Posted on 10/01/2006 2:17:32 PM PDT by Mini-14
LACEY - A 33-year-old teacher at Nisqually Middle School is on administrative leave after school officials discovered she brought a .38 Special handgun - along with bullets - on school grounds Thursday, according to the Thurston County Sheriff's Office.
Teacher Mary Catherine Roe, who lives in Shelton, told deputies she was fearful of her husband and that he used a gun while assaulting her, according to a sheriff's report. Roe also has a domestic violence protection order against her husband, according to Mason County records.
No decision was made Monday about whether Roe will face criminal charges, Deputy Prosecuting Attorney Dave Ryan said.
Roe is under investigation for the charge of unlawfully carrying a firearm, which was in her purse, on school grounds. The law says no one except law enforcement officers can bring a firearm onto school grounds. The charge is a gross misdemeanor, punishable by up to one year in jail and a $5,000 fine.
Nisqually parents received a letter from the school Friday explaining that a staff member brought a weapon to school and was placed on leave. The letter reminded parents that it is against state law to bring any firearm to a school campus. The letter did not name the staff member.
Assistant Superintendent of Human Resources Brian Wharton for North Thurston Public Schools declined to confirm or deny who was on leave. No charges have been filed and no district disciplinary action has been taken, he said. Students did not see the weapon, Wharton said.
Roe is a language arts teacher, according to the school's Web site.
Wharton said the district is cooperating with the sheriff's office. District officials will consider the results of the criminal investigation before they decide on any disciplinary action.
He said the district policies don't specifically address what to do if staff members bring weapons to school, though it references the state law forbidding firearms on campuses.
"We expect our staff members to follow the law," he said.
School officials learned about the gun after a co-worker asked Roe how she is protecting herself against her husband, the police report states, and she told him that she had a gun in her purse, according to the sheriff's department.
The co-worker told Nisqually Principal Karen Owen, the report states, and school officials called deputies.
Roe told deputies "that she was aware that she should not bring the gun to school. She thought that if she was discovered that she would simply be asked to put it in her vehicle. Ms. Roe said that she has a concealed weapons permit and is proficient at shooting because of her military training."
Roe was visibly upset and crying when police came to the school Thursday to investigate, the report states.
Roe told deputies that her father had purchased the handgun for her after her husband had assaulted her Aug. 5, "and she has carried it with her ever since," the report states. Roe's husband, Shawn Roe, is awaiting trial on pending charges of unlawful imprisonment and malicious mischief, according to Mason County records.
Her claim that she has a concealed weapons permit could not be confirmed. An official at the state Department of Licensing said Monday that the names of individuals who carry concealed weapons permits is confidential and is not open to the public under state law.
The Thurston County Sheriff's report does not state whether Roe's handgun was loaded, but states that the gun, along with five bullets, were confiscated.
Roe has filed a divorce petition, which is pending, against her husband, according to court records.
The district has the discretion whether to report the incident to the Office of the Superintendent of Public Instruction, which is in charge of teacher licensing, state superintendent spokeswoman Kim Schmanke said. It is not one of the offenses that set off an automatic investigation by the state, she said.
Roe could not be reached for comment Monday at a phone number for her residence in Shelton.
After a concerned parent at Monday's school board meeting questioned the lack of a weapons policy for employees, school board President Judy Wilson responded that she would be interested in exploring a policy for employees who bring weapons to campus.
"I personally believe that we need to have one. We have one about drugs and alcohol," she told the parent and the school board.
No. Ex-husbands go after their former wives at their workplace. It is very common.
Fine way for them to treat a Vet.
Sounds as if she did everything by the book. Got a restraining order, had a CC permit and training with her weapon, filed divorce papers to divorce her husband that had held her hostage and had done God only knows what to her while doing so.
And still, she's the one that gets in trouble for trying to be pro-active and protect herself.
We all may as well just give it up right now. Don't fight back, let those stronger than you abuse you. Just shut up and take it. *Rolleyes*
Wonder how long they would've let her take leave from her job to get this creep put away? How do you earn a living and take care of your kids when you have to go underground because someone is stalking you on a grossly uneven playing field? Bet he has a gun, or could get one within hours if he wanted one. Yeesh.
Please ping me if you post updates to this story. I'd like to see how it plays out. My guess is she's either going to be dead, or he will be. Hope fate is in her corner because her state sure isn't. Mine isn't either. We don't have CC in Wisconsin. I can't even have so much as a sock with a roll of pennies in it in my possession or a set of brass knuckles to protect myself if I'm off of my own property.
The co-worker told Nisqually Principal Karen Owen, the report states, and school officials called deputies.
WHY COULDN'T THIS CO-WORKER JUST STFU??? The woman told you how she was protecting herself honestly. So why did the co-worker have to go running to the principal like the beeyotch she is? Jeez Louise I friggin' hate tattletalers.
That's what I thought too...
Just goes to show what kind of brainwashed socialists some ofthe people we have working in the school systems are (and probably in other job areas where there are a lot of "social science" degreed people) today. You tell 'em you're protecting yourself and they go running to the authorities to rat you out.
Probably best to say nothing...
Pathetic excuse for logic.
Exactly how I feel. Right after Columbine when everyone was saying an incident like that could happen anywhere- I was somewhat reassured by the knowledge that I knew for a fact at least 2 employees at the school my children attended were armed. It made me feel good to know that, I'm amazed other parents do not feel the same.
I stated that women should be able to protect themselves but do yall really want a class of kids around 2 people with drawn guns , that are on an emotional edge. Wouldn't it have been better for her to take some leave until the situation diffused? In this case, IMO it's not about her, or, him but the kids.
I do agree if she really thought her ex might come to the school to do her harm, she should have taken a leave of absence. One should think of the children in a case like this.
I do not have a problem with responsible adults having guns at school as a practice. I think there should be armed responsible adults and it should be a requirement. Those armed adults may be the one to save the children's lives if some nut starts shooting.
How diligently can the any law be applied, when the law itself on its face violates the Constitution, the Supreme Law of the Land? The right of the people to keep and bear arms shall not be infringed. That's the law, and the edict you are kowtowing to violates it.
Unfortunately, you are wrong. Any law "impairing" the individual citizen from bearing arms in defense of himself is a direct violation of the Washington State Constitution, not to mention the 2nd Amendment to the U.S. Constitution.
Art. I, § 24 (enacted 1889) of the Washington Constitution:
The right of the individual citizen to bear arms in defense of himself, or the state, shall not be impaired, but nothing in this section shall be construed as authorizing individuals or corporations to organize, maintain or employ an armed body of men.
I see nothing in the wording of that article that makes exceptions for "special places" like schools, courthouses, or whatever. It is written, very much like the 2nd Amend., in perfectly plain English that any cretin with a kindergarten education and an IQ larger than their hat size should be able to understand easily- of course, that lets out liberal 'tards, Democraps and Congresscritters...but I repeat myself.
It has long been held by many courts that a law that is in violation of the Constitution is null and void at its inception. This would be a perfect case for the NRA, GOA or others to take through the court system. [Except that the Wash. Supreme Court is a nest of leftist, socialist a$$h*les, who would rule against anything like this. But better to get directly to the USSC.]
Yes, I understand that "it's the law", but many things are the "law" until they are tested all the way to the USSC, and this seems like one that should be tried.
I agree. We need teachers trained to protect our kids. I think they ought to be wearing hosters under jackets though. A gun in your purse, not with you at all times could get into a kids hands. If you lock the purse up, you may not have time to get it, when you need it.
Sorry to say it, but you're right.
I know what you will do -- you are going to get on the phone and call 911 demanding that the police come, knowing full well that they are going to be bringing their GUNS.
I guess everyone has a right to their opinions depending upon who is in charge. Actually, I am not too upset that some of this is happening as it plays right into the hands of those who want to see some major change take place. The public will not agree until things are VERY bad. It's getting close.
And just how, pray tell, does your comment show me up as "wrong?" Did you have something else in mind that you forgot to post? I suggest that it should be policy that teachers be trained and allowed to carry. How does that conflict with your observations? Or is that your all-occasion preface to a reply?
I did not mean my comments to be a personal attack. I was simply trying to point out that no matter how much training a teacher gets, they simply cannot carry. Thus training and licensing doesn't help.
You say I am wwrong but you do not contradict anything I say, you just pretty much repeat parts of it.
Okay, here's why you are "wrong": Teachers can't stop Beslan style massacres or any type of attacks. It doesn't matter how many NRA courses they have or how many concealed licenses they have, they CAN'T legally carry a gun in schools in most states.
If you view the following document you can verify for yourself that most states completely prohibit anyone with a license from carrying in schools: http://www.handgunlaw.us/documents/USOffLimits.pdf
You can also verify that most states prohibit carry in schools, even by individuals with licenses at this site: http://www.packing.org
Beslan is not remotely under discussion here. That is war. You will throw your shoulder out of joint reaching like that. Armed teachers can't protect their students against car bombs either, or ICBMs.
Are you a lawyer?
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.