The court’s opinion noted that the SRO resigned shortly after the “incident.”  That sounds like it was a good idea.  The “incident,” according to the subsequent lawsuit, involved the SRO handcuffing a seven-year old with multiple disabilities and kneeling on his back, while offering unsolicited advice accompanied by threats.  The court dismissed claims against the school district because there was no allegation of a policy or a widespread pattern of this type of conduct, and there was no allegation that the student was suspended from school or otherwise denied the benefits of public education on the basis of his disability.  The court allowed negligence suits against a teacher and an aide to proceed, noting that the suit alleged that they failed to carry out their duty to care for the student by not doing more to intercede with the SRO.  Note: this was in North Carolina, where teachers apparently do not have the same level of immunity as Texas teachers enjoy.

The SRO was employed by the city, not the school district. But still….schools should be sure that cops who are going to treat small children like this are not allowed on campus. 

Our firm’s Toolbox offers ten tools designed to properly deal with students who are disruptive or violent. This isn’t one of them.

It’s A.G. v. City of Statesville, decided by the federal court for the Western District of North Carolina.  We found it on Specialed Connection at 79 IDELR 9.

DAWG BONE: RESTRAINT IS PERMISSIBLE IF DONE PROPERLY AND UNDER THE RIGHT CIRCUMSTANCES.

Got a question or comment for the Dawg?  Let me hear from you at jwalsh@wabsa.com. 

Tomorrow: new vocabulary!