School board prevails in video tug-of-war

A judge affirmed the authority of Virginia school boards in a recent ruling that a county sheriff could not withhold a surveillance video of a controversial school bus inci­dent.

Shenandoah County Circuit Judge Thomas J. Wilson IV ordered the sheriff to send a deputy with the disputed video to play it at a closed school board hearing.

County officials set the video viewing for May 16 at 8 a.m., according to local press reports.

The judge’s ruling came in Shenandoah Co. School Bd. v. Carter (VLW 016-8-057).

The conflict among county officials arose from a rowdy road trip for the Strasburg High School basketball teams on Dec. 19. Team members reportedly engaged in “appalling” and “violent” be­havior on the school bus on the way back from games in West Virginia.

Some of the students’ actions were digi­tally recorded from a surveillance camera on the school bus.

Authorities later brought charges of assault or battery by mob against seven students.

At a Jan. 12 meeting between school and law enforcement officials, the school bus video was turned over to law enforce­ment officials. The school superintendent said he understood the video would be made available as needed by school offi­cials, according to the judge’s summary of the evidence.

Wilson concluded there was an “expec­tation that there would be cooperation” among the local officials.

In fact, school officials viewed the video several times.

Based on what they saw, school offi­cials recommended expulsion of three students, long-term suspensions for three others and penalties for two more. When some of those students appealed, school officials sought to show portions of the video at school board hearings.

The sheriff’s department refused to make the video available. Instead, Sher­iff Timothy C. Carter offered to provide 40,000 still images from the video.

The school board asked Wilson to or­der the sheriff to make the video avail­able, contending it needed the recording to provide a fair hearing for the students.

The sheriff insisted the board had what it needed to conduct the disciplinary hear­ings without the video. The sheriff also pointed to state privacy statutes, includ­ing one requiring that law enforcement records concerning a juvenile be protect­ed against unauthorized disclosure.

In court pleadings, the sheriff said Commonwealth’s Attorney Amanda Mc­Donald Wisely directed him not to show the video at the school board disciplinary proceedings.

Ruling for the board, Wilson said the state constitution provided authority for the board to decide how best to conduct discipline hearings.

And the judge said the sheriff’s reliance on juvenile privacy statutes overlooked one which allows access to juvenile re­cords for any agency with a legitimate interest in the case.

“When these provisions are read in light of the supervisory power provided by Article V, Section 7, they do not act to limit the School Board’s authority or duties; rather, they reiterate the School Board’s authority — as an institution with a legitimate interest — to investi­gate and discipline its juvenile students,” Wilson wrote.

The judge rejected the suggestion that other evidence would suffice.

“These parents demand to see the vid­eo, apparently believing that it may con­tain exculpatory evidence. No other piece of evidence can adequately address their concerns,” Wilson said.

“To deny the School Board access to this video footage — even in a controlled and confidential setting … — unreasonably interferes with the Board’s constitution­ally-mandated duties, which includes the obligation to conduct these disciplinary proceedings,” Wilson said.

Wilson granted an injunction directing the sheriff to provide a deputy to go into the school board’s closed hearing, play the requested portions of the video and then leave with the video.

Wilson denied relief on the board’s pe­tition for a writ of mandamus.

The school board was represented by Lindsay C. Brubaker and Douglas L. Guynn of Harrisonburg.

Guynn said the judge “repudiated the position and arguments of the sheriff and commonwealth’s attorney” and rec­ognized the unique governance role of the school board under the state consti­tution.

The sheriff was represented by Har­well M. Darby Jr. of Roanoke, who said he could not comment on behalf of his client.

Carter told the Northern Virginia Dai­ly he was merely seeking an explicit or­der from a judge to ensure that sharing the video was legal.

Wisely — the commonwealth’s attor­ney — did not immediately respond to a request for comment.