Details of Newport News School Shooting Make Horrific Case Even Worse

by Kerry Dougherty

Just when we thought we knew all of the horrific details of the shooting of Abby Zwerner we get more revelations.

Chilling ones.

You remember Miss Zwerner. She’s the 25-year-old Newport News first-grade teacher who was almost killed by one of her students in January.

She’s suing school officials for $40 million and they refuse to settle the case with her. Instead, these heartless “educators” pretend that getting shot is just an occupational hazard of teaching – sort of like paper cuts – and she was injured in the course of her daily responsibilities.

If they can persuade a court of this lunacy they will be off the hook for monetary damages.

And the woman who’s endured surgeries and God-knows-what-trauma will collect a few dollars from Virginia’s workman’s compensation fund.

If you’re the praying type – and I am – be sure to bombard the Almighty with petitions for Ms. Zwerner. The courts need to use common sense and give her the green light to sue the ever-loving crap out of a school district that ignored multiple warning signs and tolerated a psychotic child in class with normal kids and a devoted teacher.

Make no mistake. The school board, former superintendent and Richneck administrators set the table for this bloody mess:

In court documents released this week and an interview given to The Washington Post, we learn that after the first-grade child blasted away at his teacher on January 6th of this year, he confessed to the shooting:

Amy Kovac was approaching Abigail Zwerner’s first-grade classroom at Virginia’s Richneck Elementary School the moment a 6-year-old student pulled out a gun.

The reading specialist said in an interview with The Post that she heard the blast from the hallway and thought: “Oh my God.” Suddenly, the door to Zwerner’s classroom burst open and panicked students ran out.

Zwerner, who had been shot through the hand and in her shoulder and was bleeding badly, followed.

Kovac, 54, said instinct kicked in. She went into the classroom. She said the boy looked proud.

“I did it,” Kovac said the boy told her. “I shot the b—- dead.”

Let’s not play word games, as The Post and other outlets did. This is what the shooter actually said:

“’I shot that bitch dead.”

Then he added, “I did it” and “I got my mom’s gun last night.”

Cold.

What six year old talks like this? Where did he learn this garbage? What manner of graphic violence was he exposed to prior to the shooting?

Was he raised by wolves?

Remember, this is a SIX YEAR OLD. A child who should be learning to read and make his letters, who still believes in Santa and the tooth fairy.

Instead, this one sounds like a seasoned gang-banger.

Since the “suspect” in this case is a juvenile and hasn’t been charged with a crime, we don’t know his name or many details about his behavior.

We do know that his mother, Deja Taylor, is headed to prison. She pleaded guilty in federal court for using marijuana while in possession of a firearm. In addition, she’ll be in state court on August 15 on charges of felony child neglect and misdemeanor reckless leaving of a firearm so as to endanger a child.

We also know that this kid allegedly attempted to strangle his kindergarten teacher. He was such a problem in first grade that until just before the shooting he wasn’t allowed in class without a parent.

Deliberately clueless school officials shrugged off warnings about this kid’s violent behavior and let this shooting happen.

Being gravely injured by a firearm is not an occupational hazard of teaching first grade.

Courts should let the Zwerner lawsuit proceed.

Published with permission from Kerry: Unemployed and Unedited.


Share this article



ADVERTISEMENT

(comments below)



ADVERTISEMENT

(comments below)


Comments

70 responses to “Details of Newport News School Shooting Make Horrific Case Even Worse”

  1. Virginia Gentleman Avatar
    Virginia Gentleman

    But whatever you do, don’t pass any gun legislation that could possibly protect these teachers. Just blame the school system.

    1. Turbocohen Avatar
      Turbocohen

      What gun legislation would prevent criminals from obtaining guns, Vaginia gentleman?

    2. Matt Adams Avatar
      Matt Adams

      What legislation would prohibit this act, that is not already law?

      Is it not illegal for a minor to be in possession of a firearm?
      Is it not illegal for a firearm to not be secured (locked/lacking access) in the home in the state of VA?
      It is not illegal for said firearm to be on school grounds?
      Is it not illegal to discharge said firearm at someone other than in means of self-defense?

      I surmise you’re pointing to the fact that you’d like firearms banned outright, which in a word will never occur. That also would not stop this violence.

      1. Virginia Gentleman Avatar
        Virginia Gentleman

        Well I am glad you asked. There is NO law in Va that requires a gun to be locked, unloaded, in a house with children. That law may have stopped this shooting.

        1. Matt Adams Avatar
          Matt Adams

          “There is NO law in Va that requires a gun to be locked, unloaded, in a house with children.”

          Oh really, perhaps you should learn what laws already exist before you ask for more.

          https://law.lis.virginia.gov/vacode/title18.2/chapter4/section18.2-56.2/

          https://law.lis.virginia.gov/vacode/title22.1/chapter14.1/section22.1-289.056/

          1. Virginia Gentleman Avatar
            Virginia Gentleman

            That law does NOT require the gun to be locked and unloaded. But I suspect you already know this but hope that nobody actually reads the law.

          2. Do you honestly think that a woman who would leave a loaded gun where a mentally disturbed child could get ahold of it would change her behavior because a law said she had to?

            If so, then your credulity borders on magical thinking.

          3. Virginia Gentleman Avatar
            Virginia Gentleman

            LOL. Perhaps we shouldn’t have any laws since obviously people who break them don’t follow them?

          4. Matt Adams Avatar
            Matt Adams

            “LOL. Perhaps we shouldn’t have any laws since obviously people who break them don’t follow them?”

            False dichotomy from a Troll for the Loss.

          5. Now you are being silly – and making my point for me.

            Our murder laws do not exist to prevent murder. They exist to punish those who unjustly kill another person.

            If the law you mentioned had been in place at the time of the crime in question, it would almost certainly have served only to provide a means to punish the child’s mother after the fact – it would not have prevented the crime from being committed. Our current law already provides a means to punish her for leaving the gun where the child could get it.

            Such a law as you propose would do little apart from inconveniencing and endangering the lives of law-abiding gun owners for no good reason.

          6. Matt Adams Avatar
            Matt Adams

            Far more eloquently stated than I ever could.

          7. Virginia Gentleman Avatar
            Virginia Gentleman

            Very eloquently stated but the fact remains there is NO law that requires guns to be locked unloaded in a house in VA. That law MAY have prevented this horrific crime. Now take the L guys.

          8. Matt Adams Avatar
            Matt Adams

            “Very eloquently stated but the fact remains there is NO law that requires guns to be locked unloaded in a house in VA. That law MAY have prevented this horrific crime. Now take the L guys.”

            As Wayne eloquently stated and you still fail to understand. Laws exist to punish people for breaking them, not to prevent the crime in the first place. As the very nature of criminal is to disregard the rules.

            You cannot legislate away bad behavior, you can punish bad behavior.

            Oh and when you need to insert weasel words in an attempt to make yourself the “victor”, you’ve already lost that argument, there bud.

            Beyond that, statements like
            “take the L” mean you’re not serious in any comments. You’re here to “win” debates, problem with that is you’re the one making the determination of the “win”.

          9. Now take the L guys.

            What are you talking about?

          10. And we should not be passing laws which restrict the freedoms of law-abiding individuals based on what they MAY prevent.

          11. Matt Adams Avatar
            Matt Adams

            “Very eloquently stated but the fact remains there is NO law that requires guns to be locked unloaded in a house in VA. That law MAY have prevented this horrific crime. Now take the L guys.”

            As Wayne eloquently stated and you still fail to understand. Laws exist to punish people for breaking them, not to prevent the crime in the first place. As the very nature of criminal is to disregard the rules.

            You cannot legislate away bad behavior, you can punish bad behavior.

            Oh and when you need to insert weasel words in an attempt to make yourself the “victor”, you’ve already lost that argument, there bud.

            Beyond that, statements like
            “take the L” mean you’re not serious in any comments. You’re here to “win” debates, problem with that is you’re the one making the determination of the “win”.

          12. Virginia Gentleman Avatar
            Virginia Gentleman

            “Laws exist to punish people for breaking them, not to prevent the crime in the first place. As the very nature of criminal is to disregard the rules.” What? So, is an anti-abortion law a law to punish a woman for having an abortion or to prevent her from having an abortion? You keep digging yourself into a hole with comments that are just not accurate.

          13. Matt Adams Avatar
            Matt Adams

            “Laws exist to punish people for breaking them, not to prevent the crime in the first place. As the very nature of criminal is to disregard the rules.” What? So, is an anti-abortion law a law to punish a woman for having an abortion or to prevent her from having an abortion? You keep digging yourself into a hole with comments that are just not accurate.”

            Non-sequitur.

            That’s your opinion and I can assure you with the statements you’ve made, it’s not well reasoned.

          14. And we should not be passing laws which restrict the freedoms of law-abiding individuals based on what they MAY prevent.

          15. Eric the half a troll Avatar
            Eric the half a troll

            So what would have happened if she left the gun unloaded sitting right next to a box of ammo? You think a determined 6 year old couldn’t figure that out? What law would “punish” her then?

            Also, you do know that the whole Conservative argument for the death penalty revolves around deterrence, right…?

          16. LarrytheG Avatar
            LarrytheG

            What I get out of this conversation is that serial killers (and others) can only be held accountable AFTER they have obtained the weapons and committed the gun crime even if it can be shown that they would not have qualified for obtaining a gun if we knew that they had mental issues. There is no way to identify such people and deny them from obtaining guns.

          17. As stated previously, the ways in which someone could be criminally reckless or negligent is endless, and it’s not limited to firearms. This pretty well covers it. Does it not?

            “Any parent, guardian, or other person responsible for the care of a child under the age of 18 whose willful act or omission in the care of such child was so gross, wanton, and culpable as to show a reckless disregard for human life is guilty of a Class 6 felony.”

            https://law.lis.virginia.gov/vacodeupdates/title18.2/section18.2-371.1/#:~:text=1.-,Any%20parent%2C%20guardian%2C%20or%20other%20person%20responsible%20for%20the%20care,of%20a%20Class%206%20felony.

            And yes, deterrence is a good thing. That’s why the mother should be punished severely. The school administrators should as well. And it should be publicized and talked about, so people know about it and remember.

          18. Eric the half a troll Avatar
            Eric the half a troll

            I have heard many a gun advocate argue that they can and do leave their gun unlocked and lying around the house where their children can access it… as is their right (according to them). I doubt such lax gun security (as it is perfectly legal) rises to the reckless or negligent legal standard. Now if there were a law…

          19. “I have heard many a gun advocate argue that they can and do leave their gun unlocked and lying around the house where their children can access it.”

            That’s kind of talk is not coming from me, and reckless behavior isn’t limited to guns.

            “Now if there were a law…”

            How will law enforcement know if the gun is secured? Are you advocating a police state with random searches?

            People will be held accountable when something bad happens, with or without the laws you suggest.

            The mother of the 6-year-old in Newport New was negligent and in violation of existing laws long before the shooting. It was discovered and prosecuted after.

          20. Eric the half a troll Avatar
            Eric the half a troll

            “That’s kind of talk is not coming from me, and reckless behavior isn’t limited to guns.”

            Again, if it is perfectly legal to leave an unloaded gun lying around along with ammunition where a child can get to it, when something like this happens, it won’t rise to the “reckless” legal standard required by the general law you cite.

            “How will law enforcement know if the gun is secured?”

            How will law enforcement know if a gun is loaded? Seems harder to prove.

          21. “Again, if it is perfectly legal to leave an unloaded gun lying around along with ammunition where a child can get to it, when something like this happens, it won’t rise to the “reckless” legal standard required by the general law you cite.”

            Good grief, read the news!

            You don’t know what you are talking about. As in the case with the 6-year-old from Newport News, that law will definitely be used to hold someone accountable if guns and ammunition are recklessly left about, and something bad happens.

            “How will law enforcement know if a gun is loaded? Seems harder to prove.”

            I think you have forgotten which side of the argument you are on. I’m largely for fewer prescriptive nit picky laws, trying to figure out the specifics of how guns are stored in the privacy of their home etc.

            But I am for holding people accountable if they screw up and people get hurt. That’s what happened with the mother of the 6-year-old.

          22. Eric the half a troll Avatar
            Eric the half a troll

            “…that law will definitely be used to hold someone accountable if guns and ammunition are recklessly left about, and something bad happens.”

            From WP article:

            “Deja Taylor, 25, of Newport News, is facing one felony count of child neglect and one misdemeanor count of recklessly storing a firearm so a child could gain access to it.”

            If she is being charged under that law, it means the gun was unsecured AND loaded – which is explicitly illegal. If it was unloaded but unsecured (even near ammunition), it would be perfectly legal and unlikely to rise to the reckless standard.

          23. LarrytheG Avatar
            LarrytheG

            re: ” “How will law enforcement know if the gun is secured?”

            How will law enforcement know if a gun is loaded? Seems harder to prove.”

            correct. In 99% of such situations, the police would never be involved in the first place. No one would know outside of the family members.

            I’d be curious to know how many times in Virginia this is actually a primary charge, Seems like it would take some kind of complaint from someone (or a kid spilling the beans at school and/or taking a gun to school) then a warrant to search so how many times does something like this actually happen?

          24. “…when something like this happens, it won’t rise to the “reckless” legal standard required by the general law you cite.”

            But the facts of the Newport News shooting tell us just the opposite.
            The law I cited is what the mother is charged with, as well as other law that specifically required her to restrict access to the loaded gun.

            You have no facts to back up that statement.

          25. At the risk of beating a dead horse, were it not for laws against murder, most other laws would be unnecessary, as society would solve disputes with vengeance as in times past.

            And judging from the acrimony I have witnessed between spouses in bad marriages, there would likely be far fewer divorces.

            The case against more gun laws is that the really bad stuff is already against the law. What’s needed is stricter enforcement and longer penalties, which Democrats largely oppose.

            Democrats absolutely love making stuff against the law, but they don’t want enforcement, unless it’s against conservatives.

            It seems that minorities and prominent liberals get a pass. For example, how many of the liberals commenting on this blog have been advocating for felony gun charges against Hunter Biden? There’s zero doubt he’s guilty.

            I rest my case.

          26. Virginia Gentleman Avatar
            Virginia Gentleman

            And your argument is weak and not compelling. A law that was introduced last session and killed by Republicans MAY have prevented this kid from having access to this gun. Not guaranteed but if the mother would have locked up the gun unloaded, it may have prevented this kid from accessing it. But we will never know. And it certainly may prevent the next one.

          27. LarrytheG Avatar
            LarrytheG

            From what I understand so far from most 2A folks is that we should not deny or try to deny access to guns as it is antithetical to the 2a.
            The way to properly deal with the gun problem is enforcement and accountability of those who break the laws.

            They are fundamentally opposed to try to proactively limit gun purchasers from anyone who is not a felon.

            So we don’t stop folks buying guns to commit mass killings… until and unless they are identified as a serious threat, they are good to go. The same for parents with 6yr olds. We can’t prevent them from making the gun easily available to the kid… only AFTER, do we hold them accountable! We don’t even KNOW which ones are already doing that unless something happens to expose them!

          28. MY argument is weak?

            Fact:
            The mother of the 6-year-old shooter, Deja Taylor, has admitted in federal court that she knowingly lied on the federal form she signed to buy the gun, which very explicitly asked if she was a drug user. This violation carries a maximum penalty of 25 years in prison. (She’s hoping the judge will only sentence her to a maximum of two years)

            Fact:
            Deja Taylor also faces charges in Newport News Circuit Court, where she’s charged with felony child neglect count and a misdemeanor count of “allowing access to firearms by children.”

            Fact:
            The felony child neglect charge carries a penalty of up to five years in prison.

            Fact:
            The class 1 misdemeanor for allowing her child access to a loaded gun carries a penalty of up to a year in jail, a fine of $2500, or possibly both punishments compounded.

            But your position is that if only the law introduced in January (which was only a class 1 Misdemeanor) had passed, then Deja Taylor would have become a model citizen and everything would have been sunshine and roses.

            Sorry, but that makes no sense whatsoever.

          29. Virginia Gentleman Avatar
            Virginia Gentleman

            So in your world, we should not have any underage drinking laws because some kids will never comply. We should not have any drunk driving laws because habitual offenders obviously don’t follow them. We shouldn’t have any speed limits, because fast drivers will ignore. That makes mo sense to me.

          30. Virginia Gentleman:
            “That makes mo sense to me.”

            Then you are not paying attention. Let me try again.

            This women broke at least 4 existing gun laws. You think five would have made a difference? THAT makes no sense.

            Virginia Gentleman:
            “We should not have any drunk driving laws because habitual offenders obviously don’t follow them.”

            That’s absolutely NOT what I’m saying. We do have laws against drunk driving, just as we have laws to hold this mother of the 6-year-old accountable. The difference is there’s been a huge media campaign to educate citizens about drunk driving. Not so with the liabilities of negligence with firearms.

            I have demonstrated multiple times that prosecutors have numerous laws already on the books to hold people accountable. Adding one more won’t solve the problem.

            In some areas, we have liberal prosecutors who either won’t press charges, or won’t push for harsh penalties. Adding yet another law won’t solve that.

            Many people are oblivious to the potential criminal liability they already face. Adding another law won’t change that.

            This subject isn’t new to me. I’ve been a firearms instructor off and on for over 40 years. Safety is a big part of that.

            If the legislation you are advocating does become law at some point, I will comply. I will also teach it to others, but my reach is very limited.

            The vast majority of people will still be ignorant, because there’s no political gain for politicians to make sure citizens know the law. They get their names in the paper, and reelected, by proposing new laws to solve all our problems.

            BTW – That mother is in court today and is expected to plead guilty to the state gun charges. (She has already pleaded guilty in federal court to those charges.)

            https://apnews.com/article/teacher-shooting-virginia-boy-classroom-81d52f6bf35512c5684acb93baa8700b

          31. “Our murder laws do not exist to prevent murder.”

            I must respectfully disagree. Do you honestly think murder wouldn’t skyrocket if there were no laws against it?

            When justice is meted out quickly and with certainty, it does deter crime, as does the death penalty.

            What Giuliani did in NYC, is a case in point, though the principle has been demonstrated for thousands of years.

            It’s called “hear and fear.”

            “But the man who acts presumptuously, refusing to listen either to the priest who stands there to serve the LORD your God, or to the judge, must be put to death. You must purge the evil from Israel. 13Then all the people will hear and be afraid, and will no longer behave arrogantly.”

            Deuteronomy 17:12-13

            We are now seeing, particularly in Democrat run cities, is the reverse. As prosecution and punishment gets lax, crime gets worse, including murder.

          32. The purpose of the law against murder is to outlaw the unjust killing of another, and to define the punishment for for those who commit murder.

            If consideration of this punishment results in a deterrent effect then that is great, but it is not the purpose of the law.

            I can only speak for myself, but murder being illegal is not the reason I refrain from committing murder. I refrain from committing murder because it is wrong.

          33. The purpose of the law against murder is to outlaw the unjust killing of another, and to define the punishment for for those who commit murder.

            If consideration of this punishment results in a deterrent effect then that is great, but it is not the purpose of the law.

            I can only speak for myself, but murder being illegal is not the reason I refrain from committing murder. I refrain from committing murder because it is wrong.

          34. The law serves multiple purposes.

            Purposes of Law
            Through the law, the information is passed on to the citizens every day in many various ways. Also, it is reflected in many branches of law. For example, contract law states that agreements need to exchange services, goods, or anything that is of value. Thus, it includes everything from purchasing a ticket to the trading options on the derivates market.

            Furthermore, property law defines the duties and rights of people towards the property. This includes real estate along with their possessions. Also, it includes intangible property like shares of stock and bank accounts. Various offenses against state, federal, or local community in itself appeared as a subject of criminal law.

            Thus, it provides the government to punish the offender. There are many purposes served by the law. Out of these, the main four are maintaining order, establishing standards, protecting liberties, and resolving disputes.

            https://www.toppr.com/guides/legal-aptitude/jurisprudence/purpose-of-law-meaning-and-kinds/

          35. The law serves multiple purposes.

            Purposes of Law
            Through the law, the information is passed on to the citizens every day in many various ways. Also, it is reflected in many branches of law. For example, contract law states that agreements need to exchange services, goods, or anything that is of value. Thus, it includes everything from purchasing a ticket to the trading options on the derivates market.

            Furthermore, property law defines the duties and rights of people towards the property. This includes real estate along with their possessions. Also, it includes intangible property like shares of stock and bank accounts. Various offenses against state, federal, or local community in itself appeared as a subject of criminal law.

            Thus, it provides the government to punish the offender. There are many purposes served by the law. Out of these, the main four are maintaining order, establishing standards, protecting liberties, and resolving disputes.

            https://www.toppr.com/guides/legal-aptitude/jurisprudence/purpose-of-law-meaning-and-kinds/

          36. I do read the laws and have demonstrated that repeatedly by citing them, and occasionally providing links.

            The specific ways someone may be criminally negligent with respect to children is endless. Creating specific laws for each and every one with required prescriptive actions can be counter productive. Laws become so complex and overwhelming that citizens can’t possible be knowledgeable of what is specifically required.

        2. Of course. Because we all know that child’s parents would have followed such a law to the letter.

          Virginia already has a reasonable legal requirement designed to keep children away from unattended guns, and the child’s parent violated that law.

          1. Virginia Gentleman Avatar
            Virginia Gentleman

            I was asked to provide a law that would have possibly helped, I did. And then you follow up with a “well the parents wouldn’t have followed the law anyway”. I see how this game is played.

          2. Matt Adams Avatar
            Matt Adams

            That’s a not a law (it’s a flippant attempt to sound intelligent) and it wouldn’t have prevented it as all the steps that lead to the shooting, were against the LAW.

          3. Actually, what I followed up with was: Virginia already has a reasonable legal requirement designed to keep children away from unattended gun.

            The preamble was just a mildly sarcastic jab at the feigned naivete you adopt when discussing gun laws.

          4. Virginia Gentleman Avatar
            Virginia Gentleman

            And when the left chooses to use sarcastic jabs, the comments get deleted but not the conservatives. I see why Purdy left now.

          5. Mild sarcasm is not against the rules.

            And by the way, I’ve had at least two comments deleted from this site in the last 18 hours. I take such things as opportunities to work on my writing skills – assuming I even care enough about the comment to want to reword and repost it.

          6. Matt Adams Avatar
            Matt Adams

            I had a comment to you on this very thread removed. The difference, I don’t complain about the moderator and their decision. I take my lumps and as Wayne indicated either reword it or don’t do anything at all.

            Perpetual victim is no way to walk through life.

        3. “Well I am glad you asked. There is NO law in Va that requires a gun to be locked, unloaded, in a house with children. That law may have stopped this shooting.”

          Did you know that such laws disproportionally impact minorities? It’s true. You think society would be better off with lots more minorities in prison?

          What demographic is the mother of the 6-year-old?

          I’m not against all gun laws, but endlessly adding more and more gun laws because bad things still happen is not the answer.

          I believe Virginia has more than enough gun laws. From here, the path forward is education and enforcement.

        4. You got your law when Democrats were in power and it didn’t help.

          https://law.lis.virginia.gov/vacode/title18.2/chapter4/section18.2-56.2/#:~:text=A.,of%20a%20Class%201%20misdemeanor.

          I said at the time that the law was unnecessary as there was already a law against reckless endangerment, which is what really has teeth and was used in this situation.

          Virginia’s law on felony child neglect says any parent, guardian or other person responsible for the care of a child “whose willful act or omission in the care of such child was so gross, wanton, and culpable as to show a reckless disregard for human life” is guilty of a Class 6 felony. The charge is punishable by up to five years in prison.

          The misdemeanor charge says it’s against Virginia law to “recklessly leave a loaded, unsecured firearm in such a manner as to endanger the life or limb of any child under the age of fourteen.” That charge is punishable by up to one year in jail.

          https://apnews.com/article/school-shooting-virginia-newport-news-917b225fad63620c5280732b5fc6176c

          1. LarrytheG Avatar
            LarrytheG

            is this a common charge that we’d see a lot of across Virginia or is it fairly rare or in between?

          2. Eric the half a troll Avatar
            Eric the half a troll

            “…loaded…” being a key “out” word here.

          3. Democrats wrote passed and signed that law, not me.

            The felony child neglect law which I prefer has no such “out,” and has a stiffer penalty.

    3. Please name “any gun legislation” that can protect “these teachers”. And please do not forget to explain, in detail, exactly how the legislation you name will protect them.

    4. Basic logic seems to have eluded you.

      If someone does something terrible which causes injury or suffering to others, but no crime has been committed, and that person cannot be held accountable, THAT is where a new law may be justified.

      In this case, the parent allowed the child to get access to the gun, and will now pay a stiff penalty. What would your law do differently?

      It’s not possible to pass a law that everyone will immediately obey. Humans don’t operate that way. That’s why most laws have penalties for breaking them. It’s also why we have a criminal justice system to enforce laws and put people in prison.

  2. Thomas Dixon Avatar
    Thomas Dixon

    Where is the father?

  3. Matt Adams Avatar
    Matt Adams

    First point and this is paramount.

    “The courts need to use common sense and give her the green light to sue the ever-loving crap out of a school district that ignored multiple warning signs and tolerated a psychotic child in class with normal kids and a devoted teacher.”

    Children with intellectual disabilities are not “psychotic and you’re not a physician with the required credentials to make such a statement. Furthermore, what meets your definition of “normal” is utterly disgusting and is what causes the stigmas predicated against children who have learning disabilities.

    There were multiple leave of failures in this case, from the parents and the school.

    ““’I shot that bitch dead.”

    Then he added, “I did it” and “I got my mom’s gun last night.”

    Cold.

    What six year old talks like this? Where did he learn this garbage? What manner of graphic violence was he exposed to prior to the shooting?”

    That type of activity and language has been common place since the 90’s, go find an NWA or Body Count album.

    1. Lefty665 Avatar

      I’d suggest that this little boy is not likely intellectually disabled, but does have severe emotional disabilities that might very well include psychosis.

      He was just a half step short of being placed in a more restrictive educational environment before he shot his teacher. That does not happen to kids with straight forward intellectual disabilities. The 1 to 1 supervision required for him in the classroom (provided by his parents) is an exceptional accommodation that speaks to the severity of his issues. His aggressive confession after shooting his teacher clearly illustrates how profoundly emotionally disabled he is.

      With a little luck he is now getting the therapy he desperately needs and will remain in a segregated, restrictive, theraputic environment until he is safe to be with the rest of us.

      1. Matt Adams Avatar
        Matt Adams

        I concur, but I’m disheartened by the lack of distinction in these articles. Having disabled children is hard enough, people don’t take the time to understand the difference.

        Hopefully he’s getting the help he needs, it’s unfortunate that his parents didn’t further help. Either, because they couldn’t or wouldn’t.

        1. Lefty665 Avatar

          Yes, exactly.

      2. Apparently, he is in the custody of his great-grandfather and is attending school in an undisclosed location (not Newport news).

        https://www.pilotonline.com/2023/06/17/great-grandfather-of-richneck-shooter-who-has-full-custody-of-6-year-old-says-boy-is-thriving-at-new-school/

        I hope he really is doing well.

        1. Lefty665 Avatar

          His behaviors were so egregious before the shooting it is hard to imagine him in a normal public school setting after. What ever the educational setting let’s hope grandad is a healthy environment and the boy is getting the mental health services he clearly needs.

  4. Mike Allen Avatar
    Mike Allen

    Black on white hate crime.

  5. Ronnie Chappell Avatar
    Ronnie Chappell

    While the wounding of a teacher at Richneck Elementary School is a tragic, awful and anger-inducing event it should be handled as a workman’s compensation claim.

    If it isn’t, school systems across Virginia will be swamped with $40 million lawsuits and taxpayers will end up paying the cost of that litigation and the judgements.

    Readers of this blog know that teachers are routinely the victims of classroom violence, perpetrated by their students. While shootings are rare, physical assaults are not uncommon. While I agree, no one expects to get shot by a six-year-old, the chances of a teacher being beaten, choked, or knocked down by an angry student over the course of a 20-year career are disturbingly high.

    The mistakes made at Richneck Elementary in the handling of this student prior to this shooting – the failure to properly respond to claims the boy was carrying a pistol – are particularly egregious. But taxpayers shouldn’t be forced to pay for the mistakes of a handful of incompetent educators. Much has been said about ending “qualified immunity” for policemen. Perhaps school officials would make better, more responsible decisions if they too were personally and financially responsible for their worst errors.

    The workman’s compensation program was established to provide fast and fair compensation to people hurt on the job – even when a worker is fully or partially responsible for the injury he or she sustained. I think that is clearly the case in the Richneck shooting.

    Think for a minute about how different our perception of this event would be if the pistol-wielding six-year-old had wounded or killed a classmate instead of his teacher.

    First, it’s almost certain the teacher would be a defendant in the resulting lawsuit for failing to protect her student. Afterall, the teacher is the first line of defense in situations like this. And if I understand Virginia law correctly, teachers have an absolute right to immediately remove kids from their classroom if they believe them to be a danger to others. This action is subject to later review and discussion with administrators.

    If the shooter’s attendance at Richneck was conditioned on the presence of a parent in the classroom, why did the teacher allow him into her classroom without a parent?
    Why was this essential, well-thought-out safety precaution ignored? If the decision was made by a school administrator why did the teacher comply? Why didn’t she elevate her concern?

    Why did she allow the shooter into the classroom after rumors that he had brought a gun to school? Why didn’t she insist on a complete and thorough search – a search she witnessed — before allowing his return?

    Is “my supervisor ignored my concerns and ordered me to put myself and students at risk” an adequate reason? I don’t think so.

    The teacher should receive fast and fair payment through workman’s compensation for her injuries. Nothing more.

    I acknowledge that this $40 million lawsuit captures the frustration and outrage teachers and parents feel about the continued deterioration of public schools.

    Maybe people think if we send a big enough message — award a big enough verdict in a case like this one — things will begin to change.

    They won’t.

    Student on teacher and student on student violence will remain common place in Virginia schools.

    And that’s not going to change until teachers in every school in Virginia refuse to allow violent, angry, disruptive kids into their classrooms. Only when teachers take back their classrooms will school boards and school administrators begin to truly address this issue.

    1. “And that’s not going to change until teachers in every school in Virginia refuse to allow violent, angry, disruptive kids into their classrooms.”

      Without support from the administration, teachers have limited options. They can continue to work where they aren’t supported. They can relocate to a different area in hopes that things will be better, or quit and find another career.

      “As of April 2023, the Staffing and Vacancy Report tool shows 3,573 teacher vacancies for the 2022-23 school year.”

      https://www.doe.virginia.gov/teaching-learning-assessment/teaching-in-virginia/turning-the-tide

      What happened at Richneck Elementary wasn’t merely a few “mistakes.” It goes way beyond that. It was deliberate and willful. Teachers raised concerns, but were explicitly forbidden from taking any effective action, putting teachers and children in grave danger.

      I don’t support frivolous lawsuits, but I strongly support this one. I also hope it goes to trial. We’ll learn more from that trial then would ever become public information otherwise.

      1. Ronnie Chappell Avatar
        Ronnie Chappell

        Thanks for the response. I couldn’t disagree more. I do not believe that teachers are helpless, voiceless drones who must endure untenable and sometimes unsafe conditions in their classrooms because they lack authority to act. They don’t. And that’s the fiction the lawyers who brought this lawsuit will try to sell to a Newport News jury.

        This never would and never could have happened in the teacher had put her students first and acted on her fears.

        Teachers who refuse to stand up to idiot administrators are as big a problem as idiot administrators.

        Nothing is going to change until teachers take back their classrooms — announce loud and strong — We’re mad as hell and we’re not going to take it anymore.

        They’d enjoy life at school knowing they can control their working conditions. They’d be happier and more effective. Their students would learn more.

        Time to stop acting like victims.

        1. There are 3,573 teacher vacancies for the 2022-23 school year. Perhaps you should take a job as a teacher in an out of control school with an administration opposed to your views and demonstrate how that works.

          Please report back how it goes.

  6. We now know how heinous the crime of allowing a child access to a firearm is…….. a 60-day suspended sentence.

    Anyone see a problem with this?
    No more so called ‘gun laws’ until those we currently have are ALWAYS enforced to the fullest extent possible.

Leave a Reply