From 2000:
Jan. 30th, 2009 11:48 amACLU sued on behalf of Tulsa gradeschooler accused of "casting a magic spell that made a teacher sick"
Oh man.
No indication of how it turned out - it's an 8 year old case.
Oh man.
No indication of how it turned out - it's an 8 year old case.
(no subject)
Date: 2009-01-30 04:53 pm (UTC)(no subject)
Date: 2009-01-30 04:56 pm (UTC)(no subject)
Date: 2009-01-30 05:02 pm (UTC)(no subject)
Date: 2009-01-30 05:02 pm (UTC)Long story short, the ACLU sued for ten million dollars and refused to accept a settlement, and then the judge dismissed the charges and ordered the Blackbears to pay $6,000 in court costs, which they couldn't afford. Eventually, they agreed to forgo their appeal of the dismissal in exchange for dropping the "fine".
(no subject)
Date: 2009-01-30 05:20 pm (UTC)But the wikipedia article doesn't match the news articles of the time - the judge's dismissal wasn't based on the facts of the case, and wasn't even based on the law of the case. It was based on his personal belief that since she *wasn't* a wiccan and didn't really *want* to wear pentacles and practice wicca, that the school's suspension of her, vilification of her, and institutional mistreatment of her "because she is a witch" didn't matter.
Apparently, blatant discrimination and mistreatment on the basis of "witchcraft" is only actionable in OK if you're a wiccan. I wonder if he'd rule the same way on behalf of an arab child who was beaten and ostracised for being a muslim when he wasn't one, or for a straight child suspended for being "gay".
(no subject)
Date: 2009-01-30 06:19 pm (UTC)And, for the record, the more I look at the Wiki article the more I wonder whether it isn't discussing the plot of the Lifetime after-school special instead of the actual history, so perhaps I shouldn't quote from it too heavily.
IANAL, but I'm afraid to say that I think that is the correct interpretation of anti-discrimination statutes in the United States. In order to make the legal claim that someone was discriminating against you for being an Ick, you actually have to be an Ick. The statutes just aren't designed to protect non-Icks even if they choose to behave in such a way that a reasonable person might believe that they're Icky.
Of course, if an Arab child is beaten for being a Muslim when he wasn't one, then he contests on the grounds on discrimination based on race or national origin or something like that, or you just skip it and nail the bastards for assault and battery without regards to the motivation. I don't know if there is a federal law that says that public school students can't be suspended for dumbassed reasons or if there is any reasonable appeals process that goes beyond the local school board. Obviously, the school could not possibly have evidence to support the allegation that the teacher's sickness was based on the girl casting a spell. On the other hand, without looking over the evidence I'm not sure how much we should trust the Blackbear's claim that she actually was suspended for the perception of her religious beliefs and not for deliberately acting in a vaguely threatening Columbinesque manner. (Whether the latter merits suspension is a whole other conversation, of course.)
(no subject)
Date: 2009-01-30 06:29 pm (UTC)A) threatened to cast spells on students, who were afraid of her because they were stupid and believed in magic, just like their parents.
B) actually cast one spell already and made a teacher sick. They dropped this reason pretty quickly and tried to pretend they never said it.
(no subject)
Date: 2009-01-30 07:36 pm (UTC)Which makes sense. If one student threatens to cause harm toother students by beating them with a wet noodle, it's still a threat of harm.
(no subject)
Date: 2009-01-30 06:58 pm (UTC)(no subject)
Date: 2009-01-30 07:35 pm (UTC)And I'd think there is even less cause to go after the school district for repeating the rumor, since the suspension records are probably intended to be private and may well be privileged anyways.
IASNAL, of course.
(no subject)
Date: 2009-01-30 08:38 pm (UTC)(no subject)
Date: 2009-01-30 05:07 pm (UTC)(no subject)
Date: 2009-01-30 05:23 pm (UTC)(no subject)
Date: 2009-01-30 07:04 pm (UTC)(no subject)
Date: 2009-01-31 02:57 am (UTC)(no subject)
Date: 2009-01-30 07:22 pm (UTC)(no subject)
Date: 2009-01-30 08:36 pm (UTC)I hope they're sued so hard the headteacher has to sell his boyd on the streets. This is just disgustingly wrong