thought we effectively established on this board that this is not the case. The SB attorney's OWN legal assessment on Monday night was that both boys could have been transferred to another school within the district with EQUAL offerings. Dr. D did not choose that legal option for reasons known only to him. Just because something is legal, does not mean it is policy. My understanding is Dr D had no policy directing him to move the students. (The opposite doesnt hold....if something is policy, it sure better be legal!) That is where the CB work comes in. Lets deliberately consider this matter from all aspects and see if we can create a new policy. I have said before, I think CB is on the right track. And as wvhsparent said, good policy making means removing emotion and removing oneself from the heat-of-the-moment. But I will say this: its very hard, even contrary to "rule of law" fairness, to create some policy now and ex post facto apply it to something that previously occurred.
|
|
|
Post by justvote on Feb 26, 2009 15:23:34 GMT -5
Gatordog - I complete agree with this assessment (because something is legal does not mean it's policy) and I also agree that CB is on the right track.
|
|
|
Post by asmodeus on Feb 26, 2009 17:35:08 GMT -5
I don't think he needs to be a slave to policy. It's not as though there was a policy against moving them. I'd like my administrators to be able to use their brains and not just paint by number.
|
|