PDA

View Full Version : Family of gay teen slain in Calif. blames school


NJarhead
08-15-2008, 01:25 PM
VENTURA, Calif. - The family of a gay teenager who was fatally shot in class blames the school district for allowing their son to wear makeup and feminine clothing to school factors the family claims led to the death...

http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/26218530/

So.., the parents don't believe they're at all responsible??? And what if the school DID decide to "enforce the dress code????"
Federal Law suit over the kids rights???

fansince'76
08-15-2008, 01:30 PM
This lawsuit is being brought in Cali? Cha-ching! :cash

NJarhead
08-15-2008, 01:34 PM
This lawsuit is being brought in Cali? Cha-ching! :cash

Good point.

Dino 6 Rings
08-15-2008, 02:05 PM
I don't get it, the parents allowed their boy to leave the school dressed basically in drag...but then turn around and blame the school for allowing the kid to show up in drag?

I really don't get it. I understand the parents have their hearts broken, but blame the shooter, how about that. Not the school, not themselves (although self guilt is evident in this attempt at deflecting it to someone else) and blame the person that pulled the effing trigger.

rbryan
08-15-2008, 02:10 PM
Sounds like the same kind of people who would have brought a lawsuit if the school had told thier precious little boy he couldn't dress like a girl.

Godfather
08-15-2008, 02:25 PM
I could see blaming the school for improper security (ie letting a gun in). But this claim is ridiculous.

NJarhead
08-15-2008, 02:33 PM
Sounds like the same kind of people who would have brought a lawsuit if the school had told thier precious little boy he couldn't dress like a girl.

Precisely!

Godfather
08-15-2008, 02:56 PM
Precisely!

There might even be case law in California saying they couldn't apply the dress code to that situation. I believe California has laws against employers requiring gender-appropriate dress.

NJarhead
08-15-2008, 03:03 PM
There might even be case law in California saying they couldn't apply the dress code to that situation. I believe California has laws against employers requiring gender-appropriate dress.

Our own laws are going to be our undoing.

millwalldavey
08-15-2008, 03:15 PM
Laws and lawsuits be damned... a kid is dead.

stlrtruck
08-15-2008, 03:49 PM
It's a double edge sword and the parents are now looking to make a quick dollar.

NJarhead
08-15-2008, 04:03 PM
It's a double edge sword and the parents are now looking to make a quick dollar.

...and to lay blame, thus (in their minds) justifying their lack of parenting.

Dino 6 Rings
08-15-2008, 04:09 PM
Laws and lawsuits be damned... a kid is dead.

See this is a great point. Who did the shooting? A teacher? a School administrator? NO!

Blame the Shooter. Find out where he got the gun. Back track it, find out who sold it to him or if he got it from his dad's gun cabinent. They aren't disclosing where the gun came from and that's just wrong. How did the shooter get the gun. Stop that from happening and stuff like this doesn't happen. Sure, he may want to hurt the other kid so badly he brings in a kitchen knife...but I'll take my chances agains a 14 year old kid with a kitchen knife over anyone with a hand gun, any day of the week.

The School is not responsible for this incident. The parents are misdirecting their anger.

millwalldavey
08-15-2008, 04:40 PM
The School is not responsible for this incident. The parents are misdirecting their anger.

Something I see all the time....

Godfather
08-15-2008, 04:57 PM
The School is not responsible for this incident. The parents are misdirecting their anger.

Well, they DID fail to keep guns out of the school. So they do share some blame.

But the dress code part is 100% the dead kid's parents. If it's so obviously dangerous to dress that way, don't let him go out the door dressed that way.

Preacher
08-15-2008, 05:00 PM
I think we have assumed something here....

Nowhere in the article does it say that the kid left the home dressed that way.

I would surmise there is a 50/50 chance that kid found a bathroom somewhere on the way too... or at school and applied the makeup and changed the clothes.

in the end, there too many tragedies to count in this story.

millwalldavey
08-15-2008, 05:13 PM
I think we have assumed something here....

Nowhere in the article does it say that the kid left the home dressed that way.

I would surmise there is a 50/50 chance that kid found a bathroom somewhere on the way too... or at school and applied the makeup and changed the clothes.

in the end, there too many tragedies to count in this story.

True. We had a ministers daughter in HS that showed up all frumpy in the AM and changed into the shortest skirts imaginable when she got to school. These things do happen... (although, I must say I'm glad she did that every day....)

Still... the way he was dressed or liked to dress is not reason for his life to be taken. I'm sure all will agree.

revefsreleets
08-15-2008, 05:40 PM
The real "moral" of the story? Personal responsibility is dead. There is always a phantom "them or they" to blame, and, sorry, it's the lawyers, particularly the lawyers in the United States, who are to blame. If there were too many sharks in nature, they'd starve off, but lawyers are (slightly) smarter than sharks, so they find ways to create new prey so the can survive and thrive. Sad.

This case should be thrown out....but it won't be.

Preacher
08-15-2008, 05:45 PM
The real "moral" of the story? Personal responsibility is dead. There is always a phantom "them or they" to blame, and, sorry, it's the lawyers, particularly the lawyers in the United States, who are to blame. If there were too many sharks in nature, they'd starve off, but lawyers are (slightly) smarter than sharks, so they find ways to create new prey so the can survive and thrive. Sad.

This case should be thrown out....but it won't be.

It will, however, go to mediation or arbitration before it gets in front of a judge to be heard (maybe not mandatory, but you really put yourself in a hole if you don't agree to it in California).

At that point, the insurance company steps in and says it will cost X dollars to defend the case and Y dollars to settle the case here.

Then it is simply a math problem. if X > Y, the case gets settled for money. If X<Y, it goes to court.

Heck of a way to run a railroad... or a justice system.

Atlanta Dan
08-15-2008, 06:38 PM
I don't get it, the parents allowed their boy to leave the school dressed basically in drag...but then turn around and blame the school for allowing the kid to show up in drag?

I really don't get it. I understand the parents have their hearts broken, but blame the shooter, how about that. Not the school, not themselves (although self guilt is evident in this attempt at deflecting it to someone else) and blame the person that pulled the effing trigger.

Here is an LA Times story on this that goes into a little more detail than the AP wire story that MSNBC picked up for its lurid appearance - the victim apparently had been a ward of Ventura County so the parents were no longer controlling what he wore to school (although something happened for them to lose custody) - who knows what prompted that. Definitely a mess.

The family of an Oxnard eighth-grader who was shot by a classmate at school has filed personal injury claims against the school district and county alleging that their failure to protect the boy led to his death.

Lawrence King, 15, was shot in the head Feb. 12 at E.O. Green Junior High School. At the time, he was a ward of Ventura County, a foster child living at Casa Pacifica, a shelter for abused and troubled children in Camarillo....

His classmate Brandon McInerney, 14, was charged days later with premeditated murder and special allegations of a hate crime and firearm use. McInerney was charged as an adult.


"The school staff did nothing wrong," said Supt. Jerry Dannenberg. "In fact, everything we have indicates they did everything right in this case. It's an unfortunate circumstance, but the school didn't fail to do anything."

Dannenberg said the school enforced the dress code in accordance with California law....

King's mother informed officials she was concerned King would be hurt because of "the outward appearance of cross-dressing, wearing makeup, wearing girl's clothing, shoes, etc." but did not place King in a group or foster home. The county's Department of Behavior Health also failed to "properly diagnose and treat" King, according to the claim.

http://www.latimes.com/news/local/la-me-oxnard16-2008aug16,0,1771699.story

The kid got shot on school property and tensions had been rising since the 14 year old shooter apparently thought the victim was coming on to him, so there might be some exposure there, especially if the shooter previously said something to the effect he would kill the victim in the presence of school officials prior to the shooting

NJarhead
08-15-2008, 06:47 PM
Well that certainly answers a few questions. Thanks AD.

Godfather
08-15-2008, 07:39 PM
True. We had a ministers daughter in HS that showed up all frumpy in the AM and changed into the shortest skirts imaginable when she got to school. These things do happen... (although, I must say I'm glad she did that every day....)

Still... the way he was dressed or liked to dress is not reason for his life to be taken. I'm sure all will agree.

Very good point. I didn't think of that.

Godfather
08-15-2008, 07:40 PM
Well that certainly answers a few questions. Thanks AD.

Seconded.

Seems like FARK and similar sites do a better job with these stories than the national sites.

SteelCityMan786
08-15-2008, 08:46 PM
I don't get it, the parents allowed their boy to leave the school dressed basically in drag...but then turn around and blame the school for allowing the kid to show up in drag?

I really don't get it. I understand the parents have their hearts broken, but blame the shooter, how about that. Not the school, not themselves (although self guilt is evident in this attempt at deflecting it to someone else) and blame the person that pulled the effing trigger.

Did the parents ever consider the fact that school's do have dress codes and need to blame the shooter.

Atlanta Dan
08-15-2008, 08:59 PM
Did the parents ever consider the fact that school's do have dress codes and need to blame the shooter.

Family had six months from the shooting in February to file the administrative claim against the county and school district; plenty of time left under the statute of limitations to sue the parents of the shooter

The family has not sued Casa Pacifica [the facility where the victim had been placed] or McInerney's [the shooter's] parents for civil damages. The statute of limitations for such litigation expires in 18 more months.


http://www.venturacountystar.com/news/2008/aug/15/county-schools-face-king-claims/

The liability issues here are the kind of hypotheticals you might expect to see in a law school exam for first year torts but not in the real world (or for that matter southern California)

Preacher
08-15-2008, 09:45 PM
Family had six months from the shooting in February to file the administrative claim against the county and school district; plenty of time left under the statute of limitations to sue the parents of the shooter

The family has not sued Casa Pacifica [the facility where the victim had been placed] or McInerney's [the shooter's] parents for civil damages. The statute of limitations for such litigation expires in 18 more months.


http://www.venturacountystar.com/news/2008/aug/15/county-schools-face-king-claims/

The liability issues here are the kind of hypotheticals you might expect to see in a law school exam for first year torts but not in the real world (or for that matter southern California)

There is a real simple reason why the parents are suing the school, and not the other parents or the home. The school is part of the govt. and thus have the deepest pockets. You can BET the attorney told them that.

Atlanta Dan
08-15-2008, 09:50 PM
There is a real simple reason why the parents are suing the school, and not the other parents or the home. The school is part of the govt. and thus have the deepest pockets. You can BET the attorney told them that.

Of course it's not an either/or; they can sue both (my bet is they may not sue the parents if they do not have insurance coverage but you can be sure a facility such as Casa Pacifica that houses troubled kids has significant insurance coverage) = they pulled the trigger on the admin claim now because they were out of time

The family can wait to see what facts are developed in the criminal prosecution before teeing up anyone else