The parents of a 10-year-old Black student have filed escalating legal claims against the Palo Alto, California school district, alleging that their son was physically abused by staff and students in an after-school program, and then subjected to racist bullying and harassment at school after they complained about it.
Their original claim filed in July alleges that the boy, a special needs student at Escondido Elementary School, was 9 years old when he was abused by Daniel Bueno, a staff member of the Right At School after-school program based at the school.
The claim says one afternoon in January Bueno “used his body to block the child inside a closet” for more than 10 minutes as the panicked student called his parents using a smart watch, reported Palo Alto Online.
On another day, ostensibly to punish the boy for using a curse word, Bueno allegedly encouraged other students to step on and kick the boy in the genitals, and “held the boy’s legs wide open” while another student did so.
The Palo Alto Unified School District (PAUSD) and Right At School say that Bueno was immediately fired for violating the after-school program’s policies, one day after the boy’s mother reported the incidents.
Bueno now faces criminal charges of felony false imprisonment and causing or permitting a child to suffer or inflicting pain or suffering on a child, according to an arrest warrant issued for him shared by the Santa Clara County District Attorney with ABC7 News.
At a press conference held in front of the school district office by the local NAACP on Wednesday, the family’s attorney Jim Quadra said staff at both the school and the after-school program have retaliated against the boy since his parents filed a government claim regarding the January incidents against the school district on July 17. The district denied the claim in October.
“Our latest claim details incidents … so abusive to the point where the child started to have suicidal ideation, and the school dismissed it as a joke, did not report it to the parents,” said Quadra.
The boy has faced “daily harassment, the imposition of unwarranted discipline and disregard for (his) health and welfare,” according to the parents’ subsequent legal claim filed with the state on Dec. 9.
The parents reported that their child faced continual disciplinary action, including three suspensions, for conduct in response to “racist bullying” that was ignored by staff. In one instance, they allege their son was hit in the head, and in another, they say the boy was told by another student that they would have “owned him,” referring to slavery.
In November, a school therapist told the boy’s parents that he was suicidal, which she attributed to his not being picked as a “sports team captain,” according to the claim. The parents checked him into emergency care with a suicide watch, where they learned he had reported to the school therapist that he had a distinct suicide plan and a backup plan, details the school did not share with them.
Their recent claim alleges a pattern of systemic abuse, racial discrimination and racist bullying by the school district.
“This treatment has caused undue stress, irreparable harm, and long-term trauma not only to our child but to our entire family,” said Raymond Goins with the San Jose/Silicon Valley NAACP, reading a statement from the family.
“Our family has worked tirelessly to address these issues with the proper channels, yet the systemic barriers to ensure accountability and equitable treatment have left us no choice but to bring this matter to light,” Goins continued.
Sean Allen, a board member of the NAACP, said the legal action by the family “speaks for the experience of our children — Black, brown, other marginalized communities” — who “are subject to disproportionate discipline. … These children of color feel like they’re more suspect than victims.”
Allen said the NAACP has documented “several instances within this school district where people of color, children of color have been referred to in derogatory terms …and there’s actually no discipline.”
“There’s failure here in the system over and over again,” he said. “And in this particular situation, this child’s abuse is just reprehensible.”
The Palo Alto school district responded to the press conference with a series of statements, reported ABC7 News. In one, it said the district is “working to verify” the parents’ claim that its employees ignored the mistreatment of the student. In another, it clarified that Bueno was not a school district employee, but worked for Right At School, which is a district contractor.
“While specific details of the allegations made cannot be shared due to privacy restrictions, PAUSD and Right At School are united in our commitment to diversity and inclusion, do not tolerate discrimination or retaliation, and remain committed to supporting the student and family involved in this incident,” the district statement said.
Right At School, the local site of a national out-of-school time care provider, issued a separate statement underscoring its commitment to the diversity of its students and employees, its industry-leading DEI policies and practices, and its lack of tolerance for discrimination and retaliation.
The statement noted that “the child’s parents continued his enrollment in the program for the remainder of the 2023/2024 school year and then re-enrolled him in the program for the current school year. Right At School supported the child throughout his enrollment in our program and continues to work with the child and his parents to support his success in the program.”
Quadra said the parents recently pulled the boy from Escondido Elementary, and that he will not be going back to the after-school program, whose contract with the district “should be terminated.” He said the program’s staff “have so egregiously violated the care of children they should not be on the school grounds.”
The Black student’s family also wants two additional employees of the after-school program who are mandated reporters of child abuse and who were allegedly present when their son was abused to be investigated and held accountable, according to the NAACP.
The claim the family filed in December seeks compensation for the emotionally traumatized boy’s care and a plan to help him return to a safe school setting, said Quadra, who signaled that the family is likely to pursue civil litigation.
The school district has 45 days to respond to the parents’ latest claim. After that the family has six months to file a lawsuit.
