No surprise here... Was expecting the speculation argument, should have she known we don't know the outcome. Right but that's is not my point. What is not speculation is and that is my argument thinking of all the kids that may be right now in the same situation, was she deprived of her right to make for herself an educated decision, the answer is yes and she was deprived of that right because some individual withheld a key information by a cold blooded decision, a fact. Should have she questioned the wisdom of the adults in charge of her education and representing the Authority, was it a natural thing to do for her to trust and assume that any kid around her couldn't be a life threat? Should have she suspected the adults in charge of her and her education to withhold anything about the kids around her and deliberately expose her to someone that has been dangerous? To both the answer is? And it isn't speculation to state that her trust in the adults in charge was breached.A fact legally reprehensible under french laws? I think it is. The outcome proves she was in danger, have the adults responsible and in charge have done everything they could to prevent the terrible outcome? No and that's a fact. So the "non assistance a personne en danger" should be the least charge the individuals that make that very poor choice should be incriminated with. Thinking of which I'g go for something stronger but haven't found the legal side of the facilitator to commit a crime, yet.
How does it look, think to enter a round of QE, they will stick to total control of pubic spending.