Colomo vs bonds – what sexual harassment really is

Colomo Vs Bonds – What Sexual Harassment Really Is
Colomo Vs Bonds 2012 was a case that brought out a sharp focus on what sexual harassment really is in cases of student to student misconduct. The suit was filed on behalf of Victoria Colomo by her mother who is a former teacher and enjoined the school and nine district officials as defendants in the suit. The bone of contention was several meetings that had taken place between Victoria Colomo and Joseph Fuller who were both Special needs students at the San Angelo Central High School. The court was issued with the accounts of the meetings where Fuller had taken Colomo to seclusion within the school and asked her to be his girlfriend and in the process touched her inappropriately. Colomo’s mother then called the two students and in the process reprimanded Fuller for his actions as well as advising Victoria to avoid Fuller and ensure she does not walk alone within the campus. Fuller had also confronted Victoria twice which had led to his suspension from the school, and Victoria was assigned with an escort. Further measures were also taken to ensure that the students used separate ways and also had separate measures. Colomo’s mother also brought this point forward claiming that the school had been indifferent when dealing with the first case that had been brought forward. Under this the courts ruled that if the ‘ harasser’ acted in a way that makes the ‘ harasser’ be denied of the rights to proper education, school management and the board would have acted in differently if they had full awareness of the happenings of the case. However, the student had maintained stable grades since the case was based on the victim’s mother belief that the school acted in differently in solving the matter; hence, the case was thrown out for lack of evidence.
The Issues
Colomo’s mother was of the opinion that her daughter was being deprived of the educational opportunities which she was supposed to be accorded. In this case the issue was in relation to the sexual harassment on the part of students against each other. To a greater extent the court served to point out what constituted this sexual harassment.
The Decision
The decision which was reached by the court did not surmount to a case. Instead, the case was dismissed. It was put that the conduct of the school was not “ severe, pervasive and objectively offensive” to an extent that it can constitute a violation of the title IX.
The Reasoning
The case was dismissed because the court was of the opinion that the actions of the teachers did not constitute an act of deliberate indifference.
Separate Opinion
It might have been probable that the victim mother acted in terms of her own intuition. In this case, her actions were orchestrated by her sympathy concern for her daughter. However, on analysis from the perspective of the law, there is no course of action against the school.
Several laws and statutes can be referred to when trying to answer the above question. The Title IX was put in effect in1972; it helps us to understand the rights of the individuals when there are cases of sexual harassment involved. The statute ensured that there was gender equity; it significantly reduces the cases of individuals suing for sexual harassment. However, the individuals can seek redress on the claims of sexual harassment. The significance of this case is that it set the bar for future cases, such as this one, and will also help in subsequent judgements involving cases of students alleging harassment from other student and the administration of the school involved in the suit.
Works Cited
Dessoff, Alan. “ Student’s Death Triggers Title IX Test.” District Administration 40. 2 (2004): 23. Print.
Walsh, Devin. “ School District Not Liable in Title IX Student Harassment Suit”. 1 June 2012. PDF file.