Legal experts question prosecuting South Fayette boy for recording bullies |

Legal experts question prosecuting South Fayette boy for recording bullies

Philip G. Pavely | Tribune-Review
Christian Aaron True Stanfield pauses for a photo in Bridgeville Monday, April 14, 2014.

A South Fayette High School student convicted of disorderly conduct for attempting to record his bullies shouldn’t have been prosecuted, legal experts said on Monday.

“Disorderly conduct, in a practical sense these days, is a catch-all for disposing of a case,” said Downtown attorney Phil DiLucente, who is not involved with the case.

The charge of disorderly conduct includes harassing, annoying or alarming another person but often is used improperly, DiLucente said.

“What is alarming to me is the police’s limited knowledge of the law. They usually know procedure pretty good, but they really don’t know a lot about charges,” he said.

South Fayette police Lt. Frank Kurta charged sophomore Christian Stanfield, 15, with disorderly conduct on Feb. 12 when his mother confronted school administrators about students bullying her son on a seven-minute recording he took on his iPad one day earlier. The school’s principal, Scott Milburn, initially told police he believed he had a “wiretapping incident.”

Stanfield’s mother said he was diagnosed with a comprehension delay disorder, attention deficit hyperactivity disorder and an anxiety disorder. He told South Fayette District Judge Maureen McGraw-Desmet that he made the recording to show his mother the extent to which he was being bullied, according to a transcript of the March 19 hearing.

“I wanted her to understand what I went through,” he told the judge. “I really was having things like books slammed upside of my head.”

McGraw-Desmet did not return calls seeking comment. South Fayette police Capt. John Phoennik declined to comment.

South Fayette school Superintendent Bille P. Rondinelli said she could not discuss what happened.

“The district is precluded from discussing student matters,” she said.

Jim Jordan, an antibullying expert and author who speaks at schools around the world, said it appears that Stanfield’s mother, Shea Love, followed proper protocol for reporting her son’s bullying to the district.

Love, 40, an Air Force veteran, sent Christian’s teacher several emails about his complaints between October and February, according to testimony from the hearing.

“I would be curious to see if the school documented any investigation after the mother complained,” Jordan said. “It doesn’t seem like the district did anything, since it continued, and this boy was forced to stick up for himself by recording them and getting proof.”

Stanfield’s attorney, Jonathan D. Steele, said he anticipates winning an April 29 appeal of McGraw-Desmet’s ruling. He is considering filing a federal lawsuit against the district for not reacting to the bullying claims and for retaliating against his client.

“Districts have an obligation once they know about bullying,” he said.

Adam Brandolph is a Trib Total Media staff writer. Reach him at 412-391-0927 or [email protected].

TribLIVE commenting policy

You are solely responsible for your comments and by using you agree to our Terms of Service.

We moderate comments. Our goal is to provide substantive commentary for a general readership. By screening submissions, we provide a space where readers can share intelligent and informed commentary that enhances the quality of our news and information.

While most comments will be posted if they are on-topic and not abusive, moderating decisions are subjective. We will make them as carefully and consistently as we can. Because of the volume of reader comments, we cannot review individual moderation decisions with readers.

We value thoughtful comments representing a range of views that make their point quickly and politely. We make an effort to protect discussions from repeated comments either by the same reader or different readers

We follow the same standards for taste as the daily newspaper. A few things we won't tolerate: personal attacks, obscenity, vulgarity, profanity (including expletives and letters followed by dashes), commercial promotion, impersonations, incoherence, proselytizing and SHOUTING. Don't include URLs to Web sites.

We do not edit comments. They are either approved or deleted. We reserve the right to edit a comment that is quoted or excerpted in an article. In this case, we may fix spelling and punctuation.

We welcome strong opinions and criticism of our work, but we don't want comments to become bogged down with discussions of our policies and we will moderate accordingly.

We appreciate it when readers and people quoted in articles or blog posts point out errors of fact or emphasis and will investigate all assertions. But these suggestions should be sent via e-mail. To avoid distracting other readers, we won't publish comments that suggest a correction. Instead, corrections will be made in a blog post or in an article.