This is not just school teacher stupidity to an extreme, this is downright dangerous.

[BSM1]

How awful!! That principal needs to be fired!

I was thinking more along the lines of an execution.

 

[Apple Sugar]

Then you would likely be sued for libel, malice, or deformation.

Not after she's found responsible for everything she did. And my free speech alerts the public of her actions. She can't sue when it's true. But if she tried I'd counter sue. And win. Adding a charge against her of malicious prosecution. Because (when/if) she's found guilty of these egregious trespasses against children and their health, and sues me for libel, not applicable, and defamation, not applicable, because she did do those things, she's what I call her on those boards. There is no slight to her character when her actions were adjudicated as her character in deficit by law.
And it is, "defamation". Not, deformation.

 

[Apple Sugar]

And we have a final decision on her punishment: She will have her pay cut to that of an assistant principal.

School board OKs demotion of former Manchester Elementary principal accused of making students walk outside - Fayetteville Observer: Local News

That's it. She's in an administrative position teaching home bound and hospitalized students, and will see a small pay cut.

Aww, she lost a little money! When parents of these kids she abused could have incurred hospital costs or lost their child.
And genius! That sadist is going to now be supervising home bound kids or those who are in the hospital. Where her depraved behavior could have put any one of the students under her charge.

Well, there's nothing that says the parents can't push this to the District Attorney, or the state attorney general's attention. And that of CPS.

She got demoted and took a pay cut. That'll teach her!

 

[dust1n]

Not after she's found responsible for everything she did. And my free speech alerts the public of her actions. She can't sue when it's true. But if she tried I'd counter sue. And win. Adding a charge against her of malicious prosecution. Because (when/if) she's found guilty of these egregious trespasses against children and their health, and sues me for libel, not applicable, and defamation, not applicable, because she did do those things, she's what I call her on those boards. There is no slight to her character when her actions were adjudicated as her character in deficit by law.
And it is, "defamation". Not, deformation.

But she wasn't charged on what you stated. Putting up a billboard saying someone was a child abuser (especially if they are not) would most certainly be libelous.

And yup, typos happen on lunch breaks.

 

[Shadow Wolf]

Not allowing the children to have water, and instructing faculty to not give them any, should be grounds for criminal charges.

 

[angellous_evangellous]

In this day in age, with people not wanting to take responsibility for anything -- and wanting to be soft and weak -- what the principal did was insane. She should have given all of the children puppies and expresso.

But denying water to children -- it sounds so terrible, but none of them were actually harmed, and wasn't even hot outside. It's a stupid thing to do, but it's hardly criminal.

 

[Shadow Wolf]

In this day in age, with people not wanting to take responsibility for anything -- and wanting to be soft and weak -- what the principal did was insane. She should have given all of the children puppies and expresso.

But denying water to children -- it sounds so terrible, but none of them were actually harmed, and wasn't even hot outside. It's a stupid thing to do, but it's hardly criminal.

Fortunately they weren't. And though the temperature itself wasn't that hot, the humidity made it seem hotter. And what if it went on for longer, and temperature did get into the 90's, and these kids were not allowed water?

 

[angellous_evangellous]

Fortunately they weren't. And though the temperature itself wasn't that hot, the humidity made it seem hotter. And what if it went on for longer, and temperature did get into the 90's, and these kids were not allowed water?

"If" is completely irrelevant. It wasn't in the 90s when the event occurred, and we have no knowledge on what "would" have happened.

Demonizing this principal is easy. Actually considering the situation takes a moment of rationality. It makes no sense to meet stupidity with rash judgment.

 

[Shadow Wolf]

"If" is completely irrelevant. It wasn't in the 90s when the event occurred, and we have no knowledge on what "would" have happened.

Demonizing this principal is easy. Actually considering the situation takes a moment of rationality. It makes no sense to meet stupidity with rash judgment.

The only thing irrational is the principal's refusal to let the kids have water. And considering the dangers of heat stroke and dehydration, "if" is not irrelevant but a legitimate concern.

 

[angellous_evangellous]

The only thing irrational is the principal's refusal to let the kids have water. And considering the dangers of heat stroke and dehydration, "if" is not irrelevant but a legitimate concern.

You don't think that it's not irrational to call for the execution of the principal when no one was harmed?

When we're talking about what disciplinary action the principal must receive, it certainly is an issue that no one was hurt. It also brings into sharper focus the actual danger that the kids were in. Were they really in danger if no one in the entire group was harmed? Or was it only a possible danger which in actuality is no danger at all.

Yes, it's stupid because had the conditions been different, someone could have gotten hurt. But the conditions weren't different, so we cannot judge the principal by conditions that weren't even present -- as in punish her as if children were harmed.

Is the principal able to tell the difference between actual danger and possible danger? That is, did she have the wisdom to place the kids in an uncomfortable but perfectly safe environment knowing that they would be safe -- or did she merely get lucky by way of stupidity?

I have no issue with removing her authority to do what she did just to be safe -- just in case she (and the kids) just got lucky. That seems like how they solved the problem.

 

[jonathan180iq]

Overreaction - Gets 'em every time.

 

[Shadow Wolf]

You don't think that it's not irrational to call for the execution of the principal when no one was harmed?

When we're talking about what disciplinary action the principal must receive, it certainly is an issue that no one was hurt. It also brings into sharper focus the actual danger that the kids were in. Were they really in danger if no one in the entire group was harmed? Or was it only a possible danger which in actuality is no danger at all.

Yes, it's stupid because had the conditions been different, someone could have gotten hurt. But the conditions weren't different, so we cannot judge the principal by conditions that weren't even present -- as in punish her as if children were harmed.

Is the principal able to tell the difference between actual danger and possible danger? That is, did she have the wisdom to place the kids in an uncomfortable but perfectly safe environment knowing that they would be safe -- or did she merely get lucky by way of stupidity?

I have no issue with removing her authority to do what she did just to be safe -- just in case she (and the kids) just got lucky. That seems like how they solved the problem.

My complaint revolves solely around denying the children water, in fact, a direct order to not allow anyone to give them water. Because of this, yes, she should be removed from her position. No, they weren't harmed, but with such an issue it is best to err to the side of caution.

 

[Skwim]

UPDATED JUL 16

Spring Lake principal reassigned after parents questioned 'walking' punishment

A Cumberland County elementary school principal has been removed from her job following an investigation into allegations that she forced some students to walk outside for up to 2.5 hours for failing to wear their school uniforms.

Tammy Holland has been temporarily reassigned to the Cumberland County Schools central office, Superintendent Frank Till said Wednesday. She was principal at Manchester Elementary School in Spring Lake.

Bradshaw [a parent] and other parents said the children had to walk until a parent brought them a uniform to wear for the rest of the short school day.

"They made us walk in the hot sun for 3 hours with one water bottle and one bathroom break," explained fifth grader Theophilus Owens. "They only let us go in the shade for a little bit."

Theophilus also said several students were sweaty and appeared to be overheated. He said one girl even fainted.

Holland has 14 days to appeal the decision.

source

 

[Shadow Wolf]

UPDATED JUL 16

Spring Lake principal reassigned after parents questioned 'walking' punishment

A Cumberland County elementary school principal has been removed from her job following an investigation into allegations that she forced some students to walk outside for up to 2.5 hours for failing to wear their school uniforms.

Tammy Holland has been temporarily reassigned to the Cumberland County Schools central office, Superintendent Frank Till said Wednesday. She was principal at Manchester Elementary School in Spring Lake.

Bradshaw [a parent] and other parents said the children had to walk until a parent brought them a uniform to wear for the rest of the short school day.

"They made us walk in the hot sun for 3 hours with one water bottle and one bathroom break," explained fifth grader Theophilus Owens. "They only let us go in the shade for a little bit."

Theophilus also said several students were sweaty and appeared to be overheated. He said one girl even fainted.

Holland has 14 days to appeal the decision.

source

That's interesting, as it contradicts all earlier reports. We go from no breakfast and having a direct order against giving the kids water to giving them a bottle of water, and from no mentioned health issues to a girl fainting (I'm not sure if a fifth grader would know the signs and symptoms of overheating).