Chicago student expelled for gang activity
Student expelled for hand signals
Expelled Dirksen student back in class
A photo of 15 year-old Trayla Lindsey with five friends was found in a school classroom at Dirksen Junior High School in District 86. The students were pictured in front of a locker, smiling and three of them were making claw-like gestures at the camera. School officials determined that the students were making ‘gang signs’ and suspended Trayla for 10 days for engaging in ‘gang activity’.
On the day Trayla was suspended, Travis-Lindsey talked alone with a school official and then was reunited with her daughter.
“She was crying. She was just balling. She didn’t say anything. I guess she had never been in trouble, so it was more or less a shock to her. She was like, ‘10 days?’” Travis-Lindsey said.
Because she was not allowed to speak to the principal, Travis-Lindsey went to the superintendent’s office to get some answers. They immediately scheduled a hearing on the suspension, but district officials decided Trayla had to stay home for 10 days.
The school held a hearing on February 25 and gave the Lindsey’s a choice. Trayla could attend Premier Academy Middle School (the district’s alternative school) or be expelled.
Trayla’s family hired a lawyer, Carl Buck of Rathbun, Cservenyak and Kozol. Saying the district’s decision was arbitrary and capricious, he filed a lawsuit asking the court to reinstate Trayla.
On Tuesday afternoon, Judge Herman Haase did just that at the River Valley Justice Center, 3206 W. McDonough St., Joliet. After Haase heard the facts of the case, he asked the school district why it wanted to “squash her like a bug,” Buck said later.
The judge told the two sides to talk again to try to settle the issue, Buck said. They did and agreed that Trayla would be able to return to school Wednesday. She will be allowed to make up the work in class that she missed, Buck said. Trayla also will be required to attend classes to educate her on the risks posed by street gangs, he said.
Trayla isn’t a gang member. She explained that she and her friends were just goofing around in the picture. Nor could the school system supply any evidence besides the goofy picture that indicated she was involved with any gang in any way. So why did the school go after this honor student with a clean discipline record in such a vicious fashion? Zero tolerance of course, we’ve seen it over and over on this site. Even after a judge ordered them to play nice they still insisted that Trayla take ‘gang awareness’ classes.
Even judicial fiat isn’t strong enough to remove the foolishness from zero tolerance inspired administrators.
(Tip credit to Tori in Texas)
Looks like the school is lawyered up.
Schools are now an authority that may choose it’s own standards and delivery of services. Since 36% of schools now include distance learning, I doubt suspending students who excell will raise much concern. Especially at this age, distance learning could be a safety net for kids unfairly charged, so going after the ‘bad ones’ is acceptable. (A 16 year old around here was just arrested as an adult for inviting 14 year olds to his house while his parents weren’t home, so the police can enforce a school away from school). It’s a brave new world.
http://nces.ed.gov/pubs2005/crime_safe04/indicator_08.asp
About 54 percent of public schools took at least one serious disciplinary action, including suspensions lasting 5 days or more, removals with no services (i.e., expulsions), and transfers to specialized schools, for any of the offenses that occurred in the 1999-2000 school year (table 8.1). Altogether, about 1,163,000 actions were taken. Of those serious disciplinary actions, 83 percent were suspensions for 5 days or more, 11 percent were removals with no services, and 7 percent were transfers to specialized schools
A glance at table 8.1 will reveal, in the year 2000 the majority of these violations were not related to weapons or drugs (insubordination was 18.5%). Zero tolerance infractions have only increased since then.
The message from this story is clear, and it’s one I’ve repeated in the comments section for several stories: when your kid is a victim of this idiocy, LAWYER UP! I’m opposed to the explosion of litigation in general in this country, but it’s clear that litigation is the only thing that brings these school district martinets to heel. In item after item on this site, the story is the same: School district refuses to listen, and the kid only gets justice from the courts.
My kid is a year away from graduating from high school. I can’t wait. Every day, every parent with a kid in public school rolls the dice…they know their kid could be the next randomly selected victim.
Even if she WAS in a gang, there’s a little thing called freedom of association, in addition to the free speech issues. It’s time for another tea party.
I don’t mean to be off topic… but isn’t the word “bawling”? I mean, shouldn’t a *reporter* know the difference, no matter what it sounded like the mother was saying?
Michael: If not the reporter, certainly the editor should have caught that. They are homonyms, but “bawling” is crying, and “balling” is slang for behavior that certainly shouldn’t be allowed in school.