School Violence: Lessons Learned

FBI Law Enforcement Bulletin,The, Sept, 1999 by Stephen R. Band, Joseph A. Harpold

In Pearl, Mississippi, a 16-year-old boy allegedly killed his mother, then went to his high school and shot 9 students, 2 fatally. Three students were killed and 5 others were wounded in a high school in West Paducah, Kentucky; a 14-year-old student pleaded guilty. During a false fire alarm at a middle school in Jonesboro, Arkansas, 4 girls and a teacher were shot to death and 10 individuals were wounded when 2 boys, 11 and 13 years old, allegedly opened fire from the woods. A science teacher was shot to death in front of students at an 8th-grade dance in Edinboro, Pennsylvania; a 14-year-old awaits trial. Two teenagers were killed and more than 20 individuals were hurt when a 15-year-old boy allegedly opened fire at a high school in Springfield, Oregon. The deadliest incident of school violence recently occurred at a high school in Littleton, Colorado, when 2 young male students went on a killing spree and then committed suicide.(1)

These and other incidents of school violence have shocked Americans and created an atmosphere of fear and disbelief in many U.S. communities. How can youngsters commit such vicious attacks? Why are they occurring? What can be done to stop them? As the first responders to these tragic incidents, the law enforcement agencies directly involved face many difficult challenges and previously unthinkable situations. What lessons can the law enforcement community learn from these wanton acts of violence?(2)

First and foremost, all aspects of a community need to work together. School violence is not the sole responsibility of the school system. Law enforcement, local government, civic groups, corporate entities, schools, and parents must form a partnership to combat these violent acts. Schools must prepare for these attacks. Law enforcement must develop response plans for handling such incidents. And, communities must work with both to prevent such tragedies from occurring.

PREINCIDENT PREPARATION

Memorandums of Understanding

Representatives from law enforcement, the schools, and the community should come together to sign memorandums of understanding (MOUs) that clearly define what each organization or agency will do from the beginning of the crisis to the end. MOUs should state what resources each participant will provide and identify the command structure (i.e., who will take charge and who will act as support). Also, MOUs should require ongoing liaison among all of the participants to enhance communication and maintain readiness.

Most important, MOUs should assign specific tasks - such as processing the crime scene, conducting interviews, coordinating media coverage, administering victim/witness services, and handling other support systems - and encourage agencies to appoint the best employees to those tasks. Then, the participants should train together so that each individual involved will know exactly what to do and who is in charge. During a crisis, no time exists to address these issues.

MOUs and Law Enforcement

Because some of these tragic events have required officers to secure large areas for crime scene processing, MOUs should ensure that law enforcement agencies consider the need for adequate human resources and technical support. For example, in some of the school shootings, officers had to interview up to 300 eyewitnesses immediately. Additionally, a considerable amount of computer support became necessary. Such major investigations often result in large databases that require the on-scene capability of data entry and management. Finally, MOUs should specify that all investigators receive annual training in how to handle juvenile criminals, especially young mass or spree murderers.

MOUs and Schools

Before any planning or training can occur, a good working relationship must exist between schools and police. To this end, school districts should establish a crisis response team made up of decision makers who can develop preincident plans and sign MOUs. The team should include the leadership of the school, such as the chief of the school's security force, as well as facilities engineers and architects, medical personnel, and legal representatives, if such exist. The school's media spokesperson also should participate.

Once they have developed preincident plans, schools must train with the other participants to learn their roles in crisis situations, including evacuation, and to understand the importance of their contributions, especially to the law enforcement agencies involved. Moreover, the police should educate teachers and school officials about problems in their communities that could influence students, such as gangs, drugs, and violence.

MOUs and the Media

MOUs must state clearly who will handle the media. This proves paramount because, in some instances, the media may arrive at the scene before the police. MOUs should state who will issue press releases and how often that will occur. Personnel assigned to handle the media must provide written, accurate updates to the press. These individuals also must know who is responsible for investigating rumors. Because rumors constitute a major problem in a crisis, quickly dispelling as many as possible should become a priority for investigators. MOUs also should encourage law enforcement and schools to include media representatives in the preincident planning and training process.