The Virginia teacher who was shot dead by her 6-year-old student wrote to a loved one before the incident expressing dissatisfaction with the administrators, who were apparently warned three times that day that the boy had a gun.
Citing a source close to the situation, NBC News reported that Newport News first grade teacher Abigail Zwerner sent a text an hour before she was shot on January 6 saying the child had a gun in her backpack.
“She was upset because she tried to get help with this child, for this child, and then when she needed help, no one came,” the source said.
News of her scary text broke when Zwerner’s lawyer announced the 25-year-old teacher would sue the school district.
Lawyer Zwerner claims that the administrators of the Richneck Primary School were inactive, as a result of which her client suffered.
“Three times that day for several hours — three times — the school administration was alerted by interested teachers and staff that the boy had a gun at school and threatened people,” lawyer Diane Toscano said. at a press conference on Wednesday. But the administration couldn’t help but worry.
Toscano said one teacher told administrators at 12:30 p.m. on the day of the shooting that she looked for the gun in the boy’s backpack but believed it was in his pocket. Shortly thereafter, another teacher alerted administrators about the boy after a student said the 6-year-old boy showed him a gun and threatened to shoot him.
Surprisingly, another employee asked if she could search the boy, but the administrators fired her, telling her to “wait the situation because the school day is almost over,” Toscano said.
Police said the boy “intentionally” shot Zwerner around 2:00 pm that same day, and the bullet went through her arm and into her chest. Her lawyer said the 25-year-old teacher alerted the school at 11:15 a.m. that the boy had threatened to beat up one of his peers.
Police said no one from the school warned them about the gun before the shooting.
Police said the boy’s mother, who has not been identified, acquired the weapon legally, but it remains unclear how the child was able to gain access to it. The mother was not prosecuted.
In a statement through their lawyer, the family said their son had an “acute disability”.