Story One
A classmate, who is a friend of Mr. Parker's son, was mad at him because he sat in someone else's seat at lunch. At recess, the boy went over and started punching him. Other children stood around and watched. The playground aide noticed a cluster of children and headed over. She was met half way by a girl who ran to get help. The aide soon arrived and broke up the fight between these two 7-year-olds. Mr. Parker's son indicated to the aide that he was not hurt and that he did not want to go to the nurse. The classmate who started the fight was brought into the assistant principal's office to write a "think sheet". He had to write down what he did wrong, what he could have done differently and how he could make it up to his friend. He also missed two recesses and wrote an apology to Mr. Parker's son. Mr. Parker's son wrote back "that's OK. You can still be my friend." That afternoon the teacher discussed the issue with the entire class using the Open Circle format. At that time both boys had their arms around each other and were friends again. The teacher called both sets of parents and everyone seemed to be satisfied with the outcome. ------------------- BTW.. the fact stressed by the schools that the kids were hugging each other is sorta contrived don't you think, if you were forced to sit in a "open circle format" in front of everyone. Don't you think you were just a little pressured to at least act like you were friends again? Not exactly a natural atmosphere there ??? Notice this is the story written by the gay lady. Is it any consequence that this story shows the most unrelated of all the stories being presented. Just my two cents.
------------------ Story two ------ just released
On May 17, several first graders were involved in a disagreement over who would sit where in the cafeteria. As a result, upon going outside one child took another by the hand and brought him to a third student in an area of the playground that is somewhat difficult for the adults to see. (The student who was hit said that he went willingly.) All children who saw agreed that the third student then hit the student who had been brought to him two to four times in the chest/abdomen (children’s accounts vary) and he fell to his knees. The student who was hit says he was hit when down; the other children say he wasn’t. One child reports that one student held the arm of the student who was hit; however, the child who was hit and the other children did not report this. The children involved named five children who were nearby watching but not directly involved. Several other students were close enough to see a cluster of students but not close enough to see what was happening. The student who did the hitting suggested that others also hit, but none of them did so. Based on the children’s accounts, this all may have happened in under a minute. The aide on duty saw a group of children gathering, and as she walked toward them was approached by a child that said someone was being bullied. When the aide inquired what was going on, the child who was hit identified one student who hit him, and the other children agreed. The child who was hit said he was not hurt and did not want to go to the nurse. He reported that his feelings were hurt, because the child who hit him was his friend.
The child who did the hitting was sent to the assistant principal’s office and while talking with her acknowledged his behavior. As a result, he filled out a “think sheet,” to reflect on his behavior and choices, missed recess on two days, and wrote an apology. In addition, the classroom teacher called both sets of parents and a class discussion was held about not hitting and speaking up when there is a problem on the playground. The teacher indicated that both parents took the matter seriously and seemed satisfied with the outcome. Following the incident the boys were observed arm in arm at school and subsequently the child who was hit went to the house of the child who hit him for a play date.
Note that in this description of the events.. also every chance to minimize the numbers involved were used. Example in the opening paragraph I used, it said "SEVERAL" students disagreed, but offers no visualization into a number (between 3 and 4 or 8-10) were in the initial scrap... Why not give a more accurate number, probable because they don't want to give credence to the fact that many people involved as the father said there was.
Also note on the second description, a child is in on what is going to happen. How many others were also in on knowing what was going to happen is something I am sure we will never know for sure. But at least we can safely assume that the kid that lead the victim to his beating was in on what was about to occur. That is premeditated btw... One wonders (the school does not give but a glancing description) if that was the kid that possible held his hands ?? Was there more, we can't really tell... The school minimized that as perchance happening, the third description (in the story description mentions many held him). We can not honestly know for sure, but at least the second version finally mentions this is a possibility unlike the first version.
The second description states for a fact that the victim was hit only 2-4 times but then say the account varies. So I was just wondering how such a big crowd gathered around with only 2-4 hit time. I think at age 6 I could muster up 2-4 hits in under 2 seconds. So we are supposed to believe that a group formed in this time (we are lead to believe that only 5 were mainly viewing, but yet others were just watching the crowd gathered around and could not see. I have been in a few fights myself in my youth. I know exactly how long it takes to form a crowd, if it is over before I get there, there is no time for a crowd to gather.
---------------------- Just fishy IMHO... more of it is fishy, but I don't have time to put them to pen right now.. perhaps later.
Take care.