Appeals court reinstates threats case against boy

Aug. 5—The state Appeals Court has ordered a Juvenile Court judge to reinstate a threats charge against a Gloucester boy who allegedly told an assistant principal that he wanted to kill his teacher back in 2019.

The decision, released Wednesday, concluded that in a "close call," there was sufficient probable cause to support the delinquency complaint brought against the then-13 year-old boy — but also noted that the court was not asked to, nor could it, consider the decision by the Essex District Attorney to pursue a criminal case.

The boy, who was one month shy of his 14th birthday at the time, was called to the assistant principal's office on Oct. 3, 2019, after his classroom teacher expressed concerns that he was becoming "more and more defiant" in class and that she needed "intervention."

School officials were aware of other angry outbursts toward staff and other students at the time. During the meeting, the boy allegedly referred to his teacher with a vulgarity and said she "makes me so angry" and "I want to kill (her)." As he spoke, he jammed his hands into his pockets, "postured up," and swayed back and forth, according to the decision.

School officials, concerned that the statements were made despite the presence of an authority figure and in the context of prior incidents, reported the incident to the school resource officer, who took out a complaint.

Under the Criminal Justice Reform Act, judges in juvenile cases are expected to consider the long-term impact of involvement in the criminal justice system before allowing a case to go forward.

But the Supreme Judicial Court has also acknowledged concerns about school violence.

The boy's public defender filed a motion asking Juvenile Court Judge Kathryn Phelan-Brown to dismiss the complaint prior to any court activity. The lawyer, Lauren Russell, argued there was no probable cause for the charge to be brought, because there was no evidence the boy was capable of carrying out the threat or that he intended for his teacher to be made aware of the comments — which she said amounted to the child venting "adolescent angst" and "blowing off steam" in the heat of the moment. She also argued there was no evidence the teacher was actually placed in fear.

Russell also argued that the comments were protected free speech, comparing them to hyperbole uttered.

A prosecutor argued to the Appeals Court that the remarks went beyond that, however, given the context in which they were made and the boy's history and behavior.

"We are aware of juveniles who have killed their teacher," assistant district attorney Kathryn Janssen told the Appeals Court in June.

In its decision, the court called the matter "a close call," but concluded that under the less-stringent probable cause standard, there was evidence for the case to be brought.

The ruling, barring a further appeal, sends the case back to Juvenile Court.

Because the case is a juvenile matter, it remains sealed. The boy is referred to under the pseudonym "Leonardo L." as is typical in cases that are appealed from the Juvenile Court.

Courts reporter Julie Manganis can be reached at 978-338-2521, jmanganis@gloucestertimes.com or on Twitter at @SNJulieManganis.