On the day of the scheduled hearing, both the attorney for the petitioner and the attorney for the respondent were absent from school. Therefore no formal hearing was held. A few days later however, an informal hearing was held and afterward the court ruled 9-0 in favor of the respondent.
Of the ruling, attorney for the petitioner said "It all came down to influence. I think the court would have thought differently if Mr. Paccone hadn't expressed his opinion a week ago."
If you have the mind that want to hurt someone. Anything all can be the weapons. Whether it is kirpan or not.
ReplyDeleteI agree with Maddy. Before the informal court hearing, many judges were in favor of the petitioner, until Mr. Paccone voiced his opinion in regards to the case. He said he is in favor of the respondent, which in return altered the judges decisions.
ReplyDeleteI disagree. Respondent should win because kirpan is a weapon, and students need security in the school.
ReplyDelete