Oxnard school's handling of gay student's behavior comes under scrutiny

[Blue_Tires]

Brandon McInerney is the defendant in the Chatsworth courtroom, accused of bringing a gun to his middle school and killing gay classmate Larry King. But as the case unfolds, the school itself has come under scrutiny.

One teacher after another has testified in the murder trial about their deep worries that King's feminine attire and taunting behavior could provoke problems — and that E.O. Green Junior High administrators ignored them.

It wasn't just that King, 15, had begun wearing makeup and women's spiked-heeled boots, witnesses testified. It was that he seemed to relish making the boys squirm at his newly feminized appearance and was taunting them with comments like "I know you want me."

"They wanted to beat Larry up for what he was doing to them and they came to me because I wanted to keep them out of trouble,'' E.O. Green teacher Jill Ekman testified. "I told them that I would work on getting assistance from the office and we would work this out."

But that didn't happen, Ekman and others testified. After days of escalating tensions between King and McInerney, McInerney, then 14, brought a handgun to the Oxnard school on Feb. 12, 2008, and shot King twice in the back of the head. King died two days later.

http://www.latimes.com/news/local/la-me-0811-gay-student-20110811,0,923167.story

[Ozymanithrax]

1. The very idea that...

if a student dresses differently it is his fault when "tensions" happen is the same as if a woman wears jeans she is asking to get raped.

Teachers that are unwilling to protect students due to their own prejudices should not be teachers.

[Johnyawl]

2. It wasn't just that he was "dressing different"...

...he was taunting the other boys. That's a form of bullying, and the school had a responsibility to put a stop to it, just as they would have if the other boys were taunting him for dressing like that. Bullying should be unacceptable behavior, no matter who's doing it. And the article makes it sound like the teachers were trying to keep iyt under control, and was getting no support from the school administrators.

Not that it excuses the kid who killed him.

[William769]

4. So who's to blame for the hand gun on school property?

Who's to blame for not immediately taken care of the "bullying" on either side? Sorry your post just don't make sense to me.

[Johnyawl]

7. I don't know what's so difficult to understand about my post.

I clearly blamed the school administration for NOT taking action to end the bullying. I clearly said that the bullying was no excuse for murder. And the person to blame for the hand gun on school property is the kid who brought it to school, and committed murder with it. WTF was so difficult to understand about that?

[William769]

8. nice edit.

:eyes:

[Johnyawl]

14. what did I edit?

[Ozymanithrax]

6. Sometimes just the very existance of someone is consider a taunt by another.

Imagine this.

This young man walks down the hall in high heels, tight pants, and glitter. That is called self expression.

Another young man says, "Hey faggot, why don't you go to the garden with the other Pansy's"

And the first boy quips back, "Oh, come on, you know you want some of this."

I do not believe that this gay kid taunted this guy relentlessly with his gayness without haveing received a bit of taunting forom the other side. I'd bet, that if you have video you would see stuff coming from both sides.

The point I am trying to make is this. No amount of taunting excuses blowing a boys brains out.

[Johnyawl]

9. No amount of taunting excuses blowing a boys brains out.

I think I made that point in my post.

And the scenario that you're IMAGINING is not the scenario that the teachers described. Bullying in any form is wrong. Escalating bullying to violence is wrong. This is all the school districts fault. It's the district's administrations responsibility to protect our children, keep them safe, and keep the schools under control.

[Vanje]

16. yes. nt

[LooseWilly]

19. The claims that he was "taunting the other boys" is being brought up by defense...

Mostly from reports of one teacher, according to the article.

On the Other hand, there's this from an assistant principal: "Epstein, who testified for the prosecution, denied that anyone on the campus relayed concerns about King's safety before the shooting."

The key point of that is "concerns about safety", I think. There were complaints allegedly filed by a teacher named Ekman... but if you read the entirety of what is said...

In the King case, teachers testified about their concerns over King's willingness to bring attention to himself, even if it was negative. Ekman, a 21-year teaching veteran, had King in seventh grade for reading and English and knew that the school's special education plan for King urged him not to call special attention to himself.

That was why when she saw him wearing mascara and eyeliner to school in the eighth grade, she told him to wash it off, Ekman testified for the defense. King complied but returned the next day with even more makeup and a message: Epstein, the assistant principal, had told him that it was his right to wear the makeup, she told the court.

Epstein, in her testimony, said she had consulted with Hueneme Elementary School District officials about how to react to King's dress and makeup. She was told that he had the right to wear girl's items as long as they were within the district's dress code, Epstein testified.

Another assistant principal, Sue Parsons, sent an e-mail to the staff telling them to leave King alone unless his behavior was disrupting a class. Ekman said Epstein advised her to teach tolerance if students were upset by King's behavior.

It sounds, based largely on the em-boldened portions of the text, like Ekman was just as "uncomfortable" with King's "unorthodox" ways as McInerney... making King wash makeup off, ostensibly to "protect" him... but in making the choice to try to coerce King into "not calling attention to himself" Ekman was essentially legitimizing any and all prejudices held by any of the students in the class. Rather than "teaching tolerance" Ekman seemed to try to teach King to "hide in the closet".

It is a perspective that is similar to that of teaching women to "embrace the veil"... to "protect" them from men, who obviously can't control themselves. Except when they can. When they've "learned tolerance"... learned that seeing a woman's neck, or ankles, doesn't mean they're asking to be raped. Likewise, seeing a man in makeup doesn't mean they're asking to be shot twice in the back of the head. (Ironically, he wasn't even wearing makeup the day he was murdered.)

The notion that wearing the makeup, or that saying "you know you want me" within earshot of a teacher who obviously legitimized expectations that he should "stay in the closet", equals "bullying" is tantamount to saying that women wearing low-cut shirts and smiling at someone is "sexual assault".

In the greater context of that teacher's testimony, I don't buy it.

[xchrom]

3. 'I know you want me' = good enough reason to be murdered?

Please, tell me that is not where they are going.

[William769]

5. It's a form of "bullying".

[Fumesucker]

11. I disagree..

We really do not have enough information to make that determination, just exchanging words or even barbed words does not necessarily constitute bullying.

[William769]

15. I do to.

I was just quoting another post. ""

[Ozymanithrax]

12. Unless a girl says it to a guy, then its a comeon...

What the story doesn't touch on is the type of bullying the victim underwent for years.

I can't blame him for wanting to express himself once he found out who he really was. And "You know you want me" may have been in answer to ungracious statements by other boys.

Schools are supposed to be safe places where children can learn to rebel or conform, which ever they want to do. But they are vicious tribal societies where the unpopular, the geek, the gay, and anyone else different go through years of torment. The school didn't fail when it allowed one young many to wear feminine attire and to bully someone by saying, "You know you want me." It failed years before that.

[William769]

18. I agree.

I was just quoting another post in this thread. Thats why I used "".

[Johnyawl]

13. Yes, it CAN be.

The teachers saw it as a form of bullying, the teachers reported it to the administration, and the school administration did nothing to handle the situation. And their failure to deal with the problem, led one unstable kid to murder another.

[ProgressiveProfessor]

21. Not as an excuse, but as reasons for the jury to go with a lesser charge

Doesn't mean I like it, but that is why it is being done.

[bluestateguy]

10. "Gay Panic" should not be a permissible defense in court

It is absolute junk science, and a product of a culture that assigns a pseudoscientific label to what we used to simply call bad behavior.

[DBoon]

17. And what about "Negro Panic" and "Mexican Panic"?

allow "Gay Panic" and you will get lots of interesting defenses for crime

[LooseWilly]

20. Heh, or "Caucasian Panic"... or "Polo Shirt Panic"?...

"Sorry judge... but he was wearing the same brand of loafers as that boss that fired me when I was a teenager. I... I just lost it..." :+

[toddwv]

22. I agree with some others.

There's not enough info to make a definitive opinion.

Harassment is harassment regardless who it's coming from so while I take the teacher's statements with a grain of salt, the fact of the matter is that there was most likely ALOT more going on here than we will ever know.