Another thread- sorry

[klmno]

I posted this in Special Education forum too- I apologize if I'm taking too much advantage here- just let me know. I'm feeling a little frantic and angry and desparetly want to have some action to take prior to mid- week. Any experience or knowledge with this would be greatly appreciated!!

Those who have read a few of my previous threads might recall that a couple of months ago, I had received an email from the principal that she inadvertantly sent to me- she was angry at me over pushing for IEP to be implemented and the email was intended for a teacher and difficult child's case manager at school only. She sent it at 1:00am- it included a statement the she wanted to call an IEP meeting and have these 2 people from sd administration there so she could tell them how great they had been for difficult child. These 2 people were listed by name- one was the middle school director of Special Education and I was having trouble figuring out who the other was- turns out, sd admin website lists this person as "liason to AES school program for suspended and expelled youth with disabilities"

I have no idea what "AES school program" is, but difficult child had no reason what-so-ever to be considered at risk for suspension or expulsion 2 mos. ago when this email was written.

Would this be enough to prove that they planned to get him out of school the first chance they had, leading to his current situation where they filed criminal charges against him on top of the suspension?

Is that illegal on their part, when according to school policy and by law, they could file criminal charges? In their code of conduct manual, there is a list of possible punishments for each violation. these various lists are basicly the same for each violation and runs the full gammet from "teacher or principal conference" to "suspension" to "referral to court" to "recommendation for expulsion". Last year, they tried the long term suspension and refferal to disciplinary review officer after the asst. principal ALONE decided his latest action was not a manifestation because it was impulsive. That obviously didn't work because of his IEP status, among other violations they committed.

This year, they clearly took advantage of the suspended sentence he has for time in detention. But, do I have enough to prove it in due process? And, obviously it is morraly and ethically wrong, but is that illegal on their part?

 

[Big Bad Kitty]

I don't know about the legalities of it, but I would certainly think so! The nerve!!

I bet Martie and Sheila will have the answer for you. Oh, I am so mad for you...

 

[Steely]

I would be talking to a lawyer about this ASAP. It does seem as if there is an underlying push to get him out - but whether or not a sd can get in trouble for intent of his nature I am not sure.

So sorry.

 

[klmno]

A member from here had pm'd me links for help in va. I emailed one yesterday- he's an attny who does advocacy work. He emailed me this morning (just found it) and said he has experience with iep's with behavior issues and with juvenile law. I just saw on his website- he lists himself as also having experience with disabilities and discrimination. SSHEWW- I hope he really does!! He asked me to call him tomorrow afternoon. I hope he has a lot of experience and is good and can do something. I'm sure the school people don't want their reputations hurt, but geez, I can't imagine being willing to throw a kid's life away to save my reputation when complying with the IDEA and trying to do a good job could save the kid and my reputation.

The attny did say my ability to deal with the school would depend on difficult child not going to detention this week. I need to talk to GAL asap but she is out of town until tomorrow pm.

 

[Steely]

I don't understand, what does difficult child going to detention have to do with "your ability to deal with the sd"? Sorry, I am probably being dense, and do not remember all of the details. Can you keep him from going to detention?

This is certainly discrimination. That is exactly what this is. I went through years and years of it with my difficult child until I could not take one more school meeting, and pulled him out and homeschooled him. I was willing to live in poverty if I simply could extract him and myself from the day to day rhetoric, discrimination, and battles we were both dealing with. Of course it was not just the school district, it was also the parents. It's awful.

 

[klmno]

Hey, Steely! I think he meant that some things (advocacy to get iep implemented for instance) would require that difficult child be in school- not detention. The possibility of going to detention this week results from already being on probation with 5 mos of detention suspended until this June. Then, difficult child and friend went into a shed (detached, just opened up door and walked in, nothing stolen) but both got charged with felony B&E with intent to commit larceny. That is what the arraignment is for this Tues. It appeared because of the circumstances of what actually happened and PO new difficult child had been doing really well since getting on probation (last June), maybe he wouldn't get detention. But then, sd charged him criminally for vandalising his school issued computer, on top of suspending him. (He was spending night with other boy, they took computers apart, other kid got his put back together, difficult child tore his up while trying to get it back together, then cracked screen accidentally while rough-housing with other boy-other boy verified this story to school) So, I would say that will be the straw that breaks the camel's back. And they know it.

 

[Steely]

Hmmmmmmmmmm.
Well, in my naive opinion, it seems whether your son is in detention, private school, home - wherever - you have a case of discrimination, and every right to demand he be back in mainstream school.

You are in my thoughts.
Hugs.
Steely

 

[dreamer]

It was overkill to have your son charged the way they did for the computer, but that was exactly what the sd wanted- they are HOPING to get him sent away...and if he does not get sent away for these charges, - say if he did not have the other issue sitting on him when the computer thing occured- the sd I bet would continue to find things to put a twist or spin on and have him charged...as many times as it would take to GET him sent to detention.
Well, OK, thats MY cynical opinion.
How sd handled my dtr caused me to go to due process, becuz instead of following her IEP her school was deliberately ignoreing it and intentionally and maliciously trying to trigger her. (to their surprise, it did not work, when triggered she did not lash out but rather folded up and shut down)
AFTER things did not work out well with my dtr, school targeted my non difficult child son. They made things up when there was nothing they could spin and twist.
DO I hate I am homeschooling my 2 disabled kids? you betchya! difficult child cries herself to sleep many nites over no prom, no chorus, no social part of being in school. My son anxiously awaits weekends and spring break. My real estate tax bill comes and I fume becuz the part that goes for school is HUGE. The sd here was more than willing to let 2 of my kids be "thrown away" becuz they did not know what to do or want to do what our docs, etc suggested......and when it was not as easy as they hoped to get rid of me and my kids, they upped the ante and got more aggressive. THey were then willing to create my children into criminals and fabricate incidents to get rid of them.
It is a dificult enough life to BE a difficult child. It has to be exponentially more difficult to be targeted and triggered on purpose and have people make up even more bad things about you.
I am afraid becuz of the fears related to the school shootings etc, we are going to have more and more difficulty with kids with diagnosis'es, kids on medications, and kids whose behavior is not 100% conforming and compliant be pushed out of more and more things like school, college, jobs, places to live etc. ANd it will not necessarily have anything to do with any behavior the difficult children are even exhibiting. It is a sad thing, a tragedy in the works, and so many of the difficult children actually ARE quite intelligent, bright etc. But they are being robbed of their chances to reach their potential. And to me it seems as if the school itelf is actually sending the opposite message that I have been trying to teach ymy kids- hang in there, stick to it, don't give up- keep trying, so- my kids hung in there, but, the school gave up. The school is trying to take the easy way out.....nice rolemodeling for our difficult children. (not)

 

[klmno]

Thank you so much for the support, Steely. I know you are having a difficult enough time for yourself lately, so I appreciate your thoughts.

Dreamer, I am in 100% agreement- I had to look again to see if you lived in this state! So much has happenned over the last 3 years with sd and difficult child that I couldn;t begin to post it all, but it is exactly the way you are saying- there is just too much that points to that. I still find it so hard to accept that the sd admin would back up school admin doing this, but they do.

I have SSOO tried to back up punishments they dish out for him- I would (and have) supported the suspension for the computer, and I already paid them for the repairs. But, criminal charges- NO! Re. detention- I used to think kids who broke the law might learn a lesson by going in there a week or month or whatever. NOT!! Based on what I learned from difficult child's 3 week stint in there last year, it does nothing more than waste their life and undo whatever progress the parents' efforts with treatment plan has gotten them. Oh, it does do one thing- they learn more about drugs, sex, weapons/violence, playing the system, etc. Just the lessons I want my difficult child to learn....(UHMM)

 

[Marguerite]

Klmno, you said, "Then, difficult child and friend went into a shed (detached, just opened up door and walked in, nothing stolen) but both got charged with felony B&E with intent to commit larceny."

I can only speak for Australian law, but that isn't breaking and entering, it's just entering. If a door is unlocked, nothing had to get broken in order to gain entry. Similarly, if they had a key, it would still just be - entering unlawfully. Maybe theft of the key also. But not break and enter.

I had a kid, a neighbour from over the road, break and enter into our house. All she stole (that time) was a packet of crisps. She cut the flyscreen in our bathroom window and climbed in (only a child could have fitted through). She later confessed it was her. She also had been regularly stealing money whenever she visited - our house as well as others. Again, she would just walk in while w were there, we generally knew she was there but while we were distracted she would grab my wallet and empty out the cash. Again, she confessed later.

The police could only give her a warning. I had no proof about the money (she was confessing to everything, but I'm sure it was hr, nobody else had opportunity). She was not charged, I never got my money back. She was eventually removed, placed in foster care and when we saw her a year or so later, she bounded up to me really happy, because she was at last away from her abusive family.

Different story at that point, but it shows how the law can be compassionate, instead of ridiculously punitive.

But her getting into our bathroom - that was break and enter, even though the window was open, because she had to cut the flyscreen to gain access. Her walking in while we were busy in the garden, to steal my wallet - entering unlawfully.

I often leave the house unlocked when I go out - if a thief chose that time to steal my computer, it would be unlawful entry only. But if I lock up when I go out, it would be - break and enter.

Sounds to me like someone is using the system to bully your soon as well as you.

I can't help you any further about the legal stuff - you need someone with the finger on the pulse of your laws.

As for keeping him out of detention - if it's that urgent, have him come down with a bug of some sort.

Marg

 

[klmno]

Thanks, Marg! I don't think felony B&E with- intent to commit larceny was an appropriate charge either. The other boy, who is a good kid and had never had a charge before, owned up to all this being his idea. The shed was on his neighbor's property- apparently an older man who has moved away and his grown son comes in every couple of mos. to check on things. Anyway, the friend told difficult child that he had gone thru a window of the shed before, but we aren't sure if that is true. But the evening this happened, both boys have told us mom's (before they knew we would compare notes), and they told police (separately) and actually stuck to this story, that other boy wanted to go inshed just because it looked so spooky with no one ever being there, difficult child went along, friend says he'll go to side of shed to go thru window, difficult child says he's not going thru window, friend goes to side of shed, difficult child looks at door and pushes it or opens it (it isn't clear- it has been verified that it was unlocked), difficult child calls to friend to not go thru window because door is open, friend returns to front and they both walk in- cops come after boys are leaving shed but still in yard, no stolen property. That was it. Wrong, yes, felony B&E with- intent to commit larceny- NO. That is why we thought the friend would get off and difficult child would have something more added but maybe not detention.

Oh, the lady across the street who called the police says she saw one of the boys (the friend) go thru the window. However, we are not sure if she meant that she had seen him go thru the window before this evening, or if she thinks she saw him go thru the window because he went to the side of the shed before difficult child opened the door. Anyway, about all of us who talked to the boys really believe the friend didn't go thru the window that evening. In either case, difficult child didn't- or at least no one has even suggested that he did. Funny how when he's along with someone else that does something wrong, he gets in the same (equal) trouble because he was there. When it is the other way around, the other kid gets a lesser charge or violation at sd because, well, it was difficult child who started it, did the worst, etc. (I haven't figured that one out yet). If cops are against him- I know it sounds absurd, I think it comes from the school reporting things to resource officer. The resource officer told difficult child he was suspect in vandalising cars in our neighborhood. UHMM. I first heard rumor of this last year while difficult child spent 2 1/2 mos on a monitor (ankle bracelet with alarm to police if he went out of house) and then after this shed incident with him being home unless he's under my nose- soo, I really doubt he's breaking into cars. And truthfully, I don't think he could break into a car- difficult child is the type that would only do something that absurd if he were manic, then he might but it wouldn't be the typical way, it would be slamming his fist or something else thru the window. It wouldn't be a habitual thing- he'd be caught right away.

We thought difficult child had a chance to stay at home -Especially since the son of the property owner received apology letters from each boy separately and each boy offered to do the yardwork this summer. I heard that the son was thrilled to get that offer because no one is there to cut grass, etc. And, I heard that the son was thinking this was not a major deal to him because nothing was stolen, the door was unlocked, nothing damaged, they didn't go in the house itself, etc.

The cops here always tell me that they have to charge the worst charge they can and that all they have to do is find probable cause to do that. That might be true, but something is awry because cops also say it is up to judge to reduce charges, hear explanation, etc. Well, of course that never happens. I have learned (heard from several attny's) that in juvy court, they all have discussed this even before trial. It reminds me of my stint in the navy and how that worked. Anyway, if they are going to get off, which difficult child has NEVER gotten off, I'm not sure how it works. But, when they aren't going to get off, the judge will just say to difficult child and his attny "did you go into that shed" difficult child/attny will say "yes" and judge will find difficult child guilty as charged.

He had a chance before sd charges for reasons I mentioned in previous posts, but now, this is what I see happening.