Parkland Middle School student hit, killed on Loop 375 after leaving campus during walkout

Ha! you've not seen me get salty yet. If and when you do, you won't mistake what I posted before as salty.

My link doesn't help your argument. It doesn't provide any evidence of negligence or liability. At this point, unless more information comes out, I don't see a case for negligence or liability. I see some kids that made a really bad choice, broke school rules, and ended up in a tragic accident. Your mileage may vary.

I linked the statement from the superintendent that said the event wasn't sanctioned by the school. Students intent on exercising their first amendment rights walked out of the school and went to a gathering area. Their safety was considered, knowing they were going to walk out, by using the football field's close proximity to the school and so no street traffic was impeded. Their rights were protected. The school did just about everything they could do to walk the tightrope between the free expression of Constitutional rights and maintaining the students' safety, even though the school did not officially sanction the activity.

If you punish students for exercising their first amendment right to free speech and freedom of assembly, you're teaching them that might makes right, and their rights are not rights, but privilege only extended when a government agency, like a school, allows you. That might be a lesson that would get the school sued. It could certainly be a lesson that would backfire eventually at the ballot box.

 

As far as I have read, the walk out was not sanctioned by the school. It was a matter of students exercising their first amendment rights of freedom of speech and freedom of assembly. If the activity wasn't sanctioned, there'd be no release or permission slip signed by parents. Instead, what appears to have happened was the school realized that a large number of students were going to participate and helped keep them as safe as they could, under the circumstances.

I don't understand your desire to label the teachers as liberals. The school is in Texas. There's just as much chance the teachers are not liberals, as the are. I get that you don't want these kids to exercise their Constitutional rights, but that's not up to you. I would hope conservative teachers would agree with liberal teachers when it comes to Constitutional rights.

 

Yeah, it does. See the bolded and underlined portion at the end and see my explanation reposted here since you avoided discussion the first time

The statement you linked admits to a DESIGNATED AREA TO HOLD THE PROTEST and also admits that NO ONE IS TO BE PUNISHED for allowing this behavior IE it was sanctioned. His statement there is a lame ass attempt at CYA and you know it.

Except they didn't maintain safety because by your own admission they didn't watch the sides of the gathering but felt it necessary to watch the front and back. It would've taken TWO PEOPLE to watch the sides, MAX and could actually have been achieved by putting the front and back watchers catty corner to each other so they could watch two angles.

You've still never answered my question: What would be the great burden in adding 2 watchers or more efficiently using the one's already assigned?

The school would not be exposed to liability for not allowing a mass exodus of this sort. You've got quite a bit to learn about 1st amendment jurisprudence.

 

Total nonsense. The supervision was consistent with what the school does every day before classes, at recess, during lunch, and after class.

 

If the teachers stood around with their thumb up their ass while the kids walked out that protest was with liberal educator approval

 

How much money are you prepared to devote to "security?" How about a lunch and recess?

 

A little teacher bashing? Teachers don't run the school, genius.

 

Take away police protection for mayors and judges and give it to the kids instead

And if they need more fire as many desk jocky education REMFs as needed

 

Other reports said teachers were in the crowd.

Who watches the doors in your house?

Take a look at the Google satellite view of the school. You're giving the school an impossible job unless it packs more kids in classrooms than the fire code allows, the school day is cut, the schools get a huge budget increase, or some such.

Before school, recess, lunch time, after school before the buses take them away ... every day.

No tort was committed. Get over yourself.

My high school (3k students in 1963) held a boycott of the cafeteria. The Admin huffed and puffed, threatened, etc. because it cost the school a bundle, but had to give in to the demand to improve the quality of the food. This was long before rebellion was "in" and in a very, very conservative community. You don't understand there's some dirt (no play on words) kids won't eat, especially these days.

 

I can see you have absolutely nothing to contribute.

 

You have no ideas and insist that no one else have any ideas either

 

You lost the argument pages and pages ago. The only power the school has is in the form of truancy rules. The school did not sanction any walk out. Children said that they will walk out under the right to peaceably assemble. So to avoid being punished under truancy rules the walk out was just to the school fields. The school was not even obligated to provide any security other than they normally would for any other on school ground field events

 

We'll see who has a lot to learn when and if this ever goes to court.

There was no reason to add 2 watchers to a place where no students went, not even the group that left campus. I linked to you the latest information that said the skipping group actually went to the football field and then jumped the fence. So, the previous reports that they went out a side door was erroneous. Your argument that the students were insufficiently monitored and that more "watchers" at side doors would have prevented this tragedy is refuted, since no one went out those doors, not even the group that left campus.

Had the school sanctioned the activity, all the students would have participated and all the teachers would have been there supervising. Instead, only about 400 of the 1400 students in the school participated. Thus teachers remained in class with the majority of students. The whole activity only lasted 15 minutes.

The superintendent didn't say NO ONE would be punished. He said no administrator, teacher or school staff would be punished. The students leaving campus are going to be punished for truancy. That specifically speaks to the superintendent's statement that the school did not sanction the activity.

I believe the mother will probably sue the school, but proving negligence on the school is going to be tough. They didn't violate Constitutional rights, but did provide an area that would keep the kids safe while exercising their right for the short amount of time the walkout took. Her son chose to leave campus without permission, jump the fence, and get in traffic, against school rules. He carries responsibility for that choice.

As I have said before, I'm going to wait until more information comes out before calling the school negligent and liable. You're welcome to do as you like.

 

If… if frogs had wings they wouldn't bump their butts on the ground.

The school didn't sanction the walk out. No one approved it, not liberals, not conservatives.

 

Obviously the inmates are running the insane asylum known as public education if the authorites meaning teachers and paPer shuffling administrators have no control over the students coming or going as they please

 

I'm pretty sure they don't let the kids just pop up and decide when and whether or not they're going to recess lunch or class.

Come off it.

 

As much as it takes for the baseline measures it takes to secure a building. Like securing the exits.
Why don't you start another thread and we'll discuss school budgets. That's not the topic of this thread, so stop trying to deflect with it. It's annoying.

 

Which reports.

When I'm babysitting my nephew? I keep an eye on the kid so I don't have to watch multiple exits. That's reasonable when you're dealing with one subject only and are alone. That's not reasonable when you're a school talking about an outdoor assembly.

It would take either moving the persons admitted to be on the front and back so they could watch a side a piece in addition, or adding 2 adults during the assembly only.
If that is a great burden then having the assembly was unreasonable because they lacked the personnel.

You mean when they're actively supervised? Schools post multiple teachers during pick up and drop off.








Negligent supervision was committed. See above posts for the argument.

Real fancy, you're comparing an indoor hissy fit the admin didn't sanction, with an outdoor apparently at will attendance without supervision to ensure you actually go there when you leave class assembly the school has designated an area and time for.
I'd be surprised if 1% of the students even attempted to walk out if the admin had taken a more reasonable position.

 

Lol if you say so chief

1) you can't have it both ways, either they didn't sanction it or they designated an area for it and provided normal levels of supervision as required with other sanctioned school events.. Which is it?

2) The first amendment has reasonable time place and manner restrictions allowable. A mass exodus from a public school during the school day on the children's recognizance? Its reasonable to restrict that to a) a different manner of protest (ie no leaving class or otherwise disrupting the school day) b) another time IE not during school and/or c) a different place IE not to take place at school. So the school was under no obligation to allow this riot or comply with it. This is fairly settled as a matter of law.

3) The school was obligated to provide reasonable supervision for their charges. They failed to do so, see above posts for explanations/arguments as to why.

 

Not at side DOORS. You've said SIDE DOORS, I've gone on record and corrected you the report said SIDE, only. They absconded by going past the SIDE along the highway by the ramp. I've shown you the google street views of that, so have other posters.
The point about watching the sides is about the fact there are clear sight lines and if the sides had been watched someone would've SAW the group climbing the fence and moving away. They'd have been in a position to stop them or call the school resource officer to give chase. They'd have been SUPERVISING their charges rather than turning a blind eye.

See you at the flag pole is an event schools run in a similar vein: they designate space, its an approved activity that won't merit any punishment, but attendance is voluntary.
When my school did it, you'd tell your teacher and move with a group supervised by a teacher or PTA adult volunteer to and from the flagpole. There was accountability.

And they carry the responsibility of their choices not to take reasonable measures to supervise their charges. Again you've not answered the question: What would be the great burden of using the admitted at least 2 watchers more efficiently or adding 2 more to watch the additional sight lines possible for humans to move in in the real world?

 

The students walked out of class and remained on school grounds. The supervision on the grounds was consistent with what the school provides every day before classes, at recess and lunch, and after classes.

You're barking up the wrong tree, counselor.

 

It seems to me, that if the school had placed monitors all around the campus, including the side you speak of, then they would be telegraphing the expectation that students were going to skip the short protest and leave campus, and were guarding against that happening. That was not the expectation. A minority of the student body was to assemble for a moment of silence and remembrance of the students killed at Columbine High School and other schools, at the time the Columbine shooting happened to mark the 10 year anniversary, and then return to class.

I'm sure the administration, teachers, staff, and other students all feel great remorse for the death of the young man. That doesn't make them responsible for his death, negligent in supervision, or legally liable.

Now, if more facts come out, and among them is that teachers or administrators were told of the plan to skip the protest and travel to the park, that's a different story. If they knew and did nothing to stop those kids, that's a liability problem. If they didn't know, and the kids acted on their own, there's no guarantee that even if adults had been stationed where you wanted them to be placed, they could have stopped the accidental death from happening. The Columbine shooting was at 10AM. I don't know what time the Parkland Middle protest started, but it seems logical that it was very close to 10AM. The kid was hit at 10:27, and was said to have been going back to school when he was hit. From the vantage point on the side of the building, seeing the kids jump the fence, chasing them down and/or calling police, I'm not convinced anyone monitoring would have definitely stopped the child from being killed. However, there also wasn't an expectation that kids would be doing something so dangerous and against school rules.

I feel certain that no one in authority in the school wanted anything to happen to those kids, and would have taken action, had they known of the plan to skip. The school provided a convenient place for those that were going to exercise their free speech rights, and then quickly get back to class, with the intention of keeping them safe. If there wasn't mens rea, bad intent, then there is no liability.

 

Take a look at the Google satellite view of the school. It would take scores of teachers and/or support staff to watch all the ways a students to leave the grounds.

Start one yourself. The point is that government has decided they don't support the level of supervision and security you think is important.

You don't like to have your position refuted.

 

Do you have any children of your own? Even helicopter parents take their eyes off an 11-year-old.

Did you look at the school grounds on Google?

Or recess and lunch?

They were "actively supervised" during the walkout.

Your argument failed.

You can't resist misrepresenting the walkout rally supervision.

Do you really think the school adminstration wanted the kids to walk out?[/QUOTE]

 

They didn't sanction it. They did not stop it. The students held their protest on school grounds after discussions were held

There was no riot

They provided the same supervision that they would do to any sporting event on the school fields.