First-grader suspended for 'sexual harassment'

[Ssenkahdavic]

Cj2i3 said:

Ssenkahdavic said:

Cj2i3 said:

That's how it is now, if the other family wanted to they could also sue the living crap out of the kids family and have a good chance of winning.

They wouldnt win.  A child under the age of 7 has been found incapable of understanding and commiting a "illegal" act.  It would probably be thrown out.

That said, they probably could sue the school for allowing this "heinous" act to occur.  Tho it appears that it was not an unwanted act.

Hence why they would be suing the kids family. Lawyer would just have to prove that the parents in someway taught little Jimmy it's okay to touch a girl in that way.

Though your right they could also sue the school.

Had a conversation about this yesterday with a friend of mine (whos wife is an attorney).  I do not remember the exact words and Im on my phone so, cant look it up, but she had said any lawyer who tried to sue the family better be very careful.  As they can lose their license for this type of thing (bringing up completely friviolous lawsuits without having the facts and whatnot is very frowned apon).  As the kid cannot be liable for commiting an illegal act, its the same with proving that he was coerced by his family.   There was a good bit more legaleese, but I had gotten the point. 

She did say the school would almost certainly lose if it was determined that it had affected the female child, since it had happened before and they were responsible to make sure it didnt happen again (if it was unwanted, which the article said wasnt the case)