A federal judge issued a damning order as he ruled that a lawsuit filed against Denver Public Schools by former East High School dean Eric Sinclair will proceed in court.
Sinclair filed the complaint last year following a March 23, 2023, incident in which a student, Austin Lyle, shot Sinclair and another staff member before driving to the mountains and shooting himself.
Sinclair’s complaint makes the case that the school district was to blame for the shooting and had neglected basic safety protocols and standards — a claim Judge Gordon P. Gallagher agreed with.
“Mr. Sinclair has shown that Defendants seem to have knowingly opened the door for a mass shooting and/or outbreak of gun violence at East High School,” Gallagher wrote. “This conduct is illogical, baffling, and plausibly conscience shocking.”
"Conscience shocking" is a legal standard Gallagher described as “undoubtedly a difficult standard to satisfy.”
But Sinclair satisfied it.
“DPS appears to have exhibited a shocking disregard for the risk A.L. posed to an entire school full of children, faculty, and staff — as well as to himself,” Gallagher wrote.
The district also maintains it did nothing wrong.
“The events of March 2023 were a tragedy that profoundly affected our educators and students,” DPS spokesperson Scott Pribble wrote. “DPS remains committed to the safety and well-being of our entire school community.”
The district asked the judge to dismiss the case, arguing Sinclair failed to demonstrate that the district, board and a former assistant principal created danger to Sinclair.
The judge dismissed complaints against the assistant principal, the board and individual school board members.
Now, DPS is the lone defendant.
“We are encouraged by the Court’s decision to dismiss several key components of this case, including the dismissal of the claims against the Denver Public Schools Board of Education and the named former school assistant principal,” wrote Pribble.
Opening the doors to a mass shooting
Lyle had been previously expelled from Overland High School for possessing guns and ammunition and had been suspected of having a gun at East.
“No measures aside from a daily backpack search conducted by an untrained staff member were implemented to prevent him from bringing a gun into the school,” the judge wrote.
The district maintains it had no reason to believe Lyle’s possession of a firearm posed an “actual risk known to them.” The judge shot down that assertion, noting that Superintendent Alex Marrero himself had described the presence of guns in Denver schools as “a ticking timebomb.”
Sinclair’s complaint alleged that DPS knew Lyle’s history with guns; ignored its own district policies; and admitted him as an East student without adequately warning teachers and staff, convening a threat appraisal team or filling out a required form.
Even after the district had credible information that Lyle had previously brought a gun to the school, Lyle faced no discipline, searches or restrictions beyond a backpack search.
The district also allegedly discouraged school administrators from referring students who had brought guns to campus to expulsion hearings or by suspending them — a move that allegedly violated federal and state law and DPS policy.
Finally, the district had removed all school resource officers “without giving faculty and staff tools, training or resources to keep people safe,” the complaint alleges. DPS maintains it put policies in place, but Gallagher found no concrete evidence that happened.
All of this amounted to recklessness, the judge wrote.
“All of these allegations show that DPS was aware of the risk posed by A.L. having a gun
in the school and were aware of procedures in place to mitigate that risk, yet they consciously did not follow those procedures,” Gallagher wrote. “They also consciously chose to allow A.L. back to school without checking his person despite credible evidence that he had a gun on his person in school on March 2.”
DPS maintains its actions were legal
DPS maintains the judge’s ruling does not mean the court found the district violated the law. Instead, the ruling means that the claim can enter the evidence-gathering stage of litigation.
“At this stage in the proceedings, the Court must take what the plaintiff has alleged as fact and make a decision accordingly,” Pribble wrote.
The district has yet to present its facts and evidence.
“Denver Public Schools is confident that the evidence will demonstrate that its actions in this case were consistent with legal requirements and looks forward to the opportunity to present its arguments in court in the near future,” Pribble wrote.
