The Day Everything Went Wrong: How Ignored Warnings Led to a Tragedy at Richneck Elementary

By John Huber
MarylandK12.com

On January 6, 2023, a quiet first-grade classroom at Richneck Elementary in Newport News, Virginia, became the location of a tragedy that educators across the country would quickly learn about. Abby Zwerner, a dedicated teacher, was shot by her six-year-old student. The event was awful enough on its own, but what became known in the months that followed was even more disturbing: this was not a random or unforeseeable act. It was a preventable disaster, preceded by multiple, blatant, and specific warnings that were ignored.

The case has since become a national conversation about school safety, leadership accountability, and gaps in crisis response protocols. A jury recently awarded Zwerner $10 million in damages and found Assistant Principal Ebony Parker grossly negligent. Parker now faces eight felony child neglect charges in a criminal trial scheduled for May 2026. Meanwhile, the principal and superintendent walked away shielded by sovereign immunity. This is the initial article in a series and here we lay out what happened that day and why this case matters far beyond Virginia. In future articles, we will look at the events in much more depth.

Leadership and Responsibility
Richneck Elementary’s leadership structure was typical of many schools: a superintendent overseeing the district, a principal managing the building, and assistant principals handling day-to-day operations. At the top was Superintendent George Parker III, who was fired weeks after the shooting. Briana Foster Newton was the principal and was reassigned and later dismissed from the civil lawsuit under sovereign immunity. Ebony Parker, the assistant principal, was left as the sole defendant in the recently concluded civil trial and the upcoming criminal trial. She resigned days after the incident, invoked her Fifth Amendment rights during testimony, and now faces multiple felony criminal charges that could lead to prison time.

How did responsibility fall almost entirely on one person when the failures were systemic?

The Timeline of Warnings
The day began like any other, but trouble was brewing long before the first bell. The would-be shooter had recently been suspended for an aggressive act against Abby Zwerner that included slamming her phone and breaking it before the holiday break, and January 6 marked his first day back in class. What’s unclear, and concerning, is whether any formal reinstatement conference or behavioral re-entry plan was conducted before his return. That gap draws attention to re-entry protocols and risk assessment, which we’ll explore later in this series.

Between 11:15 and 11:30 a.m., Zwerner went to Assistant Principal Ebony Parker and expressed concern that the child seemed “off,” was in a violent mood, and had already threatened to beat up a kindergartener. Parker was well aware of the boy’s history: he had choked a teacher the previous year, cursed at staff, and had been suspended just before the holiday break for breaking Zwerner’s phone. This was his first day back.

At 11:45 a.m., the first gun-related warning surfaced. Two students told reading specialist Amy Kovac that the would-be shooter claimed he had a gun in his backpack. Kovac searched the backpack at approximately 12:30 p.m., after the would-be shooter had already left to go out to recess. But Zwerner told Kovac she had seen the child take something from his backpack and slip it into his pocket before he left for recess. Kovac immediately reported this to Parker, who dismissed the concern, saying the boy’s pockets were “too small” for a gun. When Kovac asked if the child could be searched, Parker refused, insisting the mother was on her way to pick him up. No lockdown was initiated. No police were called.

There is no evidence in testimony, grand jury reports, or media interviews that Parker ever actually called the mother before the shooting, or what she might have told her. Staff accounts repeatedly quote Parker saying, “the mother was on the way,” but whether that claim was based on an actual conversation or mere assumption remains unknown, especially since Parker invoked the Fifth Amendment. This issue creates another gap in communication and crisis response. The shooter’s mother’s interviews (ABC News, CBS News) focus on her son’s ADHD and the gun access issue. They do not mention any call from Parker or what was communicated that day.

Shortly after 1:00 p.m., the situation escalated further. Teacher Jennifer West received a report from a student that the would-be shooter had shown him a gun during recess and threatened to shoot him if he told anyone. West called the office, and the warning was relayed to Parker. A guidance counselor, Rolonzo Rawles, even asked Parker for permission to search the child. Parker said no, again, citing that the mother was coming.

At 1:59 p.m., the would-be shooter pulled a loaded gun from his pocket and shot Abby Zwerner as she sat reading to her class. Despite severe injuries to her hand and chest, Zwerner evacuated her students and sought help. Only then were police called to the school.

The Fallout
The aftermath was swift and chaotic. Law enforcement flooded the school. Parents demanded answers. Days later, Parker resigned. Weeks later, Superintendent Parker was fired. In court, the jury found Ebony Parker grossly negligent and awarded Zwerner $10 million. The principal and superintendent were shielded by sovereign immunity, leaving Parker to bear the brunt of accountability. Her criminal trial is set for May 2026.

This case has shaken confidence in school safety nationwide. How could so many warnings go unheeded? Why were administrators so unprepared to act? And why does the system allow some leaders to walk away while others face prison?

Why All Schools and School Systems Should Pay Attention
This case is a warning for every school system. Are our administrators trained to respond to imminent threats? Do they have the training and expertise to identify that the threat is real and imminent? Do teachers have the authority to initiate lockdowns or searches when seconds matter? And perhaps most troubling do academic priorities like state testing overshadow safety concerns?

Schools often claim safety is their top priority. But when a tragedy like this happens, we have to ask: is that really true?

What’s Next
Over the coming weeks, MarylandK12.com will publish a series of articles and videos examining the deeper issues behind this case. We’ll explore the authority gap that leaves teachers powerless in emergencies, the controversial expert testimony that drew backlash, and the systemic focus on testing that may come at the expense of safety. We’ll also look at what other systems can learn from this tragedy and whether our schools are prepared for a similar crisis.

Stay tuned. Because when schools say safety is the top priority, we need to ask: Is it really?