If I get it right, the school was only aware of idiosyncratic ideations that, in their opinion, merited professional inspection. I doubt they knew the child had a weapon in his immediate possession or they would have not let him back in class. The parents knew the child had access to a weapon and therefore they should have conducted an immediate inspection of the child's possessions, which the school may not have been legally able to do without some required justification(s). But that's according to Michigan law which the D.A. is aware of.
From Alex's own testimony the weapon was handled rather carelessly. He pulled back the hammer and allowed the gun to be pointed aimlessly at best.
No comments:
Post a Comment