RM>  -> *4 NAME CALLING OR HARASSMENT:  JURY RULES IN SOUTH KORTRIGHT
RM>  -> Eve Bruneau, a student who filed suit against South
RM>  -> Kortright Central School District for allegedly allowing male
RM>  -> students to harass her and other girls, lost her case (news
RM>  -> services/WASH POST, 11/22).  A federal jury yesterday rejected
RM>  -> her claim, saying that "it was unreasonable to look at adolescent
RM>  -> name-calling with adult expectations," writes the paper.
RM>  SK>---------------(end of quoted material)--------------------------
RM>  SK>Does anyone else think this was a step backward?
RM>  Yes and no... I don't think that one can easily make a
RM>  blanket statement that the district is culpable; I think
RM>  this was a "deep-pockets" suit... I think, too, that Matt
RM>  makes a good point that the laws concerning sexual
RM>  harassment in the workplace do not translate well when
RM>  applied to schools...
I agree that one can't have the same expectations for student
behavior as one would have of adults in a workplace-type setting.
However, I had the impression that in this particular case (I had,
over the course of a few weeks, posted more than one article on
this same case) the school had been made aware of the problem by
the parents and students, and had dismissed it as pretty much a
"boys will be boys" or "the girl is being too sensitive" type of
thing. _IF_ in fact this was the case, then I think the school (and
hence the district) should be held liable.
I worry about this ruling, because I am afraid that it will cause
other schools to find that they do not need to protect students
from harrassment by other students, and IMO every student has a
right to a harrassment-free school environment, and if the school
has been made aware of the situation and does nothing about it, they
are at fault. The students causing the harrassment should be
removed from the school environment until they are willing or able
to behave in a more appropriate manner.
RM>  I would certainly agree that the girl is entitled to attend
RM>  school without being harassed, I believe that the boys are
RM>  guilty of assault and battery (or sexual assault) and should
RM>  be so charged, and the parents of said boys DO bear at least
RM>  a portion of the blame for what was happening.  Depending on
RM>  the evidence, the district might indeed be culpable, but the
RM>  court apparently believed otherwise in this case?
Apparently the courts did believe otherwise. I am concerned about
them finding the school not responsible when, as I recall, they
were aware of the situation.
RM>  If the decision was in the nature of "boys will be boys",
RM>  then the jury consisted of a bunch of jackasses.....
Absolutely.
RM>  SK>Students (boys) called the girls names like "dog-faced bitch"
RM>  SK>and grabbed at their breasts. I think 11- and 12- year old boys
RM>  SK>ought to realize that this isn't appropriate behavior.
RM>  I agree... I think a LOT of what routinely happens should
RM>  be recognized as inappropriate behavior; unfortunately,
RM>  that doesn't seem to be the case these days....
Sheila
 * SLMR 2.1a *
--- DB 1.39/004485
---------------