Galveston, Texas — A Texas civil court has commenced deliberations examining whether the parents of a high school shooter can be held legally accountable for their son’s violent acts, which resulted in the deaths of 10 people at Santa Fe High School in 2018. The trial, which has captured public attention due to its emotional testimony and complex legal arguments, wrapped up its final arguments on Friday.
The lawsuit targets Antonios Pagourtzis and Rose Marie Kosmetatos, highlighting allegations that they neglected clear signs of their son Dimitrios Pagourtzis’ deteriorating mental health and failed to secure the firearms he eventually used in the school massacre. Despite these accusations, the parents maintain that they locked away their guns and were unaware of their son’s imminent threat.
Dimitrios, who was 17 years old at the time of the attack, is currently in a state mental health facility following a court ruling on his mental competence, stalling his criminal trial. He has been held there since December 2019, facing charges of capital murder for the shooting located approximately 20 miles southeast of Houston.
Throughout the trial, distressing accounts from survivors and bereaved families were heard, alongside arguments from the defense centering on Dimitrios’s severe mental health issues. Attorney Clint McGuire, representing the plaintiffs, argued that the parents had prior knowledge of their son’s mental struggles through various communications and direct observances yet chose inaction. He emphasized the need for parents to actively seek help when recognizing mental health problems in their children.
On the opposing side, the parents’ lawyer, Lori Laird, argued that while Dimitrios did suffer from significant mental health issues, the responsibility for the actual crimes lay with him alone. Laird passionately defended Kosmetatos as an engaged and caring mother, countering representations of her as neglectful.
The trial also recalled last year’s notable case against James and Jennifer Crumbley in Michigan. Their son Ethan Crumbley was charged with murder for killings at his school. In an unprecedented decision, the Crumbleys faced criminal charges and were convicted of manslaughter, having been deemed to have irresponsibly allowed their son access to a firearm.
Laird also criticized the school’s administrative actions, revealing the institution’s poor communication regarding Dimitrios’s irregular behaviors and absenteeism. She pointed out the lack of coordination in notifying the parents about their son’s alarming warning signs, including his social media post that ominously showed him in a “Born to Kill” t-shirt prior to the shooting.
Chase Yarborough, a survivor of the shooting, has endured lasting physical damage with shrapnel embedded in his heart and a bullet lodged in his head, as highlighted by his attorney, Sherry Scott Chandler. Additionally, the trial evoked poignant narratives from families of victims, including that of a Pakistani exchange student whose aspirations were tragically cut short.
The complex case has opened broader discussions regarding parental responsibilities, mental health awareness, and gun safety, resonating with an increasing public demand for accountability in the wake of repeated school shootings.
As deliberations continue, the impact of this case is expected to reach beyond the courtroom, potentially influencing legal frameworks concerning parental liability and preventive measures for future tragedies. With the jury set to resume at 9 a.m. on Monday, many await a verdict that could reshape conversations and policies surrounding gun violence and mental health in America.