Lawsuit claims SAD 40 ‘buried heads in the sand’
Courier-Gazette, February 24, 2008
(excerpt) “MSAD 40 essentially ‘buried its collective heads in the sand’ and pretended that such conduct was not occurring,” the lawsuit states.
This inaction by the district allowed the sexual abuse to continue, the suit reads.
Once the relationship became public, the boy left the alternative school, because it became known in the school of the relationship. High School Education Teacher Thomas Shriver, who became Bramhall’s supervisor beginning in September 2005, publicly named the boy, the lawsuit states.
Also, in late 2005 or early 2006, Shriver became romantically involved with Bramhall, and is now the current husband of Bramhall, according to the lawsuit. Shriver no longer works for SAD 40, Carnahan said.
The boy was treated in a hostile manner by the district, including Strong and Shriver, and made to feel as if he had done something wrong. In addition, the district or its staff offered no assistance to the boy.
The lawsuit claims cites violations of several federal laws meant to protect students. The suit also claims that the district was negligent in its hiring, retention and supervision. There also are claims of intentional infliction of emotional distress, and battery.
(excerpt) “MSAD 40 essentially ‘buried its collective heads in the sand’ and pretended that such conduct was not occurring,” the lawsuit states.
This inaction by the district allowed the sexual abuse to continue, the suit reads.
Once the relationship became public, the boy left the alternative school, because it became known in the school of the relationship. High School Education Teacher Thomas Shriver, who became Bramhall’s supervisor beginning in September 2005, publicly named the boy, the lawsuit states.
Also, in late 2005 or early 2006, Shriver became romantically involved with Bramhall, and is now the current husband of Bramhall, according to the lawsuit. Shriver no longer works for SAD 40, Carnahan said.
The boy was treated in a hostile manner by the district, including Strong and Shriver, and made to feel as if he had done something wrong. In addition, the district or its staff offered no assistance to the boy.
The lawsuit claims cites violations of several federal laws meant to protect students. The suit also claims that the district was negligent in its hiring, retention and supervision. There also are claims of intentional infliction of emotional distress, and battery.
0 Comments:
Post a Comment
<< Home