video screenshot

 

In a landmark civil trial, Abby Zwerner, a former teacher from Virginia, was awarded $10 million after being shot by her 6-year-old student at Richneck Elementary School in Newport News. The lawsuit accused ex-assistant principal Ebony Parker of disregarding the student's gun-related warnings in January 2023. Zwerner sustained injuries to her chest and hand during the classroom incident.

 

The case against Parker is pivotal, highlighting school safety issues and the responsibility of school officials. Kevin Biniazan, Zwerner's lawyer, emphasised the importance of assigning accountability to those involved in the tragic outcome. Meanwhile, Parker’s legal team argued that she did not breach professional standards, with expert testimony stating that school safety is a collective responsibility. The jury spent 5½ hours deliberating before reaching their decision, reported CNN.

 

The civil verdict precedes Parker’s upcoming criminal trial, where she faces eight felony charges for child neglect. According to law professor Darryl K. Brown, it is unusual for civil cases to be held before criminal ones, suggesting strategic advantages for the defence. The criminal trial will delve deeper into Parker's actions, scrutinising her obligation to safeguard the students. This case adds to ongoing discussions about gun access and school shootings in the United States, which has seen 64 incidents this year alone, with 27 on K-12 school grounds.

 

Zwerner testified about the lasting impact of the shooting, describing difficulties with daily tasks and emotional distress. Although Parker's team tried to challenge Zwerner’s testimony by highlighting her functional achievements post-incident, they maintained that the tragedy was unforeseeable. The implications of this verdict could influence future cases regarding accountability in school safety.

 

 

Key Takeaways:

 

• Abby Zwerner won $10 million in a civil trial after being shot by a student.
• Former assistant principal Parker faces criminal charges for negligence.
• The case could influence future legal precedents on school shootings.

 

  Adapted by ASEAN Now from CNN 2025-11-07

 

 

Only $10m? The idiotic defense was that nobody expected a 6 yr old to bring a gun to school so they didn't check. It should have been $50m.

Who got sued? The parents, the principal, the school, local school board, the municipality, the county supervisors, the state board of education? And will any of these pay up?

 

It's not a question of better weapons searches in schools, it's getting rid of guns. But in the US, nobody takes responsibility.

On 11/7/2025 at 12:23 PM, unblocktheplanet said:

It's not a question of better weapons searches in schools, it's getting rid of guns. But in the US, nobody takes responsibility.

You only say this because you are against guns. Guns have been bought and sold in the US since the people landed on the East Coast. The right for an adult to bear arms is given in the constitution. But nowadays guns are easily gotten by kids. Even in Thailand. You see how well the no guns rule is working here in Thailand. NOT. The only solution is to scan those entering an educational facility. You can pass your no gun laws all you want and it will not curb anything. If it does do anything it would only increase the amount of people obtaining guns illegally. Making weapons harder to trace back to their owners. 

The only one who was sued was the assistant principal.  What the teacher won was a JUDGEMENT for 10M and that is all.  Now just try to collect that from someone who does not nearly have that much and who only has limited assists.  Plus, that assistant principal has an upcoming criminal trial ahead and might well be going to jail for a nice stretch of time.

 

The ten million is a headline and that is about it.

On 11/6/2025 at 3:30 PM, gargamon said:

Only $10m? The idiotic defense was that nobody expected a 6 yr old to bring a gun to school so they didn't check. It should have been $50m.

It’s NewPort News, which is the ghetto.  They would have known better. 

16 hours ago, bluebluewater said:

The only one who was sued was the assistant principal.  What the teacher won was a JUDGEMENT for 10M and that is all.  Now just try to collect that from someone who does not nearly have that much and who only has limited assists.  Plus, that assistant principal has an upcoming criminal trial ahead and might well be going to jail for a nice stretch of time.

 

The ten million is a headline and that is about it.

Was thinking something similar.  How long can the garnish the wages if the child is employed later in life?

 

What percentage of wages can be held each pay period?

 

Quick search says the original judgement is 10 years which can be extended twice for total 30 years.

22 hours ago, thesetat said:

You only say this because you are against guns. Guns have been bought and sold in the US since the people landed on the East Coast. The right for an adult to bear arms is given in the constitution. But nowadays guns are easily gotten by kids. Even in Thailand. You see how well the no guns rule is working here in Thailand. NOT. The only solution is to scan those entering an educational facility. You can pass your no gun laws all you want and it will not curb anything. If it does do anything it would only increase the amount of people obtaining guns illegally. Making weapons harder to trace back to their owners. 

Ya know, ICE is doing a pretty good job of door-to-door searches. They could confiscate all weapons found at the same time.

 

The Puritans (to whom I believe you are referring) used their guns for hunting not school shootings.

 

If you believe Thailand is a gun culture, even distilled as 1/6 of the US population, you're focusing on the wrong news.

 

THE ONLY SOLUTION IS TO BAN GUNS and their manufacture! All these weapons came out of US factories. All the weapons used by Mexican cartels came out of US factories. Cut off the source. Maybe authorities can't find them all but a substantial reduction would sure cut down on the violence.

 

Trump violates the Constitution every single day, ignoring the rule of law. So why defend the Second Amendment? What's so sacred about that above all others?

 

Yeah, you're right: I don't think guns, wars, violence, capital punishment also ever solved any problems anywhere. So why don't you tell us why you're an American gun-nut?

4 minutes ago, unblocktheplanet said:

THE ONLY SOLUTION IS TO BAN GUNS

 

Guns don't shoot people. People shoot people. 

 

The solution is just to kill all people and then there are no people to kill so problem solved. 

It's fake sh*te people.

 

No 6 year old is physically capable of discharging a firearm, let alone smuggling one into school to fire it later.

 

Absolutely retarded.

 

💯0%

 

 

16 minutes ago, Packer said:

 

Guns don't shoot people. People shoot people. 

 

The solution is just to kill all people and then there are no people to kill so problem solved. 

People shoot people with guns.

Take the guns away and the people can't kill people with guns.

That's how the industrialised world works except the glorious freedom to shoot and kill USA.

30 minutes ago, bannork said:

People shoot people with guns.

Take the guns away and the people can't kill people with guns.

 

People kill people with cars.

People kill people with ropes.

People kill people with their hands.

 

Ban all cars? Ban all ropes? Remove everybody's hands at birth? 

30 minutes ago, Packer said:

 

People kill people with cars.

People kill people with ropes.

People kill people with their hands.

 

Ban all cars? Ban all ropes? Remove everybody's hands at birth? 

A gun is intended to kill unlike

cars, ropes and hands and everything else which is not a weapon.

A false comparison.

2 minutes ago, bannork said:

A gun is intended to kill 

 

Nonsensical lie. 

1 hour ago, Packer said:

 

People kill people with cars.

People kill people with ropes.

People kill people with their hands.

 

Ban all cars? Ban all ropes? Remove everybody's hands at birth? 

Cars exist to move people.
Ropes exist to tie things.
Guns only exist to kill.

Hands? Better to use the brain attached to them.

1 hour ago, bannork said:

A gun is intended to kill.

 

1 hour ago, Packer said:

Nonsensical lie. 

 

A gun’s purpose is to kill — that’s not opinion, that’s design.

Calling that a ‘lie’ is like calling gravity a rumour.

You can use a gun for sport or display, but it was engineered to end life.
That’s what separates it from every other tool in the shed — including you.

46 minutes ago, LosLobo said:

Guns only exist to kill.

 

Absolute nonsense. 

 

Trolling is against forum rules, just so you know. 

14 hours ago, Packer said:

 

People kill people with cars.

People kill people with ropes.

People kill people with their hands.

 

Ban all cars? Ban all ropes? Remove everybody's hands at birth? 

 

Those are silly comparisons.

 

It is much more difficult to kill someone with your hands and they have much more opportunity to escape. 

Unless you mean knives. Unfortunately, it is not possible to ban all knives because they serve other functions, such as cooking and tools (cutting rope, etc). 

 

People can kill with cars, but only a tiny percentage of the time. And cars have another primary use, so we cannot get rid of them. Although I think high-speed motorcycles should be banned. 

 

Apart from hunting, guns have no other use besides killing. 

 

The justification to "bear arms" in the US is for protecting against the govt if the govt gets out of hand. But I guess no one ever considered that people would be using these guns rather frequently to attack each other. 

 

 

 

 

12 hours ago, Packer said:

 

Absolute nonsense. 

 

Trolling is against forum rules, just so you know. 

 

It's not nonsense nor trolling.

Apart from hunting .

21 hours ago, Packer said:

Nonsensical lie. 

I'll bite. So then what is the use for a firearm other than killing???

28 minutes ago, unblocktheplanet said:

I'll bite. So then what is the use for a firearm other than killing???

 

Feeling big and powerful.

Armed robbery.

Polishing. 

Buying and selling for profit.

Presidential ear size reduction.

 

There are many many other uses.