he's pretty high functioning he reads well but like other asperger's and autistic children he doesn't understand social cues he doesn't understand how the intonation our volume of his voice might affect someone he doesn't understand jokes  and the day of the incident of the twenty fifth so what is the significance of these number one the previous incidents and this if you will counseling advice like this is what you must do are you complaint my best recollection is without having in front of me is that we claimed the school district parents got failed to follow instructions which were specifically given to her by the counselor maggie stroud in the consequence of that is the poorest the consequences that on that issue that brings up an extreme question because it's the confrontation at the door of the classroom whether excessive force or not that if they cleared the room joe was likely to try to leave the room with this fellow students still there and the instruction with regards joel had to be carried out explicitly by the school regardless of anybody joe but to disregard instead of what they may deem appropriate for the for the school i guess i am trying to sort of get out with regard to the duties i think i can help you in that regard and outside cats but cannot dictate the school's behavior because just to give you a third issue to juggle for i have real trouble with proximate cause in this case assuming that there could be negligence for not doing what the counselor says that there is they they didn't  redirect here you know they focused the camera on here they sanctioned param or tried to corral him because he was disrupting the class assuming that could be negligence i don't see how you can approximate c dictate the school district tally will treat their children but if the teacher is informed how to deal with a child and then doesn't act on that and it causes the child to and of the situation that is medical hospital so they could deal with his going to billing to deal with the situation so the whole thing just is very difficult for me to put a hand on a case try to pressure from a different angle that generally a duty arises whenever you undertake a task to do something in this case the task was to teach job now the standard of care that will be applied is what was reasonable under the circumstances for this teacher under her circumstance special education in my opinion the teachers and administrators were negligent and not following the advice of the counselors or anything like that on the record no your honor i didn't see anything like that so i'm having trouble with what interaction problem with the system is handcrafting in dropping that person into the ground to control that person either from star herself or others per se excessive force by because there was no injury but your but the rapist is gruesome in the sense that it shows the takedown of the screaming but was there any evidence showing that what was done was brutal versus law enforcement attempting to restrain someone of with certain disabilities in a certain circumstance yes and what was that on february fifteenth this officer had a similar experience with this little boy and she yells that he's under five feet tall she knows that he's disabled and she knows that his gait is unusual he has no physical problems so i february eighteenth she stands at the door of the classroom and joe gets down on his hands and knees and tries to get around her and even do that called in and by the vice principal of the brain waves and clearly room and it escalated just try to get out of the room and start pushing trying to get his way out and then crawl why start pushing and i don't remember if you push the teacher the principal he start pushing so hard there's i understand we try to push him into a special something area at that point i don't know what happened very frankly because we're watching the video it's kind of difficult the street but but joe is pushing back against sweeps and so then the question is is a reasonable for weeks at that point to decide in order to stop this i'm going to handcuff which then led to the takedown which then led to the to the to the lake shackles so i'm just wondering if there's if we if we she was offended by i think we're all different people who watch the speed you think have different reactions which means summary judgment of your theory is very disturbing i've watched it three times and tried to understand everything that happened but that into consideration this was more force than what was necessary and we base that on the february eighteenth and this afternoon that she could simply grab this little boy returned to his seat joe i don't know if your are you were saying for the actions of the officer the seizure of the force that may have been reasonable may not have ban is there any damage at all that could happen in this case by have vacating a classroom is there any cognizable cause of action because of what the school district get and i submit there is absolutely not that clearly this case is this case arises out of a couple of unchangeable torts that would type of conduct but this is a little bit different than most cases because clearly the officer is an independent contractor and under the court claims act the governmental entity in this case the school district is liable only for its students this diagnosis of off asperger's syndrome which is a form of autism which given the school district nearly seven days before at that point in time there was a communication apparently between the parents and some type of study done not by a professor or anyone with any known credentials but it appears to be a student paper at university of michigan was taken off the internet and given to the school district under federal time of a change diagnosis to meet with a multimedia spin mary at cheam which would include the school psychologist the administration the teachers and the parents and determining what will be the future steps  by federal law impact on the first of march and i e p team was convened and it was decided that actually the student would be home found because of his uncontrollable  follow was the formally agreed to i e p which had a little bit different scenario because he was diagnosed with obsessive compulsive disorder and attention deficit disorder which perhaps would have been a little bit different way of handling the contractor of the tort claims act actually defines employee under idaho code search bash nine o two and it excludes independent contractors it can be a service that aren't even paid you cannot have a cause of action where we're liable for the independent contractor secondly is this information given by a parent outside the normal realms of an eye e p which is the statutory way in which we control contractor were likely immune for that but there's really no duty to supervise a police officer and get involved the second u t c and event calling in the officer so all of a sudden at oral argument it's seen that we're starting to talk about what was a do there is a debate on how to handle the situation but is this negligence i don't think so what did the school do the school emptied out a flask room and tried to stop the student with probably less than teacher who has proclivities to attack other students in this instance there is no known proclivity of this particular police officer to take any type of violent action the only proclivity we knew of i that the student may act up or so we even had a prior incident one week before where the oxford was struck in the chest by the student whether intentional or not but he didn't act violently that would be the only way there be any negligence is if we had notice that this particular officer would act inappropriately we didn't take steps to change assignments that's about all we could do abstractly once the officer engages it is against idaho law for us to interfere or delay or obstruct in any manner of the officers duty we certainly can't have a common law judy that would run contrary and put the school district at risk of being guilty of a misdemeanor for obstructing an officer there's no way we can control what the officer does i suggest to the court that the only way that we can really create what is the proper thing for a school to do this to follow what was on the current by e p not that there had been a complaint or a suggestion made by the parents this suggestion by the parents isn't the way we anyway of what was reasonable for the teachers that you under the circumstances absolutely absolutely if we have to look at the whole judgment decision i think it's unfair to second guess that teacher  they please the court my name is guy hallam i'm here today with bill moore on behalf of the city and australia weeks i believe the court has hit on the big issue for as far as angela weeks is concerned here today and that is the reasonableness of her actions and the committing any crime videotape it's rare that we had a videotape of the incident that questioned the officer was called into the room by the vice principal and you can see her arrive in the room and stand at the back of it and just make her pre known she was there for some amount of time before the school officials decide to empty the room as they are emptying the room the plaintiff lestrange decides that he wants to go with all the made to clear the room for both rice and leaves and now the officer is in a position to do what help prevent joe from leaving from what i saw is that correct am i wrong what was going on there you know your honor i believe you're correct if i understand what you're believe if by this teacher is instructed to stay in the room he gets up he refuses to comply with fast and comes towards her she puts herself in front of him passively and says we're not going to do this today at the point of confrontation and  based upon her confrontation with him on the eighteenth he she then dressed him away from the door physically and that's basically blocking him into the corner there was a time out room and hashing out room and she directed towards that room but he's struggling and continuing his agitation level it is escalating as you can see on the video and as the record reflects has been escalating the entire day there is you can hear her on the video and she has testified to this that she's asking him to calm down and fact you can hear her loudly saying it and that is in response to her meeting with the mother i believe on february eighteenth where the mother missing that informs the officer that what you've what you've got to do sometimes to get him in control is raise your voice and she does that and you can see here that going on in the background you can see it on the video that her testimony was clear about that she instructs him to calm down he does not he's yelling he's as stated at that point she decides to take him down and he has push against her very hard to get out of that position near the timeout room before he is taken down and that is something that a reasonable officer is not allowed and that is a suspect or any one individual pushing against a an court martial and we can hear some stuff but to be honest whether there's a threat i think it's pretty hard to say from the video we can't really just turning i think that the district court under the threat and he does pretty that a failure to warn i defended a person is also another factor will take into consideration and this case joe didn't have any instruction about what he was supposed to do he was obviously confused he was