Student voices not heard.

As in a previous post, I discussed the fact that the students, although young, should have been requested, yes even required, to give direct testimony in the VP's, ( EP) criminal trial.

These three video clips are examples as to why I feel that way. 

A public trial teaches us more than any testimony in a civil trial.  Do not sign any NDA in civil cases with schools. Make sure prosecutors do their jobs.

These three videos describe some graphic details, especially this first one.  It is criminal that students can commit murder in "very safe" environments. 

See my posts on workplace violence and how divorce can be a factor in my soap operas ideas.  I do not care how mentally ill someone is, to be honest. Criminal is criminal.

This first video does not involve a gun.

https://youtu.be/EKi2RI0ZXio?si=0sEruuSlv7KGsShC

Per above link, a language barrior with the custodian impact cleaning up a crime scene, really?

Just an ordinary day they say.

https://youtu.be/k2C_uGbCoV8?si=K2bLZxIaXX5Lng1Z

Shared experience

https://youtu.be/uuxda0aEKLE?si=Ao-L-y9vn5utvMrs

Not a fan of the movement to ban guns. Watch the first video to understand why.  This young woman in the third video is well spoken. Her take as a student in the middle school in Parkland  (not in the high school) and in another building at Brown seems to matter.  But she did not witness the shootings. 

Does it make you righteously angry that one person can wreak havoc and chaos, and a defense attorney underplays the impact on the young students in a criminal trial because nobody died in the first grade classroom? They witnessed first hand, their teacher get shot and at least one was threatened. 

Marian R. Carlino

May 31, 2026

How did a legal expert state "Unthinkable" and "Unprecedented"? Children spoke up, who really listened?

Since 1998, I have been a refugee, from working as a teacher in public education, and have paid attention to many of the nationally televised shootings, as my blog and book confirm.

Richneck Elementary School: The televised reports of the shooting and subsequent civil trial against the vice principal and the upcoming criminal trial of the vice principal have been of special interest to me. Since January 6, 2023, life has not been the same for anyone in Richneck Elementary School.

Life has not been the same for me since 1998, when I was told to get out of my class for speaking up for the safety of my classroom. I believed in 1998 that prevention is worth a pound of cure and so much more.  The jury on November 6, 2025, placed a value of $10,000,000 for the results of the "incident" that did not prevent anything.

I am happy the young teacher (plaintiff) followed through with her case and had lawyers who believed her. The defense lawyer (vice principal) had ignorant lawyers.  Why did the blond defense lawyer use the words "unthinkable" and "unprecedented"?  Her words were not built on truth. No one in their right mind would use those terms to describe the "incident" or events of January 6, 2023. Interesting the defense attornies did not use the words shooting.

I wrote my book to share my story and help in prevention.  It took a lot to follow through. I was not shot, and no one in my school was.  But then, and even today, the possibility was great that there could have been a shooting.

The recent court case's testimony stated that three students warned the staff of imminent danger.  What the staff did and failed to do led to a young teacher getting shot.

You may wonder why the students played a part and why the staff went to the principal.  Students should be believed, and the chain of command is spelled out in policy. Staff who break the chain of command face consequences. Not every adult believes children.  Although it is greatly recognized that young children usually do not lie when it could lead them into trouble.  The girls and the young boy who spoke faced threats from their 6-year-old classmate with a gun. Did they have more bravery than staff?

Maybe these two documents will give more insight.  They are from 1998. 

My principal told me I could not consider children neutral and take their word.  I used neutral to distinguish between the perpetrator and the victim, a witness, someone who has information or saw the event.

The policy created in October 1998, after I left the school district, spelled out what a teacher should do in the case of a weapon on campus.  

Connect dots for prevention.  ASK yourself what you would do in a school if a child threatened others with a weapon, not just a gun. How did the expert testimony in the trial  fair?

ASK- asking saves kids yesterday, today, and tomorrow.

When the system fails.

VA. Teacher wins lawsuit

Marian R. Carlino

November 9 2025