Keeping Our Students Safe: Lessons Learned from Prior School Shootings

Posted · Add Comment

By David Nash, Esq., Director of Legal Education and National Outreach, Foundation for Educational Administration

A student in class draws pictures of the gun he has brought with him to class, along with disturbing drawings depicting mass shootings. When the parents reject the school request for the student to be seen for a mental health clearance, the student is allowed to return to class. A mother’s frantic call to a school that her child may engage in violent acts and that there is an “extreme emergency” fails to result in a lockdown.  Instead, the Assistant Principal goes to the class and escorts the wrong student to his office.  An Assistant Principal fails to act on reports from three teachers that students are claiming that their 6-year old classmate has brought a gun to school.  Each of these breakdowns preceded school shootings that occurred those same days, with tragic results.  

Understanding the lessons that can be learned from those breakdowns and others that occurred during school shooting incidents was the focus of a virtual LEGAL ONE session offered on January 15, 2026 that was attended by more than 700 persons.  The session was hosted by Arthur J. Gallagher Risk Management Services and supported by New Jersey Schools Insurance Group and three of their sub-funds, representing hundreds of New Jersey school districts.  During the session, I had the opportunity to facilitate a discussion with Jeff Gale, the Director of the NJDOE’s Office of School Preparedness and Emergency Planning (OSEP) and Dr. Thomas Gambino, who also works in OSEP.

The session highlighted lessons that can be learned from 5 high profile school incidents that occurred across the country between 2018 and 2024.  

The cases highlighted include the following:

  • February 14, 2018 at Marjorie Stoneman Douglas High School in Parkland, Florida;
  • November 30, 2021 at Oxford High School in Oxford, Michigan;
  • May 24, 2022 at Robb Elementary School in Uvalde Texas;
  • January 6, 2023 at Richneck Elementary School in Newport News Virginia; and 
  • September 4, 2024 school Apalachee High School in Winder Georgia.

 

Listed below are brief summaries of what occurred in these incidents, some of the contributing factors in each case, and the legal repercussions to date.  We then end with a brief summary of key takeaways for school districts.

 

Marjorie Stoneman Douglas High School

On February 14, 2018, a former student, prohibited from the campus after being expelled in 2017 for disciplinary reasons, returned to the school armed with a .223 caliber semi-automatic rifle and took the lives of 17 people and injured 18 others. In this case, there were numerous contributing factors.  They included a student with an IEP and a long disciplinary history without effective interventions to address underlying behavioral issues, concerning social media posts, access to a firearm that was legally purchased, interest in mass shootings, and significant breakdowns in information sharing between schools, local law enforcement, and the FBI.  

The litigation that arose from this case resulted in a $127.5 million settlement in March 2022 against the FBI, to settle litigation involving alleged failures to act on numerous tips, and $26 million to settle litigation against the school district for its alleged failure to take reasonable actions with knowledge of the shooter’s potential for violence, along with a lack of preparation for an active intruder scenario, and a failure to prevent the gunman from entering the campus.  The settlements involved no admission of liability

 

Oxford High School in Oxford, Michigan

On November 30, 2021, a high school student was interviewed by school staff in the presence of parents regarding drawings (including a drawing of a gun and images of persons being shot) and communications (including messages such as “blood everywhere,” “the thoughts won’t stop help me,” “my life is useless,” and “the world is dead.”) written on a notepad that were seen by a teacher.  The parents were asked to take the student to be seen by mental health professionals but refused to do so and then left the school.  The student was allowed to return to class and subsequently removed a 9 mm semi-automatic handgun from his backpack and took the lives of 4 students, also injuring 7 other people.

In two groundbreaking criminal trials, each parent was convicted of involuntary manslaughter (See March 2023 Michigan Court of Appeals decision).  This marked the first time that parents had been convicted of involuntary manslaughter for their role in enabling and otherwise not addressing their child’s conduct leading up to a school shooting.  

 

Robb Elementary School in Uvalde, Texas

On May 24, 2022, a former student armed with an AR-15 style assault rifle entered Robb Elementary School in Uvalde, Texas, at 11:33 a.m. and began shooting.  Within a minute, the shooter entered connected classrooms 111 and 112 and continued firing.  The shooter ultimately took the lives of 19 students and two staff members.  The shooter was killed at approximately 12:50 p.m., 77 minutes after the first officers entered the school.

In this case, there was a 77-minute gap between the arrival of first responders inside the school and the final confrontation and elimination of the shooter. Initial attempts to engage the shooter were abandoned after officers were met with gunfire, and those on scene did not attempt reentry until much later, despite multiple cues that an active threat remained.   After initial attempts to enter the classrooms failed, officers and leadership prioritized evacuating other classrooms, negotiating with the shooter, and waiting for additional equipment or tactical teams, instead of pressing to stop the shooter. This included searching for keys, waiting for breaching tools, and testing keys on the janitor’s closet rather than the classroom with the shooter.   

On the school district side, there were also critical breakdowns.  Doors—including exterior and interior—were routinely left unlocked, and there were systemic failures in enforcing door security policies. On the day of the attack, all exterior and at least eight interior doors were unlocked, and the delay in accessing rooms stemmed from a lack of keys and a failure to follow proper protocols for securing the school.  Inaccurate and inconsistent public messaging—and contradictory posts between agencies—created further confusion among families and the public during and after the incident.    Finally, the evacuation and reunification processes were chaotic and delayed. Medical and mental health evaluations for victims and evacuees were not systematically conducted, and many families received late, inaccurate, or poorly delivered information about their loved ones.  

A settlement was reached with City of Uvalde for alleged systemic failures in the response by law enforcement and school officials in May, 2024 involving payment of $2 million to families of victims and an agreement for systemic changes, including enhanced police training, and a permanent memorial.

 

Richneck Elementary School in Newport News Virginia

On January 6, 2023, a 6-year-old male student shot teacher Abby Zwerner in the abdomen, while in the classroom, with a 9 mm handgun belonging to his mother that he had brought to school in his backpack, seriously injuring the teacher.  On the day of the shooting, three teachers at various points throughout the day reported to the Assistant Principal information they had received from students that the 6-year-old student in question had brought a gun to school. Despite these warnings, the Assistant Principal did not search the student.

The teacher who was shot brought a lawsuit against the school district, the superintendent, the principal and the assistant principal.  The lawsuit was dismissed against all of the defendants except the assistant principal.  A jury ultimately found the Assistant Principal liable for $10 million.  The assistant principal has also been charged with felony child abuse and disregard for life. The criminal trial is scheduled to begin in May, 2026.  The outcome of the criminal trial may impact whether the insurance provider and/or school district will be responsible to cover the civil judgment against the assistant principal.

 

Apalachee High School in Winder Georgia

On September 4, 2024, subsequent to a call from an unknown source threatening a shooting at the school, a 14-year-old high school student shot and killed 4 and injured 7 others after bringing an M400 semi-automatic rifle AR-15-style weapon into the school.

A review of the timeline in this case reveals critical breakdowns and highlights the devastating impact that even a delay of minutes can have in a crisis situation.

Prior to 8:15 a.m. – The shooter, Colt Gray, arrived at the school on a district school bus, carrying an AR-15 style rifle and a knife in his backpack. That morning, an anonymous threat was called in, stating that shootings would occur at five schools, with the first targeting Apalachee High School.

9:50 a.m. – The shooter’s mother, Marcee Gray, called the school from 200 miles away, reporting an “extreme emergency” involving her son after receiving disturbing texts from him. During the first period, the shooter referenced school shootings, prompting the teacher to email the shooter’s counselor to report this behavior. 

10:00 am – A school administrator entered the shooter’s algebra class to find him following a call from his mother to the guidance counselor. The shooter had already left the room.  The assistant principal mistakenly finds and removes the wrong student, Colton Gray, instead of Colt Gray. Colton was escorted to the office by the SROs

10:20 a.m. –  The shooter returned to his closed and locked algebra classroom door, knocked, and when a student saw he had a gun, the shooter opened fire in Hallway J.  The first 911 calls were made at 10:20 a.m. The shooter attempted to gain entry to another classroom, but a student pushed the door closed and was shot, preventing the attacker from entering. More victims were shot, injured, and killed in the hallway. Teacher Mr. Richard Aspinwall was shot after stepping into the hallway to check on the noise. The final victim, a 14-year-old boy, was ambushed and killed by the shooter after exiting the bathroom amidst the gunfire. 

10:21 a.m. – The two School Resource Officers (SROs), Deputy King and Sergeant Boyd, located the shooter, confronted him at gunpoint, and he immediately surrendered. 

10:23 a.m. – The school initiated a lockdown at 10:23 a.m. after multiple employees activated wireless panic buttons embedded in their badges. 

The above timeline highlights numerous breakdowns, including:

  • A failure by the school bus driver and other school employees to notice a suspicious item sticking out of the shooter’s bookbag that turned out to be an AR-15-style weapo;
  • a failure to initiate threat assessment protocols are receiving an anonymous tip about a potential shooting and receiving a phone call from the shooter’s mother about an extreme emergency;
  • The mistaken removal of the wrong student from class 20 minutes prior to the school shooting; and
  • A three minute delay between the start of shooting and the implementation of a lockdown

 

Key Takeaways

The brief review of these incidents in this article highlights some of the numerous ways in which breakdowns in training, information sharing, threat assessment protocols and incident response can have tragic results.  Key takeaways include:

  • Triage approach is critical – School officials need to prioritize threat assessment and response, even with other critical competing demands on time
  • Follow NJDOE guidance on conducting threat assessments – following a consistent formal threat assessment protocol reduces the potential for credible threats to go undetected
  • Removal of students does not remove potential threats – even where students were suspended or expelled horrific incidents may occur, underscoring the need to develop multi-faceted response plans that address underlying causes of student behavior
  • Potential civil and criminal liability may extend well beyond the school shooter – we have seen multiple examples of parents facing criminal liability and a recent example of a school leader facing civil and potential criminal liability 
  • Capacity and experience of law enforcement varies widely – Local law enforcement comes in all shapes and sizes and having meaningful discussions that address the realities of local capacity as part of the annual Memorandum of Agreement review process is critical
  • Consistent protocols, terminology and training are essential – In the heat of the moment, and absent thorough training, students, staff, and volunteers will be tempted to employ their own strategies and terminology which will increase the likelihood of harm for all involved
  • Information sharing and coordinated action between schools, parents, law enforcement and outside entities are critical – Breakdowns in information sharing undermine the ability to proactively identify emerging student needs and address issues before a crisis situation occurs

 

Additional Resources

Listed below are additional resources that may be helpful for school officials seeking to ensure that they are prepared to implement a comprehensive approach to prevention, identification and response to school shootings and other crisis situations that may occur in schools.

 

Conclusion

Ensuring a safe school environment has always been the number one priority for school officials.  With potential threats that are constantly evolving, all stakeholders involved in our public schools have a critical role to play.  Learning lessons from prior tragedies can be an important part of the process, and help reduce the potential for tragic incidents to occur in our schools.