The defense lawyer for the VP did his job for his client. He did not do anything, in my opionion, to tell the truth. (See post on What about JT?)
It is important to pay attention to these trials. Experts do, as they study the failures.
In IDEA, the concept of least restrictive environment is important, but also has led to unrealastic expectations and, frankly, the violation of rights.
I say it is important because through the years, long before 1975 (and still today) appropriate education has not always been provided for all. We all know it is a herculian task that faces our educational system. It faces us in our homes. "She got more than me, wa wa." How come I can not go?" You know that drill.
I have four examples here from my own experience. In 1983, I worked in a group home for mentally and physically challenged adults. To this day, I can not figure out why one young man was a resident. And my favorite, Alan, was in his 50's in 1983. He had been placed in an institutional setting at a young age and was socially educationally deprived by that placement. His cognitive skills and behavior were not an issue. He had been adopted and as he told me, had what would be considered ADHD as a young person. Basically, he was not wanted. He was my friend for years. My kids, not born when I met him, knew him also. He read the newspaper and kept up with news. Our discussions were not just about food, although he worked in a local restaurant as a dishwasher.
In my first experience in an LRC (Learning Resource Center), I taught a young man, place beause of his reading deficit. He excelled in math. He complained to me one day that he was in the same math book/group as the year before. I met with the teacher who complained to the principal (not the same school district as 1998). The teacher did not understand the issue. The principal, teacher and I met. There were tears. I did prevail. The kid did not have a deficit that impacted his math. The teacher had years of experience beyond mine. She was not familiar with his IEP?
Another teacher in that school wanted me to provide indrpendent work for my students in his classroom. He did not want to understand the idea of IDEA or least restrictive environment. I would have kept everyone of my students all day, but I worked in an LRC, not a self contained classroom.
The Least Restrictive Envirionment is a legal term. Schools often get threatened, some rightfully so, with violating it due the placement of a child.
Until I invited a child into my Girl Scout troop, a mother of super happy child, thought her child could be educated appropriately in a regular classroom. The least restrictive environment for this child was the home due to her complex, rare disabling condition. The school district offered home instruction, OT, PT services. I met this child as a home tutor. The parent loved their child to infinity and beyond. They provided many enriching experiences. The child flew on airplanes, knew DWD more than anyone I knew but it would have been a disservice and health risk for anything but home education. The parents did not usurp their responsibilities in the educational part of parenting which many parents do. But until the mother saw the Girl Scouts, she did not have a realistic view of "normal" and physically healthy child development. The mother thanked me. My troop benefited from the child as well.
Public schools are responsible for a lot, but the parent is the primary teacher, not the school.
So back to removing a child from a classroom, even temporarily. The devil is in the details. My book goes into detail about the struggles I had in removing a child who had violent episodes.
Lawyers, advocates, parents, educational staff usually have good intentions, but sometimes resistance can lead to deadly consequences. Sandy Hook and the high school in Parkland, Florida, are prime examples of IDEA and least restrictive environment failures. Adam Lanza, the alleged dead shooter at Sandy Hook, was taken out of school by the parent, but not after, per reports, many years of denial.
The lawyer in the criminal trial of the VP, EP, kept asking the educational staff, "Why didn't anyone of them separate JT that day?" No one really explained least restrictive envirinment or the IEP. WHY? I have an idea as to the answer, for both the reason for not removing the child and not fully answering, FEAR.
Did a fear of retribution carry more weight than the fear of the child pulling a trigger? Violations of IDEA and placement are punitive to staff.
I am not excusing staff, but they did take action. The VP ignored the staff; the relayed fears of the children, and the threats of JT.
JT violated all the rights of the staff and students. Six year olds are not held legally liable for their decisions not those decisions of incompetent staff.
Was JT in an approptiate, least restrictive environment? With some information disclosed publically, he was not in an appropriate grade level placement so probably not. It was not academically least restrictive. Angry children go to school everyday. Could, would or should have a different type of classroom setting for JT, for least restrictive educational purposes, prevented this shooting? Maybe it could have with less frustration, more individual attention helping? Remember, learning disabled children are expected to move in and out of classrooms much more often than their non disabled peers. In JT's case nothing was prevented. A jammed gun was the difference between one injured to several injured or dead.
If you have school aged children, read about Least Restrictive Environments and even 504 plans.
Keep in mind, there is no right to privacy in a public setting. Classrooms in public schools are public settings.
Your child rights end at my child's body. I state that with no prejudice. Least restrictive environment interpretation has restricted peers for years. I know first hand as a teacher and as a parent.
Least Restrictive Environment:
Stayed tuned.
Marian R. Carlino
May 31, 2026