is are really not disputed on november sixth two thousand and eight and his actions at the end of the day was handing out notes for her parents and one of her students was being very disruptive and unruly he struck a female students and started running around laughing and screaming and being chased by the other students miss acton's asked for him to come to her he ran by her she reached out grabbed him by the shirt and he proceeded to sit down now we contend that ms that instead not pinch the students over the board obviously disagrees and believes that she did in fact  now pursuant to the board's policy the board does have a long with the well the board has a corporal punishment policy oh it's a misconduct rule for dash twenty five that's prohibits teachers from using corporal punishment that results  deliberate use of physical force and they give examples of what they consider physical force and that includes pinching as well as slapping and pushing choking however the key dispute in this case really centers around what's considered deliberate if you look at black's dictionary definition of what deliberate is it's intentional and premeditated actions in this case the board made a finding that what most likely happens is what miss action says happened that she asked it wasn't isn't there a disputed fact here whether there was a pinch or wasn't and yes he said the facts are agreed upon that they're there mostly uncontested except for that point that's correct your honor ok so what's the standard of review we should be applying resulted in harm to the student yeah it's really not been dealt with what's meant by cruel under the one thousand nine hundred five amendments or if you look back at past cases in which i cited to them they've identified cruel so we're going to stand with the board of education when they made their decision did not find any kind of harm that was caused to e m physical harm that is they brief inferred and presumed that c m was psychologically harmed by what happened and that there was possible harm given to the school as well based on this conduct as well as other students the classroom that he witnessed this and that gets me to my second point in gilly and if this is not considered illegal per se conduct under the in this case what the hearing the board did was they presumed that the damages must have occurred to the faculty to the school based on what miss agnes did that specifically what the appellate court said it cannot do but the board and find specifically there was no physical contact or injury correct they didn't determine that no they did not determine that no so their determination was that relevant to the physical was what he crabbing of the shirt but they did mark on his chest so this clear evidence there was a picture of what mr thompson witnessed was this adkins grabbing a shirt she didn't see any skin in miss adkins hands court concluding that there had been corporal punishment and dismissals and why based upon the fact that the young man never testified as to anything occurring he never showed up to testify  as well as miss actions testifying that she never pinched and if she did so it was by accident and under the board's rules accidental conduct is not deliberate conduct and they have specific rules allow that don't require dismiss for certain instances of corporal punishment as well as certain instances of physical restr you stated principal thompson said that she saw ms adkins pinched this child until he dropped to his knees and then she and the security officer mr world mourn observed that he had a red mark on his chest that's physical harm this case to this court's case in one thousand nine hundred one the board of education versus the illinois state board of education determined under the gilead land standard that corporal punishment is harm to a child it meets the first test the first killing when test and it meets the second killing men test as to would any kind of warning have been useful because we already have a rule that says we prohibit corporal punishment so why do we need to warn someone when two weeks two months before this she'd already been warned about corporal punishment and here she is two months later engaging in corporal punishment again i think under the board of education versus is months you would hope that she'd have enough if she were a decent teacher that she would have some authority to say when you i tell you to stop running you're going to stop running has it been your experience with the six year olds i think it's terrible including my own and they might be afraid of me or my wife but you know i can run a park or a couple hundred times and so your belief is that it's the fault of the teacher when the kids running around screaming hitting other kids that's odd i don't know if i buy that at all ok i'm not saying it's her fault i'm saying she needs to have a way of dealing with kids misbehavior that's not corporal punishment because the board rules clearly prohibit that so well she's been a teacher for thirty four years is this the best she can do pi in the public school system adopted i am not pleased but i mean i hear a lot of people say that and i read all the incident reports of teachers to physically punished children and we have an epidemic of violence in chicago we just joined in from the federal court against the guy give it to the salt statute and i asked for the statistics how many chicago public school students have been killed so far this year just so we could add it to our make this brief seventeen in one hundred ninety three have been injured that not by teachers teachers have to be robotically teachers have to be role models as to a different way to act we don't i mean what kind of moral authority dismiss that kids have to say don't hit that kid said i don't mean it was rough but he says he hit a girl and she tries to make him sound like a criminal by saying she had written him up and other people had written him up but there was nothing in the record to show that that was the case that he had been written up this is a six year old and i think it's the worst i've written up to is if we're talking about it but misses that can said he's a bad kid who's been written up by a lot of different people but she unites so i think that must be where you get the idea that he's a are good kids and there are rough there rest kids and this is the way we teach those kids not to be rough to be rough toward them this is that make any sense i don't think it does i mean if we're going to tell kids might doesn't make right it's not you know we're not going to be physical with each other then how can a teacher have any moral authority if she engages in that kind of rough conduct herself consequence you on the issue free media ability the history of the actions of this teacher and prior occasions i'm not clear as to the elevations as to the allegedly threatening a child to beat him or her looking a fingernail verbal cue sions also the same incident a separate incident those were different incidents where she did poke a child she told him that she was going to whip his ass and so those were those were beliefs separate incidents but we're talking about five separate incidents or one that had all these things involved in them no i think that this was there were two or three events that occurred with it i think there were three or four i mean she poked a finger nail into a child she had a verbal level up to cation with the ten year old she shouted for no apparent reason at all the children in her class and she didn't follow directions i think that's more than one incident there were no but those are all separate distinctives yes and she was suspended for ten days for that two months before she was taken out of the classroom for pinching a life ok that's what the standard of review here if it's it really remedial billet he is a fact question so it's against the manifest weight of the evidence it's not up to you to look at what the board to second guess what the board did if there's evidence and record have names and we strike they strike first and so we don't i don't i'm not blaming you i'm just saying it would seem to me that somebody should talk to those people and suggest that they follow the law at least if they mention a law and we have to do that when we follow it johnson they certainly didn't beat this you know and so on you know but the stance you says in any way causes physical harm and boy injury it seems to me that there are two different things there there's friends i think that that's not punishment right that wasn't done for hundreds and also where we actually have we have a policy on physical restraint that says if you're going to restrain kids to stop them from hurting other children or other staff members you do it that way ok but you don't grab someone by a joint you grab them by you know take them by the shoulder and move them away because we don't want kids to get hurt and we don't have an argument here that this was physical restraint right i was so afraid of the teachers and so afraid so think about being a six year old and seeing your classmate you know i mean we can argue about that but being pinched till he falls to the ground isn't that going to cause some harm to those kids are they going to be afraid in believe but we don't have to show psychological harm we can show physical or psychological harm and i think it's clear we show physical harm here and i thank you mr hill briefly