The School Bus Incident: An Unsettling Event in Upper Darby
Upper Darby School Bus Driver Charged for Duct-Taping Student | School Bus Incident
Read about the recent incident in Upper Darby School District where a bus driver is facing criminal charges for allegedly using duct tape to restrain a 10-year-old student. Find out how the investigation unfolded and the legal implications of this unsettling event.
Upper Darby School Bus Driver Charged for Duct-Taping Student | School Bus Incident
A bus driver, employed by the Upper Darby School District, is facing criminal charges after allegedly using duct tape to restrict a ten-year-old student's movements, as reported by prosecutors earlier this week.
The accused, 55-year-old Juliet Pratt, has found herself facing allegations of false imprisonment and endangering the welfare of a child. These charges are linked to an incident that occurred on March 8 during her regular bus route. However, a district judge dismissed additional charges, including unlawful restraint, during Pratt's preliminary hearing. Court records confirm that Pratt was released after posting 10% of her $25,000 bail.
This unsettling event came to light when staff members from Hillcrest Elementary, where the child is enrolled, alerted investigators. An affidavit detailing the grounds for Pratt's arrest provided additional insight into the situation.
Upon review of surveillance footage from Pratt's bus, investigators witnessed an alarming scene: Pratt duct-taping the child's ankles together while he sat, restrained by his seatbelt. Furthermore, the video showed Pratt returning to the boy, this time applying tape to his chest. The report highlighted that at no point prior to these actions was the child seen trying to move erratically or leave his seat.
In the footage, Pratt is seen removing the tape with a seatbelt cutter and discarding it in the trash upon reaching the school.
During a police interview, Pratt confessed to duct-taping the student, even revealing that this wasn't the first time she had done so.
Arthur Donato, Pratt's attorney, argued that Pratt had no intention to cause harm. She acted with the motive of maintaining order and ensuring the safety of all children onboard, including the boy who was kicking his legs.
While acknowledging that Pratt's actions may be questioned in hindsight, Donato argued that an error in judgement doesn't always equate to a crime. He emphasized that the charges demanded proof of an intent to harm the child. The school district has not yet commented on Pratt's current employment status.
In stark contrast, Delaware County District Attorney Jack Stollsteimer staunchly condemned Pratt's actions, stating that her conduct was "inexcusable" and "dangerous". He emphasized that using duct tape on a child already secured in the vehicle's harness presented a severe risk, as the child would have been unable to free himself in the event of an accident.