School Board Upholds Expulsion Of Middle School Student After Attorney Argues Punishment Does Not Fit The Crime

A 13-year-old Lutcher High Middle School student accused of bullying in the football locker room was recently expelled by the St. James Parish School District’s administration and Tuesday evening the student and his attorney appealed the administration’s decision to the full School Board. The accused student, Legend Guerra, and his attorney Wilbur Reynaud, chose to conduct the expulsion appeal in public rather than the traditional method of going behind closed doors in Executive Session, and during the lengthy hearing Reynaud argued his client was not only unfairly and harshly punished, but also argued the way the Administration’s handled the case and came to a decision to expel was severely flawed and unfair.

The appeal began with Administrative Director Amy Laiche reading a prepared statement where she read a summary of the previously held expulsion hearing, stated the evidence used to make her decision, and why she feels Legend’s actions were wrong and deserved expulsion.

It should be noted that during the previously held expulsion hearing, Guerra, on the advice of Reynaud, left the hearing shortly after it began.

Reynaud said they left the hearing because the District’s policy for first offense bullying allows for a one to three day suspension (not expulsion), and at the time he told the Administration there was no basis to have an expulsion hearing.

However, also in the policy manuel, it is stated that the principal has the authority to enhance charges and therefore can recommend expulsion.

Later in the appeal, Reynaud argued if the principals have this kind of power, then there is really no need to even have a policy manual.

Laiche continued and said the investigation began after a parent complained that her son, in the football locker room, had been beaten with a belt on multiple occasions and that another student’s parent came forward reporting her child witnessed it.

Laiche said numerous football players were individually interviewed by middle school principal Angie Poché and it was concluded Guerra was the perpetrator of bullying of multiple players using multiple behaviors, behaviors such as locking a teammate in a locker, hitting teammates with a belt, and giving a teammate a pass to say the N-word and then hitting him with a belt when he gave in and said it.

Laiche said after listening to the recording of the expulsion hearing, reading the record, weighing the evidence, seeing a pattern of bullying behavior, and the fact Guerra admitted to placing a teammate in a locker, she asked the Board to uphold principal Dr. Molly Stadalis’ recommendation of expulsion.

“All students have a right to a safe school environment. I am a firm believer policy is followed. Behavior that infringes on student safety will not be tolerated,” Laiche told the Board.

After Laiche concluded her statement, Reynaud began by asking the full

Board if anyone from the Administration, at any time, had shared anything pertaining to Guerra’s case with them because the Board is supposed to be an impartial panel. They all responded no, but did admit they had held several other expulsion appeals (all upheld by the Board) in Executive Session, but that Legend’s name was never disclosed.

Reynaud proceeded to make several arguments to the Board as to why his client should not be expelled and some of those were: *Reynaud told the Board he specifically asked for and did not receive a single piece of exculpatory evidence (evidence that could be favorable for his client) from the Administration.

Reynaud said he knows of several pieces of evidence that should have been handed over to him, evidence such as there being a lack of supervision, employees being fired or placed on administrative leave because of this situation, and the fact that one of the parents of the victim works for the school district.

He asked the Board was that deliberately done? And if so, how could this be fair?

*Reynaud asked why Amy Laiche made the decision to expel his client when she was not even present at the expulsion hearing nor was the one who was supposed to hand down the punishment?

He told the Board he specifically asked and was specifically told by the District’s Attorney (and said he has it in writing), that the Superintendent or the Superintendent’s designee would be the one who would make the decision on how to discipline his

client. Reynaud told the Board Melissa Aubert was named the Superintendent’s designee and was the one who conducted the expulsion hearing. He repeatedly asked why was Ms. Laiche the one who decided on expulsion.

No one from the Board said a word or asked for clarification.

Also, and later in the appeal, Reynaud pleaded with the Board to allow Aubert to speak and share what her recommendation was on his client’s case, but the Board was mum and she never was given the opportunity to speak. *Reynaud argued the statements given by students to middle school principal Angie Poché, which are the source of most of the evidence against his client Laiche used to make her decision to expel, make little to no sense.

Reynaud said the students were interviewed by Ms. Poché, with no parental permission and no other adult in the room, and that several of the statements initially are handwritten by the students but then are finished by the principal. He also said they are so heavily redacted that most make little to no sense.

Reynaud asked how can we be sure these statements are accurate?

*Reynaud told the Board he was told the Administration cannot allow him to speak to the students interviewed without the consent of their parents, but they also said they cannot give him the names of the parents. Reynaud said that was absurd.

*Reynaud, among other points, also argued that his client had never been in trouble before (first offense) and no one was hurt as nothing in the record alleges injury (no photos or evidence showing injury).

Reynaud told the Board much of the alleged behavior was kids being kids, was not mean-spirited, and was horseplay. He said a football locker room full of 12-13-year old boys is not the most pleasant of places and that should factor into the Board’s decision.

*Reynaud told the Board he asked Dr. Steve Welsh, Phd., who is a former head of the Psychology Department at Nicholls State and specializes in school psychology, to review the record and to advocate on behalf of his client. Dr. Welsh was not allowed to offer his expertise on the expulsion because the District advised only the Administration’s record can be discussed and no evidence may be added, which Reynaud said is also not right. In the end, there was little to no discussion among the Board members on whether to throw out, reduce or uphold the recommendation to expel.

The only question asked was whether they could question Guerra, to which Reynaud said absolutely not.

Board member Sue Beier made a motion, seconded by Nicole Charles, to expel Guerra. The vote was unanimous.

After the hearing, Reynaud said he will be filing suit in District Court within the next 10-days.