INDIANAPOLIS – Just weeks into the school year, a 7-year-old Indianapolis Public Schools student told his mother his teacher allowed other students to physically abuse him in class.

He said he was punched, slapped and slammed to the floor, all at the encouragement of his instructor.

But his mother’s pleadings about his persistent fears of going to school fell on deaf ears for months, until video of the teacher’s alleged “fight club-style” discipline came to light, validating the boy’s claims.

His family has now filed a civil lawsuit against Indianapolis Public Schools.

The lawsuit in Marion Superior Court revolves around the 7-year-old boy’s ordeal at George Washington Carver Montessori IPS School 87. The boy has special needs, “with disabilities, including sensory sensitivities, an executive function disorder, and probable learning disabilities.”

These disabilities qualified him for a section 504 plan recognizing the need for a “higher level of supervision and safety.”

The lawsuit alleged that a teacher allowed him to be beaten in class on multiple occasions, with one of those incidents being recorded on the teacher’s phone.

The lawsuit claimed the teacher orchestrated a “reprehensible ‘fight club’ type of discipline within his classroom over a span of three months” in which he “encouraged” and “instigated” the boy’s physical abuse. The boy said the teacher had held him down on two occasions, allowing other students to hit him, according to the lawsuit.

The teacher, identified in court documents and an Indiana Department of Child Services report as Julious Johnican, was allowed to resign from the district. The lawsuit named Johnican along with a substitute teacher, several administrators and the district itself.

The boy’s mother accused leadership at all levels of failing to keep her son safe and said administrators initially rebuffed the boy’s claims of abuse at school.

Video of one incident, which showed a student beating the child in class with the apparent backing of Johnican, proved to be key evidence in the case. Johnican had arranged a parent-teacher conference and intended to show the boy’s parents a video of the classroom environment to assuage their concerns about his treatment and safety.

However, during the Nov. 1 meeting, Johnican instead showed the wrong video—one in which another student was attacking their son. He accidentally turned up the volume, allowing the parents to hear him encourage the other student to beat their 7-year-old.

“Don’t mess with me,” the attacking child is heard repeatedly saying during the video as the 7-year-old cries. He strikes the boy in the head and face.

Johnican, recording the fight on his phone, doesn’t intervene. “You guys done?” he asks in the video. “That’s right. You get him.”

As the fight comes to an end, the attacking boy says, “I’m gonna get him again.”

Johnican replies, “I know you want to get him when he does things.”

Before the video came to light, administrators and the teacher had dismissed the parents’ concerns, with Johnican suggesting the boy displayed behavioral issues and was “lying and/or mentally ill” about being physically assaulted in class. He suggested the boy was “fabricating stories” so he could get out of going to school.

But the second grader had told his mother he was afraid to go to class and reported on multiple occasions that he’d been “attacked, bullied, threatened, and injured in the classroom” from August 2023 through November 2023, according to the lawsuit. She had communicated with his teacher on several occasions.

On Sept. 22, 2023, the boy called his mother from school. Frantic and in tears, he couldn’t clearly communicate what happened. The mother left work and drove to school. She found her son “upset, traumatized, and shaken,” according to the lawsuit. No one at the school explained what happened to her son or why she received the phone call.

Before she left the school, the mother spoke to her son, who told her another student slammed his head against a desk, pulled him to the floor and hit him repeatedly in the head. The boy said the abuse was “being done at the instruction of the teacher.”

The mother said the school didn’t follow up about an investigation or provide additional information. The parent tried to schedule a meeting about the incident, but she was “repeatedly informed that it was her child who was disruptive, lying and that this was a sign of a disordered personality in the child and related to his ADHD,” according to the lawsuit.

The boy also told his mother that he heard a substitute teacher say that “special needs students were demonically possessed.” The same substitute teacher, according to the DCS investigation, appeared to support the fight, telling an administrator, “[They’re] bad kids, that’s what you do!” when asked about the September incident.

The boy said staff told him he “was bad and ‘needed to be baptized’ and that ‘holy water needed to be poured on him’ to cure him of his evil,” according to the lawsuit.

The boy’s grades dropped precipitously. He pleaded with his mother not to send him to school. And as the days and weeks passed, and he told his mother he was being attacked and that his teacher had apparently supported it, the school met his accounts with skepticism.

Then the video surfaced during the Nov. 1 parent-teacher conference, spurring an investigation from the Indiana Department of Child Services.

The DCS investigation validated the boy’s claims, saying they were substantiated “due to the preponderance of evidence” surrounding the case. Johnican had “knowingly and willingly engaged in behaviors toward the victims that jeopardized their overall well-being while in his care as a teacher at IPS 87,” according to the DCS report.

The teacher told a DCS investigator the two students were sometimes friends, but other times didn’t get along and had “many negative engagements.” On the day Johnican recorded the video, he said he didn’t have enough patience and decided not to interfere. He videotaped the incident “to have proof of what was happening.”

Johnican eventually resigned, with the DCS report indicating he was given the choice between termination and resignation. The boy withdrew from IPS and is now being homeschooled. He has been diagnosed with post-traumatic stress disorder and requires weekly therapeutic counseling.

The lawsuit claims disability discrimination; intentional infliction of serious emotional distress; negligent infliction of emotional distress; negligent care and supervision; negligent hiring, retention and supervision; and inadequate policies and protection.

The plaintiff is seeking damages including punitive and compensatory damages and attorney fees. The lawsuit requests a jury trial.

Indianapolis Public Schools released the following statement:

Indianapolis Public Schools (IPS) does not tolerate the type of behavior alleged in the complaint and takes reports of potential abuse and neglect seriously. When IPS learned of the teacher’s conduct, the Department of Child Services was immediately notified, and the teacher was removed from the classroom and suspended. The teacher had no further contact with students and is no longer employed by IPS. Because this matter is the subject of pending litigation, it is inappropriate to comment further on our investigation of this matter.

Indianapolis Public Schools

On Tuesday afternoon, IPS released another statement:

IPS does not tolerate the type of behavior alleged in the complaint and takes reports of potential abuse and neglect seriously. When IPS learned of the teacher’s conduct, the Department of Child Services (DCS) was immediately notified, and the teacher was removed from the classroom and suspended. The teacher had no further contact with students and is no longer employed by IPS. 

  • IPS was not aware of any fights encouraged or sanctioned by this or any other teacher from the student’s parents or otherwise, until the parent emailed the principal at 6:58 p.m. Oct. 30.
  • The principal first viewed this email early morning the next day (Oct 31), and immediately contacted DCS and IPS Human Resources.
  • The teacher was immediately removed from the building and never returned to the classroom.
  • The teacher was interviewed by Human Resources on November 2 as part of its investigation into the matter. The employee resigned during that meeting before IPS could initiate termination proceedings, which the district was prepared to do based on the information received from the internal investigation. 

Because this matter is the subject of pending litigation, it is inappropriate to comment further on our investigation of this matter.