<snip> On Nov. 29, the suspect was discovered by a teacher to be viewing images of bullets on his cell phone during class. The suspect met with a counselor and another staff member and indicated he and his mother recently went to the shooting range and that shooting sports are a family hobby. Consistent with our school policies and procedures, the school attempted to make contact with the student’s mother to discuss the incident but did not initially hear back.
The next day, his parents confirmed his account. On the morning of Nov. 30, a teacher observed concerning drawings and written statements that have been detailed in media reports, which the teacher reported to school counselors and the Dean ofstudents.
The student was immediately removed from the classroom and brought to the guidance counselor’s office where he claimed the drawing was part of a video game he was designing and informed counselors that he planned to pursue video game design as a career.
The student’s parents were also called in. Because it was difficult to reach the parents, the student remained in the office for an hour and a half while counselors continued to observe, analyze and speak with the student.
While waiting for his parents to arrive, the student verbalized his concern he would be missing homework assignments and requested his science homework, which he then worked on while in the office.
At no time did counselors believe the student might harm others based on his behavior, responses and demeanor, which appeared calm. In addition, despite media reports, whether or not the gun was in his backpack has not been confirmed by law enforcement to our knowledge nor by our investigation at this time.
While both of his parents were present, counselors asked specific probing questions regarding the potential for self-harm or harm to others. His answers, which were affirmed by his parents during the interview, led counselors to again conclude he did not intend on committing either self-harm or harm to others.
The student’s parents never advised the school district that he had direct access to a firearm or that they had recently purchased a firearm for him. Counseling was recommended for him, and his parents were notified that they had 48 hours to seek counseling for their child or the school would contact Child Protective Services.
When the parents were asked to take their son home for the day, they flatly refused and left without their son, apparently to return to work.
Given the fact that the child had no prior disciplinary infractions, the decision was made he would be returned to the classroom rather than sent home to an empty house.
These incidents remained at the guidance counselor level and were never elevated to the principal or assistant principal’s office.
While we understand this decision has caused anger, confusion and prompted understandable questioning,the counselors made a judgment based on their professional training and clinical experience and did not have all the facts we now know. Our counselors are deeply committed long standing school members who have dedicated their lives to supporting students and addressing student mental healthand behavioral issues.
So, the kid lied, the kid is manipulative and scheming and again proves that no matter how highly trained you think you are, you can't read another person's heart.
Unfortunately, the State in it's hubris still thinks it is possible to read people's hearts and their solution will be to become more invasive and punish people for thought crimes like looking at bullets on the internet.
