Stupid arrests thread...

I would tell my special needs kid to visit the principal and have a panic attack there.......see if the principal can deal with the child in need.

 

While this may sound stupid and an overreaction, real things happen quite often. There is a reason you need to sign in. For instance even if you are the parent, you might be separated and not allowed to see the child. The teacher might not know these differences, but the principle sign-in checks ID and a list to make sure they are even allowed to see the child. Same with picking them up. You can't just send your neighbour down to the school to pick up your kid anymore, you need to be on the list.

While I agree many of these sorts of things are stupid and annoying, they are there for a reason. There are lots of stories I can't share that deal with this sort of thing because of a family member being an administrator of a school district that has to deal with all these things district wide instead of school wide.

 

The article stated that the teacher let the mom in, not the mom went in without permission. If the teacher didn't follow the rules, it's not the fault of the mom.

Also having a special needs child is very difficult, when they throw a tantrum, they often will hurt themselves and people around them. It's best to comfort them as quickly as possible.

 

Parents know, especially special needs parents, there are procedures to follow. I am sure the teacher will be reprimanded as well. Neither of them followed the rules, you can't pick the more gross offender and just punish them.

The rules are there for a reason, and it takes a minute to sign in and verify identity. The teacher had ample time to try and fail to calm the child and then call in the parent who then had the time to actually make it to the campus. This wasn't life or death.

 

We are probably not getting the complete story. If the school was placed on lockdown, something is not quite right. If there was such an urgency for help, the teacher should have notified the school staff before calling the parent. Something is off here.

 

It is not a matter of opinion, it is law.

Was the mother on the campus? Yes. Did she sign in? No. She is in the wrong. The teacher probably forgot, and it was just one of those things that slipped the mind. A reprimand for the teacher might be in order, but the school implemented the policy correctly.

Suing school district wastes millions of dollars every year that otherwise could have gone towards textbooks or upgrading facilities.

The laws about this have changed dramatically in the past decade and even in the past couple years. And I don't want to diminish your great work of teaching (more people should applaud teachers here, it is a real shame) but you are not exposed to nearly anything that goes on. Sure there is talk and rumours which make it up to the administration but behind every new and weird guideline is generally a really terrifying story. There are lots of times that the teachers know nothing of what happened, but the child was still placed in danger.

I agree arresting her for tresspassing was very aggressive. But it is the law and she knew better. You know that special needs parents are usually the most intune with the schools' policies because they follow it so closely. The teacher also knew better but misdirected her.

 

Wasn't there a story a while back about a shooting that occurred because someone was buzzed into the school (because the staff knew them?). This was probably in response to that shooting.

 

There are lots of things like that that happen when the procedure is not followed. Shootings make the headlines, but abductions are the most common.

 

Yeah, arresting the mother and placing the school under lockdown should help calm the kid down....

Sounds to me like a completely anal overreaction. The US is sounding more paranoid, delusional, and trigger-happy every day. Build that wall higher, please.

 

A landowner cannot invite a person onto a property and then have them arrested for trespass without first dis-inviting them, then giving them an opportunity to peacefully and voluntarily leave.

The parent was invited in by an agent of the school, the teacher. The principal violated the law on how to revoke that invitation and handle the 'trespasser'.

 

Unless we are reading different articles, the mother was not escorted on campus. She was simply called for, probably by cell to come comfort your child from wherever she was at the time like work or home.

You don't get to bypass the security at the airport because you have a ticket. The "invitation" was to simply come console the child. The parent chose to go straight from the car to the child instead of making a stop at the office first. It is really not hard to understand.

 

Yeah, it is. A parent gets called to school to comfort their child, and ends up getting arrested. She did absolutely nothing wrong, other than crossing a 't' before dotting an 'i'. All the stupid rules and control issues in the world cannot overrule a parent's love for their child.

 

From the OP article, "Williams is a known parent at the school, so she was buzzed in right away. She saw a teacher, who immediately took her to her son."
So a school agent let her into the building, and then the same or another agent escorted her to her son. Perhaps the agents thought she had signed in, or had thought that signing in wasn't the priority with her being escorted by them at the time.

The principal was right in calling cops when hearing a person had just come into the school without checking in. Arresting her once it was verified who she was, the principal had seen just the day before, and why the checked procedure was missed was uncalled for. Of course, some zero tolerance BS could be in play here, which is just more proof ZT should be scrapped.

 

I'd say the principal needs a time out.

 

I'd say the principal should be transferred to Sandy Hook.

 

Yes she did do wrong. Really it is not hard. As a parent or any visitor to a school you must sign in at the office. No if's, and's, or but's. She did not do that, she is WRONG. It really is that simple. Love has nothing to do with it and means nothing in the law.

Next time a loved one is arriving at the airport and coming down the arrivals lane as you wait by the TSA no-pass point and no-re-entry line, try and hug them in that zone. You will be detained.

Zero tolerance is stupid, and probably was the cause of this. However the parent being seen and OK the day before means nothing in schools. As an anecdote, there was a parent here who the night before attempted suicide. The other parent called the school notified them, and the sick parent was removed from the allowed list. It was also on a federal installation so these things are taken seriously and the sick one was being actively searched for. That parent had every day for the past couple of years picked up their child at the school and knew the principle, most teachers, other parents, everything. The pickup attendant did not verify her identity (afterall the attendant knew who she was right?) and gave her the child. The principle noticed and was able to block the car from leaving while the military police were called. The parent was found with packed suitcases and it was deemed an attempted abduction. It is also common for abductions in child custody cases when one gets fed up with the legal system and decides to get some vigilante justice.

There are reasons the lists and rules are as they are. It takes a couple seconds to verify identity from "the list".

 

I am not saying she didn't do wrong by not signing in, but the account appears to be that she wasn't unescorted at any time. If she had been taken off the list, then there was a breakdown in communications at the school, because her son's teacher called her.

So she was called to the school. Then she and her escort either forgot, or deemed it not pressing, to sign in. She was in the present of a school agent at all times. When confronted about not signing in, she wasn't allowed to correct the oversight. She may not even have been allowed to leave.

No one here is arguing that there shouldn't be some type of sign in procedure with a list of who is okay or not. The cry of foul is over the overreaction in arresting her. Unless zero tolerance was in play, or there are details we don't have, a warning was all that was required. Now there is a chance the school will have to go to court.