Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the School Safety topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Parents demand independent review after assault at Deer Path Middle; board urged to probe discipline and communications
Summary
After a parent described a violent April 14 attack on his son at Deer Path Middle, several parents urged the Lake Forest SD 67 board to investigate the district's disciplinary response and communication practices, including by retaining an independent third party.
Randy Creighton told the Lake Forest School District 67 board that his son was violently attacked between classes at Deer Path Middle on April 14, and he urged the board to investigate whether the district followed its policies and state law in handling the incident.
"They grabbed him, put him in a choke hold, pulled his sweater over his head, and dragged him into a bathroom...Once inside, 6 of them beat him," Creighton said, recounting the assault. He said attackers included students with documented histories of bullying and said the district's initial disciplinary response was "wholly inadequate," describing a mix of suspensions (one student with no suspension, others with two or three days).
Creighton asked the board to examine two issues "either directly or by retaining an independent 3rd party": the district's response to the assault (whether administrators followed policy 7 200 and Illinois discipline statutes in suspensions and expulsions) and whether there is a broader pattern of bullying at Deer Path Middle that the administration has failed to address. "My family trusted that [the district] would keep them safe. That trust has been broken. I'm asking this board to restore it," he said.
Other speakers at public comment amplified concerns about withheld information and the district's communications. Jeff Brinkett told the board parents should not have to learn about dangerous incidents from "Facebook groups" and urged clearer notice to families. Kelly Cohen said the violent acts are "not Facebook rumors" but repeated acts and called the district's response "unacceptable."
Board president told the audience the board is limited by privacy laws and potential litigation and said the district would take the allegations seriously; he also said punishments will be based on facts gathered through investigation. The board did not announce an independent review or a specific timeline at the meeting.
What happens next: The parent called for either the board to directly investigate or to retain an independent third party to review the incident and district practices. The board acknowledged the concern and reiterated limits on public disclosure but offered to listen and take public comments under advisement.
