As someone who works in education, I have to tell you that these days, everyone is encouraged to report things that seem threatening or even "off" to them. Social media posts and off-the-cuff remarks included.
Now threatening to shoot someone at school will net the same result as saying the word "bomb" at airport security.
Although I certainly understand why schools must now take all threats of violence seriously, whether these threats are overt or not, and schools can potentially be held liable for negligence if harm comes from failing in their duty to warn and report of such threats, there is still a line that can be crossed when warning others of perceived threats. Whether to say a line has been crossed here or not is not apparent.
There was an interesting case out of Iowa and, although I am aware that Lumaster lives in a different state, the case can be educational. In
Dennis L. Smith v. Iowa State University of Science and Technology and State of Iowa, July 18, 2014, the Supreme Court of Iowa upheld a $500,000 award to Smith on his Intentional Infliction of Emotional Distress claims against the school and State (the Court of Appeals finding that the underlying conduct was "far broader" than false statements and defamation). Here is a link:
http://caselaw.findlaw.com/ia-supreme-court/1673157.html
The facts presented in
Smith (which involve a retaliation for whistleblowing) differ from what Lumaster has disclosed so far of the facts in his own situation, but the case can be instructive.
From
Smith: "The State urges us to be hesitant to subject university employees to liability for reporting security concerns about individuals to campus police. This is a legitimate point. But ... [defendant] did not just report concerns ... she went back ... repeatedly to demean Smith, even though she had nothing new to say or report ... It suggests that reports to university police ought to have a wide berth of legal protection, but it also shows that such reports can be misused, because of current sensitivities."
While perceived threats must be taken seriously, the source of the reports of these threats - and the reasons behind the reporting of them - must be investigated to ensure a person targeted is not being targeted unfairly and falsely. Schools cannot rush to judgment and demean or defame an individual with unsupported accusations but they also have a duty of care to those in the school, so they cannot necessarily afford to sit back and wait until facts are gathered. Schools and school personnel have been placed in a difficult position.
