(SC) High School Drug Sweep Yields Class Action Lawsuit

[hammer4nc]

Here's a followup to a news story, that was the basis for a lengthy discussion on THR about a month ago...

Link: http://www.thestate.com/mld/thestate/news/local/7430579.htm
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
17 students file suit over school drug raid
Group seeks money for damages, injunction against another such raid

By LAUREN LEACH
Staff Writer

Seventeen Stratford High School students are suing the city of Goose Creek and the Berkeley County school district in federal court, alleging police and school officials terrorized them in a drug raid last month.

Individuals named as defendants in the suit, filed Friday in U.S. District Court in Charleston, include: Stratford High School principal George McCrackin; Berkeley County school superintendent Chester Floyd; Goose Creek police Chief Harvey Becker; and Goose Creek police Lt. Dave Aarons.

The suit also names the city of Goose Creek, its police department and the Berkeley County School District as defendants.

School officials declined to comment on the details of the lawsuit but expressed regret about the incident.

The Nov. 5 raid by police and school officials has created a national firestorm, in part because it was caught on videotape by the school and made available to a local television reporter.

Stratford officials have said they had reason to believe drugs were being sold in the hallway before classes started, but no drugs were found in the raid.

Some Stratford students were arrested on drug-related charges earlier this year.

In the lawsuit, the 17 students asked for an unspecified amount of money for damages and an injunction against another such raid.

They also asked for a declaration that their constitutional rights had been violated.

The suit charges the students’ Fourth and 14th Amendment rights were violated. The Fourth Amendment protects citizens from unreasonable search and seizure; the 14th forbids states from depriving “any person of life, liberty, or property without due process of law.â€

The suit also levels charges of assault, battery and false arrest.

McCrackin “planned, ordered, orchestrated and executed the Nov. 5 raid on the Stratford campus,†the suit said.

The school district, the police department and McCrackin bear responsibility for what happened, the suit said, in part because they failed to train and supervise their employees prior to the raid.

The suit also said McCrackin “has made clear†that the raid “will be and is the standard policy for Stratford’s administration.â€

When contacted Friday, McCrackin said he had not received any information about the lawsuit. “Even if I had, I can’t comment,†he said.

Floyd said he heard about the lawsuit Friday afternoon and did not have a copy of the suit, but described the matter as “very unfortunate.â€

“We’ve had local, state, national and international news coverage on this,†Floyd said. “It’s a month old. I’m trying to get everything back to normal. I’m sorry it all happened. I’m sorry it’s a lawsuit.â€

In the suit, the students provide details of what happened to them on Nov. 5 when police burst into the school to conduct the raid. Maurice Harris, a 14-year-old freshman, said one officer pointed a gun at his face. “Maurice can still see the end of the barrel looking him in his face,†the suit said.

The suit comes one day after Ninth Circuit Solicitor Ralph Hoisington of Charleston turned over the case to South Carolina’s attorney general. His announcement angered parents who attended the news conference at Goose Creek City Hall.

Attorneys for the students said Hoisington’s decision played no part in the decision to file suit.

“It was already going to happen,†said Dwayne Green of Charleston, one of the students’ attorneys. “I share the concern that many members of our community have that children shouldn’t have to go through those types of tactics or procedures. I think there is a general concern that no one would want that to happen to their children.â€

The Rev. Jesse Jackson, a South Carolina native, traveled to the Lowcountry this week and announced plans for a Dec. 16 rally to protest the drug raid.
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
(emphasis added)

This should be an interesting story to follow...who's betting on an out of court settlement? Maybe we should start a pool on who can guess the termination date for Principal McCrackin (hehe)?

Will Dept. of Homeland Security get involved over the terrorism charge?

Aren't assault, battery, and false arrest criminal charges? How can they be levied in a civil class action lawsuit?

 

[Pilgrim]

Aren't assault, battery, and false arrest criminal charges? How can they be levied in a civil class action lawsuit?

If remedy isn't forthcoming in criminal court because the prosecutor or attorney general won't pursue the case, then the aggrieved parties allege the same charges in civil court for monetary damages.

Pilgrim

 

[semf]

Didn' t the supreme court rule several years ago that the civil rights of students were suspended while they are under state control (attending school) I have heard this before but have never confirmed it.

 

[hammer4nc]

Comment by another k9 officer:

Say hello to the first expert witness for the civil trial...

'It's not how my unit would have done it'

Police might have violated own regulations during Stratford drug raid

BY TONY BARTELME
Of The Post and Courier Staff

A videotape made by the Goose Creek Police Department during last month's raid at Stratford High School raises questions about how police used their drug-sniffing dog that morning and whether the department broke its own rules.

The nearly half-hour of footage shows how police and school officials forced students to kneel on the floor, some with hands restrained behind their backs, as a police dog passed close by, barking and excitedly sniffing their backpacks.

Other agencies don't allow police dogs to go near children during drug sweeps.

"We don't want people to say they were threatened by the dog," said Cpl. Louis Reed of the Charleston Police Department.

Reed said students could stare, make catcalls or provoke a dog in other ways. He declined to comment on the specifics of the Goose Creek sweep, other than saying, "It's not how my unit would have done it."

On Nov. 5, Goose Creek police burst into a hall of Berkeley County's largest high school with their guns drawn.

Images from the school's surveillance camera triggered a debate locally and nationally about how police and schools crack down on student drug use. Some parents and local officials support what happened.

Others, including 9th Circuit Solicitor Ralph Hoisington, said police went overboard. On Thursday, Hoisington questioned the methods some officers used in the sweep and asked the State Law Enforcement Division to share the findings of its investigation with the FBI and the S.C. attorney general.

One key piece of evidence in SLED's report is likely to be the video recorded by a Goose Creek police officer. The department provided The Post and Courier with a copy in response to a request under the S.C. Freedom of Information Act.

The recording begins seconds after a team of Goose Creek officers sealed off one of Stratford's hallways. Two officers can be seen with their guns unholstered.

"Get on the ground! Get on the ground!" an officer yells as students fall to the floor. "Hands on your head, hands on your head, do you understand?"

A few minutes later, a voice on a loudspeaker says, "All right bring the dogs down."

Goose Creek Principal George C. McCrackin is heard saying: "All right, the dogs are coming through. Just stay still."

The videotape then shows an officer entering the hallway with a police dog. A Goose Creek police report identifies the officer as Jeff Parrish and the dog as Major, a Czechoslovakian shepherd.

In the tape, the dog appears to be excited, yelping and jumping up and down, its barks echoing through the hall. Parrish leads the dog past students kneeling or sitting on the floor. The dog's head is at the same level of some of the students who are sitting.

At one point, the dog grabs a backpack with its mouth and shakes it. At another time, the dog jumps briefly on its hind legs onto Parrish as they check students huddling in an alcove. The tape shows police or school officials examining the contents of backpacks and searching students. No drugs were found.

Students can be seen tiring from kneeling on the floor with their hands above their heads. After nearly a half-hour, the search ends and an officer walks down the hallway, lecturing students:

"If you're an innocent bystander to what has transpired here today, you can thank those people that are bringing dope into this school. Every time we think there's dope in this school, we're going to be coming up here to deal with it, and this is one of the ways we can deal with it."

Echoing officials from other law enforcement agencies, Reed said Charleston police do school sweeps much differently. They usually involve a surprise announcement that the school is being "locked down."

A police dog then moves through hallways, sniffing lockers and other areas. Sometimes students are told to leave a classroom for a few minutes while a dog is brought in to sniff around. At all times, though, the students and dog are separated, Reed said.

RAID Corps., a private company in Spartanburg that uses dogs to sniff out drugs in schools across the state, also keeps its animals away from children, said Jay Russell, the owner.

He said that while his dogs have never bitten any children, he doesn't want to take any chances.

"You got to handle kids like kids, not criminals," he said.

A federal class action lawsuit filed Friday by Stratford students and parents includes allegations that the police dog was unruly and appeared to be unresponsive to commands. Several students say in the lawsuit that they were frightened by the dog when it passed by.

Goose Creek police declined to comment on the raid but did provide The Post and Courier with the department's operating policies for its canine team.

Those policies raise questions about whether police violated their own guidelines.

More than 100 students were in the hallway that morning, but the department's procedure on "illegal narcotics detection" states, "Only after the on-scene supervisor has cleared the area of all personnel will the canine enter and conduct an illegal narcotics detection."

The procedure also says that if the canine handler determines that the use of a police dog would be dangerous, he or she can refuse to deploy the dog without risk of disciplinary action.

Goose Creek's canine unit is certified by the North American Police Work Dog Association, said Jim Watson, the group's secretary. Watson declined to comment on the Stratford search, but he did say he knows Parrish and the dog Major.

"Jeff is nationally certified, and he has a helluva good dog. He has excellent control of the dog," Watson said.

He said Major is an extremely sociable dog that "loves to search for narcotics."

Drug-sniffing dogs often have the mentality of a 3- to 7-year-old child, and they are trained to uncover drugs like a child plays a game of hide and seek, Watson said. When a dog "alerts," or detects a narcotic, it's as if it has won the game.

"Why is a dog barking?" Watson said. "It's not because it wants to bite someone. He just wants to play that game."

Some dogs are trained to sit down when they detect a narcotic, Watson and Reed said. These are known as passive alert dogs. Others are trained to behave in a more excited fashion. Such dogs are known as aggressive alert canines.

"The Supreme Court has ruled you can search a person with a passive alert dog," Reed said. "We have a passive alert dog, but we still don't search people because of the possibility of someone saying something happened to them or that they felt threatened."
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
Link: http://www.charleston.net/stories/120703/loc_07stratraid.shtml

This passage will prove most damaging to the Goose Creek PD, IMO.

Students can be seen tiring from kneeling on the floor with their hands above their heads. After nearly a half-hour, the search ends and an officer walks down the hallway, lecturing students:

"If you're an innocent bystander to what has transpired here today, you can thank those people that are bringing dope into this school. Every time we think there's dope in this school, we're going to be coming up here to deal with it, and this is one of the ways we can deal with it."

What's this, Goose Creek police "psy-ops" unit? I though they had a screening process to weed out these types?

 

[standingbear]

i think some heads are going to roll on this one.

 

[Ian]

They'd better.

 

[Pilgrim]

Didn' t the supreme court rule several years ago that the civil rights of students were suspended while they are under state control (attending school) I have heard this before but have never confirmed it.

No. The Supremes allowed a 'special needs exception' to the Fourth Amendment which permitted school officials to search the students under their supervision if the officials had a reasonable suspicion the search would provide evidence of violating school rules or the law.

New Jersey vs. T.L.O (1985)

Reasonable suspicion is a lower standard than probable cause.

Pilgrim

 

[Beren]

Glad to see the kids and their parents aren't going to let this slide. Those responsible need their butts stapled to the wall. My only regret is that they didn't sue all those involved individually.

Gee - can anyone say "police state mentality brought on by the War on Some Drugs?"

Yet another example why I hope I can home school my kids, or at least send them to a decent private school.

 

[HankB]

Reed said students could stare, . . . or provoke a dog in other ways.

Uh . . . next, they'll be telling people to avert their eyes during a search. It will be to "avoid provoking the dogs" but then, people with averted eyes will have difficulty making a positive ID during any subsequent civil action.

Hmmm . . . since the dogs indicated - repeatedly - the presence of drugs, yet no drugs were found . . . doesn't the record of this dog failure open up a challenge to future (or even past) cases based on a lack of probable cause, due to Fido's demonstrated unreliability?

 

[hammer4nc]

Hank, I think you raise a good point. In this case, the dog gave repeated alerts, yet no drugs were found. That could be interpreted as evidence that the dog is "unreliable", and raises questions about the dog's level of training. Apparently, the best trained dogs will alert on actual drugs, but will not alert on drug residue.

It only took one internet search to find a recent story where a drug case was thrown out, because the training level of the drug dog was in doubt. In this case, the dog alerted on drugs, drugs were found; but because the k9 officer didn't keep a log on the dog's actual performance in the field, the whole case was thrown out!

Link: http://ftp.ij.net/rex/drugdogsc.html
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
Accuracy of drug dogs is challenged

An appeals court throws out a Hillsborough case, saying no evidence was presented to show a drug-sniffing dog's "track record."

By CHRISTOPHER GOFFARD, Times Staff Writer
© St. Petersburg Times
published August 7, 2003

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
TAMPA - Hillsborough sheriff's deputies deployed their drug-detecting dog, Razor, to sniff around the car when they stopped motorist Gary Alan Matheson for a traffic infraction on Hillsborough Avenue.

The German shepherd signaled the presence of drugs, which deputies used as probable cause for the May 1999 search. The search revealed morphine and methamphetamine.

After failing to get the evidence suppressed in court, Matheson pleaded no constest to drug-possession charges. He received probation in 2000.

This week, however, the 2nd District Court of Appeal threw out the case against Matheson, saying the state had not presented any evidence of the dog's "track record" of sniffing out drugs.

The Sheriff's Office acknowledged that it did not keep records of Razor's success rate in the field and that the dog had no training to distinguish between actual drugs and "dead scents" from drugs no longer present.

In its unanimous ruling, the appeals court also noted that Razor had received only five weeks of drug-sniffing training, whereas the Customs Service puts its dogs through a 12-week course and teaches them to disregard residual scents.

The Customs Service requires its dogs to have a perfect record; only half of the dogs complete the program. But the certification program Razor attended requires only 70 percent success.

The court's ruling, which also affects law enforcement in Pinellas County, does not forbid drug searches by dogs or declare them uniformly unreliable. But without better training, the court ruled, Razor should not have automatically been considered reliable enough to give deputies probable cause for the car search.

"However much we dog lovers may tend to anthropomorphize their behavior, the fact is that dogs are not motivated to acquire skills that will assist them in their chosen profession of detecting contraband," wrote Judge Stevan Northcutt.

Local law agencies say it's too early to speculate on the ruling's impact.

Susan Shanahan, the assistant attorney general who is handling the appeal for the state, said the state probably will ask the 2nd District Court of Appeal for a rehearing.

"The opinion's not final, and policies won't necessarily change until that opinion is final," she said.

The case would potentially have far-reaching implications and could influence cases nationwide, Shanahan said.

Some people are already celebrating the ruling.

"It'll change the way they do their training and record-keeping," said Tampa lawyer Rex Curry, Matheson's defense attorney. He argued Matheson's motion to suppress the drug evidence.

Curry said defense lawyers from across the country already are asking him for copies of his suppression motion for use in their own cases involving drug-sniffing dogs.

"The whole defense community's really barking about this," he said.

Hillsborough Sheriff's Office spokesman Lt. Rod Reder said the office will examine the ruling.

"We hope this really can be overturned," Reder said. "We find the dogs to be a very powerful and fair tool in the war on drugs."

In the past year, the 10 dogs the Sheriff's Office uses for drug searches and routine patrol handled 1,595 calls. Of those, 378 were drug searches of houses and cars, Reder said.

St. Petersburg police officials didn't want to comment on the decision, saying they needed time to research its implications.

Deputies in charge of the Pinellas County Sheriff's Office canine unit have been developing a system to track their dogs' success rates, said Detective Tim Goodman, an agency spokesman.

A supplement noting whether the dog was successful during a search goes into each report, Goodman said. Deputies have been working on making a master list to track the performance of the dogs. Goodman said the agency also tracks how the dogs perform in training exercises.
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

 

[labgrade]

"No. The Supremes allowed a 'special needs exception' to the Fourth Amendment which permitted school officials to search the students under their supervision if the officials had a reasonable suspicion the search would provide evidence of violating school rules or the law.

New Jersey vs. T.L.O (1985)

Reasonable suspicion is a lower standard than probable cause.

You'd allow your children to be held at gunpoint & sniffed by dogs till the cows come home!?

So much again for "judicial precidence - as with other "reasonable jurisprudense" cases such as Dred Scott, Miller v US, etc. & y'all let these stand?

Face it, folks.

You live in a police state where you are as servile as can be.

You reign it in now or you are toast.

 

[Pilgrim]

labgrade

Semf asked,

Didn' t the supreme court rule several years ago that the civil rights of students were suspended while they are under state control (attending school) I have heard this before but have never confirmed it.

I gave a factual answer based on a U.S. Supreme Court ruling.

You then said,

You'd allow your children to be held at gunpoint & sniffed by dogs till the cows come home!?

I'm curious how you came to the conclusion I endorsed and supported this action by the Goose Creek Police Department.

Pilgrim

 

[bvmjethead]

Problem is when you sue the Police force or the state or local government you are essentially suing yourself.

Where do you think the monies eventually collected in any such suit would come from.

Taxes?

What about the monies used to defend the (cough) guilty (cough) parties in the various suits?

Taxes?

When are the American people going to march to the doors of the courthouse, armed to the gills, and demand a radical shift in un-constitutional policies?

I know, I know...........................never.

 

[carpettbaggerr]

"If you're an innocent bystander to what has transpired here today, you can thank those people that are bringing dope into this school. Every time we think there's dope in this school, we're going to be coming up here to deal with it, and this is one of the ways we can deal with it."

Sorry Officer, you don't get to arrest over 100 people without cause.

False Arrest
False Imprisonment
Assault
Battery

These charges are obvious and I'm suprised the AG hasn't taken action yet. The lawsuit is a slamdunk, and I wish they personally sued the officers involved in this atrocity.

 

[TheEgg]

"If you're an innocent bystander to what has transpired here today, you can thank those people that are bringing dope into this school. Every time we think there's dope in this school, we're going to be coming up here to deal with it, and this is one of the ways we can deal with it."

Police state terror tactics -- the whole thing stinks -- I hope the lawsuit brings these thugs to their knees, and then they get fired. We don't need these types in police work.

 

[moa]

Making eye contact with a dog can provoke an attack from a dog. The so-called experts on dogs say to avoid eye contact with a dog that is displaying a hostile attitude, or is excited.

 

[Russ]

I hope the idiots in charge of this fiasco take the heat. The individual LEO's have no excuse for following orders unless the situation was portrayed to them as being far more dangerous than scaring some 16 and 17 year old high school kids.

The nazi excuse of "following orders " just doesn't fly.

 

[labgrade]

Wasn't arguing your point or slammin' you, Pilgrim. Please don't take it as such. Was more of a blanket statement. K?

"Problem is when you sue the Police force or the state or local government you are essentially suing yourself."

Zactly. Said it many, many times before. Until these are help personally responsible, this BS will continue.

"When are the American people going to march to the doors of the courthouse, armed to the gills, and demand a radical shift in un-constitutional policies?

I know, I know...........................never."

Give it some time, bvmjethead. (sniff)

I know, I know. Seems a long time comin', huh?

I cannot believe we have allowed so many abuses to ever have happened, let alone their continuance.

So lucky we had the "civil rights advances" of the 60s. Now, we all get to be treated the same way = all as ... decorum refrains the obvious.

Problem is, folks. We all put up with it.

When's the last time you did a stint at your po-po dept, or city council, or county commis offices in protest ofthis stuff?

Thought so.

Bitchin' on this board will do nothing.

Go out & do something about it or shut up. (said in the nicest way I know how) ;-)

 

[hammer4nc]

Here's a better quality video (about 3-4 minutes worth), of the Goose Creek drug "inquiry" (hesisitate to use the word "raid", as it might get some panties in a wad); also some commentary from a criminology type. Detailed discussion of gun etiquette, during the incident.

Link: http://www.wistv.com/Global/story.asp?S=1561171&nav=0RaPJd2z
(click on featured videos link on the page)

 

[Cosmoline]

Frankly that videotape did more to get me thinking revolutionary thoughts than any Supreme Court denial of cert. It was like watching something from 1942 in Nazi Germany! Any one of our founding fathers would have not just protested this, they probably would have called out the man responsible and shot him dead.

What disturbs me most is how our children, raised in such environments, are growing USED to that level of governmental control and intrusion. Many in the video seemed to "assume the position" with calm resignation! Even in my day, only two decades ago, we would have been going nuts in such a situation. The mere sight of an armed cop with a dog would have set everyone running out of the building. Now it's taken for granted.

No meth dealers or pot growers have caused me nearly as much concern as these cops.

If this is what the "war on drugs" has done to us, I don't hold much hope for us once the "war on terror" has had its way.

 

[carpettbaggerr]

These videos are even more disturbing. If a student asked why they were under arrest, what would the police have said? They had no reasonable suspicion for detaining over 100 students. Would they have said the students aren't under arrest? What if the someone wanted to leave?

This police force should be disbanded. The citizens of Goose Creek would be far better off with no police at all.

 

[Pilgrim]

carpettbaggerr

You raise a good question and one many officers cannot answer. A classic scenario is a traffic stop for a traffic violation and the car has several passengers. When it becomes apparent the driver is going to get a ticket, the passengers get out of the car and walk away. Unless the officer can think of a good reason to detain the passengers, he should let them go on their way.

It would have been interesting if a student at Stratford High had figured this out and made his way for the door to go home.

Hey, where are you going?

I'm going home.

You can't go home. School is in session.

No, there is no teaching going on here. I have better things to do with my time.

Pilgrim

 

[TallPine]

When a baby elephant is trained for the circus, a steel band is placed on its foot and tied to a stake in the ground. Try as the baby elephant might, it cannot pull itself free from that stake. As the elephant grows it takes more than a stake in the ground to restrain its bulk and power. Yet that is all that's needed, because early on the elephant learned it could not free itself from the stake.

 

[hammer4nc]

update: http://www.thestate.com/mld/thestate/news/local/7484776.htm

School officials refuse to release additional tapes in drug raid
Associated Press

CHARLESTON, S.C. - A prosecutor is questioning why school officials are refusing to publicly release additional surveillance camera recordings from a drug raid at Stratford High School where police drew their weapons and restrained students.

Prosecutor Ralph Hoisington said the additional recordings show students handcuffed in a stairwell for no apparent reason, and at least two officers pointing their weapons directly at students.

Goose Creek police have said in a report that "several officers unholstered their weapons and positioned them at the low ready position. This was done as more of a defensive precaution ... primarily due to the unfortunate fact that drugs and money often mean that there is a real propensity for weapon involvement."

But Hoisington said other tapes show the officers "pointing straight at students, sweeping the gun across them." Hoisington, who has seen the tapes that were provided to State Law Enforcement Division investigators, has refused to prosecute the case because of a conflict of interest.

He has asked the state attorney general to investigate whether any state laws were broken when police swept through the school Nov. 5. No drugs were found and no arrests were made.

Images obtained by WCSC-TV immediately after the raid were aired repeatedly on national television news programs. Berkeley County school officials allowed the station to record images from several of the roughly 70 cameras throughout the school. The district also allowed The (Charleston) Post and Courier to view some surveillance recordings.

Now school officials are refusing to release images from certain cameras that were never shown to reporters but were provided to SLED.

The Post and Courier has asked the Berkeley County School District for access to all footage delivered to SLED, including images from the camera aimed at a stairwell. Hoisington said that footage showed a group of students holding their hands behind their heads and lying on the ground. "They were being compliant," he said.

The footage then shows an officer "picking up about six of them, strapping them and then putting them back down in the same position they were," Hoisington said.

In a letter Friday to The Post and Courier, the district declined to release the materials, citing the federal Family Educational Rights and Privacy Act, which generally prohibits the district from releasing personally identifiable information about students, and the state Freedom of Information Act.

The district said the state's FOI law says certain information can be withheld if information is "of a personal nature" and that disclosure would "constitute unreasonable invasion of personal privacy."

Hoisington questioned why district officials would withhold the additional footage. "It's already out there," he said of images of the search.

Police and school officials decided to sweep through the school after seeing suspicious activity on the school's video cameras. More than 100 students were detained during the search. Using a drug-sniffing dog, officers and school officials searched students' belongings.

A couple of weeks after the raid, a group of more than 100 teachers and students rallied outside Stratford High in support of Principal George McCrackin.

A group of students and parents, meanwhile, are suing school and district officials, saying their constitutional rights were violated.
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

Curious. Officials using the Freedom of information act to justify withholding information.

This is purely a hunch, but I'd expect to see some token resignations (or dismissals) within the Goose Creek school administation, and police force, right about the time that the state AG's office releases their report. Or, it could be swept under the rug entirely.

 

[Waitone]

I don't think this one will be swept under the rug, I predict it will be done by the numbers. School admin types will retire. Police will be reassigned or move on to new jobs in different states. LE brass will be thumped. Reports will be written. No one will be held criminally liable.

Then the civil actions will start.

SC's power structure will react to the embarrasement cause by the event, not by the goose-stepping police state tactics.