|
|
Post by doctorwho on Feb 4, 2009 15:16:31 GMT -6
I feel the need to comment on this as I do know some of the details as I have a nephew at Gregory. There are many disturbing elements to this story. First , it was not only 2 kids involved. There were roughly 6 or so that "stood guard" as the others did what they did. Some of those kids are great kids and appear to have been caught up in something they had no idea was going to be so horrific. The main perpetrator is a problemed child. They reference 2 kids involved but it is primarily 1 from my source. He is very threatening according to my sources and is a criminal in the making. This is somewhat well known by those that know the boy/family. That is why the victims' parents are most likely outraged. The school knows this kid can be 'trouble' but have to wait until he hurts someone on school grounds to do anything about it. That doesn't seem right. Like most stories, there is definitely more to this one and it is really disturbing... from since this boy was very young. Wow, now it's even more nauseating - and makes one wonder what the hell this world is turning into..let's hope the situation in Evanston this AM isn't just another cruel chapter. The other thing is even though felonies - they will be tried in juvenille court - punishment unlikely to match the crime... |
|
|
|
Post by researching on Feb 4, 2009 15:43:15 GMT -6
I feel the need to comment on this as I do know some of the details as I have a nephew at Gregory. There are many disturbing elements to this story. First , it was not only 2 kids involved. There were roughly 6 or so that "stood guard" as the others did what they did. Some of those kids are great kids and appear to have been caught up in something they had no idea was going to be so horrific. The main perpetrator is a problemed child. They reference 2 kids involved but it is primarily 1 from my source. He is very threatening according to my sources and is a criminal in the making. This is somewhat well known by those that know the boy/family. That is why the victims' parents are most likely outraged. The school knows this kid can be 'trouble' but have to wait until he hurts someone on school grounds to do anything about it. That doesn't seem right. Like most stories, there is definitely more to this one and it is really disturbing... from since this boy was very young. Wow, now it's even more nauseating - and makes one wonder what the hell this world is turning into..let's hope the situation in Evanston this AM isn't just another cruel chapter. The other thing is even though felonies - they will be tried in juvenille court - punishment unlikely to match the crime... I am so disturbed by this story. It frightens and sickens me. It is hard for me to pass judgement on how the district should legally handle this. I know as a parent, I think it is pure torture to continually subject the victim in this case to the presence of the accused at school. Without knowing the facts in this case, I am hesitant to really give an opinion on what the district should do. It is hard to imagine a child being capable of such actions but I do believe that, in the rarest of incidents, a child can be capable of doing unthinkable things. During my abnormal psychology class during college, a student asked our professor (a practicing psychiatrist working with various law enforcement agencies) if he was ever afraid of one of his patients. The professor replied that during all of his years as a psychiatrist he was only afraid of one patient, a four year old little boy. This little boy was seeing our professor because he had attempted to kill his little sister in various ways, several times, with the last attempt nearly succeeding. Our professor said that when he looked into the eyes of this child, he saw what he termed as "no soul". |
|
|
|
Post by slp on Feb 4, 2009 15:57:54 GMT -6
I did hear that the school called certain kids down to the office to hear their side of the story...so doesn't that now make them involved? I don't know.
I pray that both kids (the victim and the assaulter) can get the professional help they need and be productive members of society before it is too late.
All I know is that when I heard this story and imagined if they had done this to my nephew I would have gone nuts. So I can only imagine how the victims' parents feel as it is their own son.
|
|
|
|
Post by casey on Feb 4, 2009 16:54:03 GMT -6
Here's the link to last night's exclusive report cosmos.bcst.yahoo.com/up/player/popup/?rn=4226712&cl=11860382&src=newsafter watching and listening to the report my skin is crawling. I can certainly understand this family's outrage. The news report put SD/MM in a very poor light. In addition, the newscasters all expressed their shock that IPSD 204 continues to allow these 2 students who were charged with CRIMINAL SEXUAL ASSAULT back in the classroom. From what I understand, the police had enough evidence to charge these two with very serious offenses. This isn't a case of he said/she said but much more. I think that the SD dropped the ball on this one and are now hiding behind the cloud of "legal proceedings". Our legal costs just continue to mount. Help! |
|
|
|
Post by Arch on Feb 4, 2009 17:16:07 GMT -6
Sounds to me like the situation of having them all in the same building falls under:
"Aggressive behavior is defined as using force, noise, coercion, threats, intimidation, fear or other comparable conduct toward anyone or urging other students to engage in such conduct."
or
"12.
Involvement in gangs or gang-related activities, including but not limited to
the display or possession of gang symbols, identifiers or paraphernalia,
soliciting others for membership, requesting payment of dues, insurance or
other forms of protection from any individual, intimidating or threatening any
individual, and/or inciting others to participate in any form of physical
violence involving persons or property. "
More than 1 person acting together can constitute 'gang activity'.
Them being there represents a continuing and ongoing fear, intimidation and threats to the victim's safety and mental and emotional state of mind.
I hope the parents take this to the National Level for attention to force other districts to wake up and ensure they have policies in place where D204's have obviously been inadequate and lacking for a situation like this.
|
|
|
|
Post by concerned2 on Feb 4, 2009 17:35:54 GMT -6
I am disgusted by this story. I am with the parents of the victim. It there is enough evidence to charge these children they have no business being in school. The victim should not have to make changes to stay safe. This kid has had his life changed forever. What is this world coming too?? If this happened to my kid, man they would have to hold me back.
|
|
|
|
Post by macy on Feb 4, 2009 17:44:03 GMT -6
Very complicated situation for the District (there is an important presumption of innocence). I understand the boys involved have been charged with felonies and it seems that if there is enough probable cause to criminally charge these kids, at the very least, the District should have a hearing to determine if there is cause to remove these kids from the school due to a safety concern towards other students (ie ask the police to share the evidence they have). I think it is important to respect the rights of the accused students, but on the other hand, if there is sufficient evidence that they committed a felony against another student, these kids should be removed for the safety of all students. I know that it is different in that it occured on a school bus, but the District did not provide a trial for the child who was using a pocket knife to clean his nails before they expelled/suspended him from school. I completely agree with Sashimi's perspective on this situation. If the Naperville police have justified felony charges against two of the involved children, in my opinion, the safety the kids at all schools should come above and beyond anything else, including vaguely written policy. As to Arch's point (above) regarding the quoted district policies; typically this sort of language/policy in a district (or corporate) handbook is typically written very loosely giving the owner discretion in terms of how they interpret what is written. |
|
|
|
Post by researching on Feb 4, 2009 17:46:26 GMT -6
Here's the link to last night's exclusive report cosmos.bcst.yahoo.com/up/player/popup/?rn=4226712&cl=11860382&src=newsafter watching and listening to the report my skin is crawling. I can certainly understand this family's outrage. The news report put SD/MM in a very poor light. In addition, the newscasters all expressed their shock that IPSD 204 continues to allow these 2 students who were charged with CRIMINAL SEXUAL ASSAULT back in the classroom. From what I understand, the police had enough evidence to charge these two with very serious offenses. This isn't a case of he said/she said but much more. I think that the SD dropped the ball on this one and are now hiding behind the cloud of "legal proceedings". Our legal costs just continue to mount. Help! Ok. I just watched the report. Boy does our district look ridiculous. We have a policy to protect the staff off-grounds but not the students. Great.  I especially liked the the close up of the Gregory sign that says "Where kids come first". What a joke. |
|
|
|
Post by doctorwho on Feb 4, 2009 18:08:31 GMT -6
Here's the link to last night's exclusive report cosmos.bcst.yahoo.com/up/player/popup/?rn=4226712&cl=11860382&src=newsafter watching and listening to the report my skin is crawling. I can certainly understand this family's outrage. The news report put SD/MM in a very poor light. In addition, the newscasters all expressed their shock that IPSD 204 continues to allow these 2 students who were charged with CRIMINAL SEXUAL ASSAULT back in the classroom. From what I understand, the police had enough evidence to charge these two with very serious offenses. This isn't a case of he said/she said but much more. I think that the SD dropped the ball on this one and are now hiding behind the cloud of "legal proceedings". Our legal costs just continue to mount. Help! Ok. I just watched the report. Boy does our district look ridiculous. We have a policy to protect the staff off-grounds but not the students. Great. I especially liked the the close up of the Gregory sign that says "Where kids come first". What a joke. just watched it also -- yes, we look inadequate to say the least--even understanding the issues. I wonder how much press will be at the SB meeting on Monday ? I wouldn't be surprised if this gets picked up at a national level if that occurs... |
|
|
|
Post by slp on Feb 4, 2009 18:40:32 GMT -6
I can understand allowing the perps to stay in school if no charges were filed or they were pending BUT they have serious charges filed against them. I think the school should err on the side of children's safety and ban the perps from school until this is resolved in the court system.
|
|
|
|
Post by steckdad on Feb 4, 2009 21:44:10 GMT -6
Very complicated situation for the District (there is an important presumption of innocence). I understand the boys involved have been charged with felonies and it seems that if there is enough probable cause to criminally charge these kids, at the very least, the District should have a hearing to determine if there is cause to remove these kids from the school due to a safety concern towards other students (ie ask the police to share the evidence they have). I think it is important to respect the rights of the accused students, but on the other hand, if there is sufficient evidence that they committed a felony against another student, these kids should be removed for the safety of all students. I know that it is different in that it occured on a school bus, but the District did not provide a trial for the child who was using a pocket knife to clean his nails before they expelled/suspended him from school. that is only for a court to decide. thus the SD needs to be real carefull |
|
|
|
Post by steckdad on Feb 4, 2009 21:48:10 GMT -6
I don't blame the school for trying to stay high and dry from this one. I also don't blame them for assuming innocence before proven guilty. If they are guilty I am sure the boys will move out of district. If not, then it is up to 204 to expel IMO. As totally disgusting as this case is - assuming all facts are true - I tend to agree that 204 really has it's hands tied in that it cannot create a law if you will - and should not comment further until whatever legal action is going to be taken occurs. Now maybe I'd offer to have the boy attend another MS school in the district - where he feels a safer environment until this all settles itself out - that way they are not passing judgement. Now I have to admit, if my kids in the school now- I am concerned about the two alleged perpertrators also... In today's litigious world however I can understand why we have to be careful. If we expel the two kids before they get a trial and they are found innocent - then what ? If we do nothing and something else happens to another student - then what? Just a horrible situation all the way around- it's a damned if you do- damned if you don't situation -- again I'd offer the victim a chance to change schools so he can learn until this settles itself out....and I'd make sure we keep an eye out at school on the two alleged perpertrators. common ground  |
|
|
|
Post by Arch on Feb 4, 2009 22:39:55 GMT -6
Very complicated situation for the District (there is an important presumption of innocence). I understand the boys involved have been charged with felonies and it seems that if there is enough probable cause to criminally charge these kids, at the very least, the District should have a hearing to determine if there is cause to remove these kids from the school due to a safety concern towards other students (ie ask the police to share the evidence they have). I think it is important to respect the rights of the accused students, but on the other hand, if there is sufficient evidence that they committed a felony against another student, these kids should be removed for the safety of all students. I know that it is different in that it occured on a school bus, but the District did not provide a trial for the child who was using a pocket knife to clean his nails before they expelled/suspended him from school. that is only for a court to decide. thus the SD needs to be real carefull So, in the meantime, if they continued doing this to other kids who go to school there...but manage to stay just outside the line of 'school function/activity/at school' then everything's cool and kosher until the courts can get to the first case as far as the Administration is concerned? Really? I'd like to see a motion to amend the conduct and disciplinary code to include acts of violence outside of school that are brought to the district's attention that have a police report to corroborate the allegations/events... then remove the students from the school for the safety of everyone else and send their educational materials home and let mom and/or dad deal with the downside of their child's actions. They still get access to the education, but in their own environment where they are no threat to anyone else. I don't see anywhere in this case that anyone actually denied or pretended nothing happened or that it is even a question at this point. Yet.. the adminstration does...... nothing. I would like to see the rule that says they are not permitted to do anything (as M2 was quoted) until the legal proceedings are done. I posted already where fear and intimidation are factors that can result in disciplinary action and both are present for the victim being at the same school the perps are at the same time never knowing if/when you round a corner or go use the rest room if they are going to be there. This is horse sh!t. |
|
|
|
Post by steckdad on Feb 4, 2009 22:47:49 GMT -6
that is only for a court to decide. thus the SD needs to be real carefull So, in the meantime, if they continued doing this to other kids who go to school there...but manage to stay just outside the line of 'school function/activity/at school' then everything's cool and kosher until the courts can get to the first case as far as the Administration is concerned? Really? I'd like to see a motion to amend the conduct and disciplinary code to include acts of violence outside of school that are brought to the district's attention that have a police report to corroborate the allegations/events... then remove the students from the school for the safety of everyone else and send their educational materials home and let mom and/or dad deal with the downside of their child's actions. They still get access to the education, but in their own environment where they are no threat to anyone else. I don't see anywhere in this case that anyone actually denied or pretended nothing happened or that it is even a question at this point. Yet.. the adminstration does...... nothing. I would like to see the rule that says they are not permitted to do anything (as M2 was quoted) until the legal proceedings are done. I posted already where fear and intimidation are factors that can result in disciplinary action and both are present for the victim being at the same school the perps are at the same time never knowing if/when you round a corner or go use the rest room if they are going to be there. This is horse sh!t. not sure I disagree with you being upset...but the incident is alleged.... |
|
|
|
Post by Arch on Feb 4, 2009 22:53:24 GMT -6
not sure I disagree with you being upset...but the incident is alleged.... In the normal world we have this thing called bond... and it's set (or not) based upon many factors, one of which is the potential threat to others if one is allowed to return to 'normal life' until a trial happens.... Was such an evaluation done in this case to determine if there is any potential threat to others or the 'alleged victim', or were they allowed to return to normal life like nothing happened simply because of their ages? |
|
I especially liked the the close up of the Gregory sign that says "Where kids come first". What a joke.