based on the message’s wording, it seems likely the student is an African-American female.
Ooooooo-kay...... How did they get from point A to point B in that?
What part of those words is "female" and what part is "African-American"?
I’ve seen ‘the image’ and can report the writing was not in cursive. Perhaps that is part of the evidentiary conclusion.
They are overlooking the fact that this could be a transgender female who wrote the hate-filled message when it was a man, and once it transgendered into its female counterpart all tensions have ceased. Therefore she can’t be held accountable for anything she wrote as a male but the crime can still be legitimate and assemblies should still be held to stamp out hate crimes. Also, she is fully entitled to restitution from the school.
Now if you can’t see the logic in that, you are behind the times.
I see what you did there...