By VDC staff
Students in the Winooski School District went home under unusual circumstances Wednesday after district officials responded to reports of threats from immigration enforcement agents, WPTZ News 5 reported Thursday October 16.
Superintendent Wilmer Chavarria said the district received the reports just before dismissal and decided to act immediately to protect families. Details of the threats were not shared, but Chavarria said they were considered credible.
“The decision was made that the reports were credible and that the harm, the potential harm, was also serious,” he said.
The district activated a city safety protocol for immigration-related incidents. Staff and volunteers fanned out across Winooski to help students get home safely—on foot, by car, and by bus.
“We had a lot of volunteers in the streets, down Main Street and Weaver Street, positioning themselves at different blocks to have an additional presence,” Chavarria said. “People were watching on corners, making sure kids were OK.”
The operation went smoothly, he said, but the emotional impact may last longer. “I’m worried that we’re going to be going through waves,” Chavarria said. “Every time that something happens in the community, people might question again whether it’s safe to send their children to school.”
Still, he said Wednesday’s events showed the strength of the Winooski community. “Teachers and staff came in force to make sure that we kept students safe,” he said.
Chavarria reassured families that schools remain safe and that plans are in place if similar situations arise. “We should not live under fear,” he said. “When things are not OK, we have protocols in place for that.”
No additional threats have been reported, and the district said it continues to monitor the situation. NBC5 requested comment from federal immigration agencies but has not received a response.
Discover more from Vermont Daily Chronicle
Subscribe to get the latest posts sent to your email.
Categories: Education
Seriously? Evacuate the school and send children home because Law Enforcement Officers seen in neighborhood?
Headline fixed:
Winooski paranoia activated last week
How about parents raise children to flaunt the laws of this nation while schools educate them in additional ways to not comply with this nation’s laws?
Alternate headline:
Winooski Community Fearful After Credible Kidnapping Threats Received
The word that makes your statement illogical is ‘Credible’ and not threats of kidnapping were imminent. Kidnapping occurs when someone is taken against their will outside of the color of law. ICE is acting in accordance with applicable immigration laws, which is something the previous Biden Administration refused to follow let alone enforce.
Not unless MS13, etc., are involved. Or parents involved in other criminalactivity. I myself ran into a small network selling contraband out of Burlington. From Eastern Europe.
Headline fixed (again!):
Paranoid Winooski volunteers watch on street corners
under Title 8 U.S C. Section 1324a of the U.S. Immigration Laws it states,
“It is a crime to smuggle aliens, transport unauthorized aliens domestically, or conceal or harbor unauthorized aliens”.
These laws were NOT written by the current Legislation in DC, and Donald J Trump has no skin in the game regarding how the law reads. HOWEVER, as POTUS he is responsible to make sure crimes are enforced. Anyone here in the U.S. that is not a Citizen, or does NOT have permission (visa) to be in this country legally, has broken Federal Law.
Is that where our educational system in Winooski wants to go, breaking Federal Law ❓ Many don’t like the law, and that is your right. Do what you can to get the law changed. But breaking the law because you don’t agree with it, fixes nothing, but could give you a Felony record that will follow you the rest of your life.
It appears that the message the Vermont teachers and education administrators want to teach our children is that one only needs to follow the laws they agree with or are told to by Democrats
Headline edited, fixed and rewritten:
You may have something there, Bob.
Democrats love illegals more than American citizens. I guess Winooski School District doesn’t under the difference between Illegal and immigrant.
Re: ” …threats made by immigration enforcement agents against families in the district.”
First, I want to know who identified the ‘threats’ and determined they were credible. Then I want to know what the threats actually were and who made them. If school authorities are unwilling to divulge this information, they should be held accountable.
This is tantamount to yelling ‘fire’ in a crowded theater. While school officials have the free speech right to yell whatever they choose, especially if there is a fire in the theater, they too must be held accountable for any harm their reactions may have caused.
Threats of being snatched by people without badges and being thrown into unmarked cars is real. Not just for immigrants, citizens too. One doesn’t need to commit a crime to be beaten, thrown to the ground, car windows smashed, by federal agents. Wake up. The methods employed by this administration are cruel and unusual. There’s a $50 million lawsuit against ICE for breaking an elderly man’s ribs after smashing him to the ground. There is a fire in the theatre. Yell loudly. Trump hates americans.
https://www.propublica.org/article/immigration-dhs-american-citizens-arrested-detained-against-will
Was wondering when you would bring in the anti government propaganda Nick, all pickups are done according to the Federal Rules of Criminal Procedure and within the Federal Statutes authorizing it, it doesn’t always come with a piece of paper handed to you like on TV. Although, it needs to be for a search warrant of your residence, unlike what the Biden FBI did to grandmothers whose homes were raided by FBI swat teams for the crime of silently praying on a sidewalk, while those SWAT teams were needed to make arrests of Child Predators/Traffickers/Pornographers with requests for their use denied, resulting in one case in Baltimore the death of an FBI Agent conducting the raid without protection and wounding of two others.
Ron, so you’re saying ICE has legal authority to detain and injure american citizens who have done nothing wrong? That right there, man, is the problem. Can you please show me where the Federal Rules of Criminal Procedure states that?
Nick, a peace officer, Local, State or Federal has the authority to use force necessary to stop violent or threatening activity directed at their authorized actions or someone in their custody. Trying to remove someone from their custody is an aggressive action, you do not push, punch, rush, grab a cop, or worse or someone they have just arrested. In most jurisdictions now, a law enforcement K9 is considered same as a peace officer. If you interfere, threaten or injure an officer in any way you could end up injured yourself and under arrest.
“September 2025 DHS Spokesperson Statement: “On September 9, U.S. Border Patrol conducted a targeted immigration enforcement operation at a Van Nuys car wash, resulting in the arrest of five undocumented immigrants. The owner of Valley Car Wash, a U.S. citizen, impeded the operation and was arrested for assaulting and impeding a federal officer.”
Yeah. So let me understand this correctly: if someone without a
Badge starts harassing a friend of mine and taking them into an unmarked car I’m supposed to just let it happen? Haha! Imagine a parent raising their child: “if someone comes up to you in a van and wrestles you to the ground, best to just get in the van. Likely a federal agent.” Come on, man. Seriously? How is someone supposed to know an aggressive individual is a cop if the cop doesn’t identify as such? Agents do not identify themselves and that’s ok? Please, I’m waiting for you to show me the receipts (aka the written law regarding ICE detaining and injuring citizens without identifying as a federal agent or officer.)
Jay, trusting a DHS press release from this administration is as reliable as a MAHA report. You are still falling for their BS? Good lord have mercy. Best of luck to your conscience.
Re: “So let me understand this correctly: if someone without a Badge starts harassing a friend of mine and taking them into an unmarked car I’m supposed to just let it happen?”
No. You can attempt to intervene. But if you or your friend unlawfully impedes and/or assaults a federal officer in the process of making an arrest, you are both likely to be arrested.
And the fact of the matter is that there is no universal federal or state law requiring an undercover officer to show a badge at the exact moment of arrest—albeit, in practice, they almost always do. And that the vehicle used by the federal officer is ‘marked’ or ‘unmarked’, is not restricted by universal federal or state laws either.
But if you want to impede or assault any law officer as you see fit, I will explain (as I’m doing here) why you shouldn’t.
On the other hand, I also realize the best teacher is experience. So, go ahead…make my day.
Keep in mind, everyone, that these are facts. And we all know – facts are meaningless to Rosato.
Oh, jay, you are hilarious. With your logic, an officer isn’t required to identify themself during an arrest. So as a witness I may want to intervene because that seems logical to help someone who is being assaulted by someone who doesn’t identify as a federal agent. The officer doesn’t identify, I injure the officer, I’m in trouble. How am I to know the person is an officer if they don’t identify as such? Your “logic” suggests that if we see an assault we should assume it is a lawful arrest and should move away from the scene. But what happens if the assaulted person is getting raped or stabbed and dies and the “officer” wasn’t an officer at all? Then, EVERYONE, keep in mind that H. Jay Eschelman suggested it’s better to not intervene; let the assaulted suffer. Message heard, Jay. You are a real hero.
Ron, I’m still waiting for the legal verbiage about detaining legal citizens who have done nothing wrong. Any concrete legal standing? I know the law is deep, but not as deep as your silence. Also, how is a citizen to know he is being detained legally if the officer doesn’t identify himself?
Am I to think that if some random dude assaulted you and tried to handcuff you without identifying himself you would comply? I think you’d fight back. But maybe instead you would remember: “Rosato said I should fight back, but he’s a d***. Even though this unidentified man threw me to the ground and broke my ribs I’ll still get in his vehicle as he takes me somewhere and won’t let me call a lawyer or my family. Thanks, officer, for doing your job! I’ll take a beating for Team USA so long as Rosato understands that detaining citizens for doing nothing is totally legit!”
I can’t believe your comments come from a place of compassion. Stop trying to justify violence. It does a body no good.
Now where did I see the citations of law from Rosato supporting his contention? Did I miss something? Oh, then there is this.
Vermont’s Fair and Impartial Policing Policy (mandated by state law under 20 V.S.A. § 2358 for all law enforcement agencies) requires officers to “introduce themselves and state their agency” during official interactions, particularly those perceived as enforcement actions like arrests. This applies even to undercover officers once they initiate the arrest (e.g., by announcing “You’re under arrest” or applying physical restraint). Failure to do so may violate agency policy, potentially leading to internal review or civil complaints, but it does not automatically invalidate the arrest.
“13 V.S.A. § 3017. Resisting arrest
(a) A person who intentionally attempts to prevent a lawful arrest on himself or herself, which is being effected or attempted by a law enforcement officer, when it would reasonably appear that the latter is a law enforcement officer, shall:
(1) for the first offense, be imprisoned not more than one year or fined not more than $500.00, or both;
(2) for the second offense and subsequent offenses, be imprisoned not more than two years or fined not more than $1,000.00, or both.
(b) A defendant’s mistaken belief in the unlawfulness of the arrest shall not be a defense to a prosecution under this section.
(c) A person may not be convicted of both an escape from lawful custody, as defined in subdivision 1501(a)(2) of this title, and a violation of this section. (Added 1995, No. 146 (Adj. Sess.), § 3.)
Vermont’s Fair and Impartial Policing Policy
II. Policing Impartially
As required by law, all law enforcement actions by law enforcement officers, such as investigations, detentions, traffic stops, arrests, searches and seizures, etc., must be based on reasonable suspicion, probable cause or relevant exigent circumstances, supported by articulable facts, circumstances, and conclusions that support the given action.
[Agency members] may take into account reported race, ethnicity or other personal characteristics of persons based on credible, reliable, locally relevant, temporally specific information that links a person of specific description to particular criminal incidents or other matters under investigation and is combined with other identifying information.
Personal characteristics shall not be used as a reason to arrest someone instead of citing them and shall not impact the decision on whether to seek continued custody pursuant to Vermont Rule of Criminal Procedure 3.
Citizenship or immigration status shall not be used as reason to arrest someone instead of citing them and shall not impact the decision on whether to seek continued custody pursuant to Vermont Rule of Criminal Procedure 3, except that criminal liability for offenses where one’s citizenship, or immigration status, is an essential element is a factor that may be considered in a Rule 3 determination.
(Example: An individual convicted of a violent felony is removed by immigration authorities after serving their sentence. Unlawful re-entry by that individual may result in substantial prison time – 10 years or more. Those factors may be considered because the prospect of long incarceration can be relevant to case-by-case evaluation of flight risk.)
Note that per Section V of this Policy, [Agency members] do not have authority to investigate civil immigration laws and that [agency members] shall not ask about or investigate a person’s citizenship or immigration status unless information regarding citizenship or immigration status is an essential element of a crime.
Personal characteristics and/or citizenship or immigration status, including the existence of a civil immigration detainer, shall not affect the detainee’s ability to participate in pre-charge or police-initiated pre-court processes such as referral to diversion or a Community Justice Center.
Under federal and state law, law enforcement agencies are required to provide qualified interpretation services, either in person or telephonically, to any person in need of it.”
Re: “….. detaining legal citizens who have done nothing wrong.”
It’s called ‘reasonable suspicion’ and ‘probable cause’.
In Vermont, the statutes regarding arrests are primarily outlined in 12 V.S.A. § 3577. This statute provides the framework and guidelines for law enforcement officers regarding arrest procedures.
Key Aspects of 12 V.S.A. § 3577
Arrest Without a Warrant
Felony Offenses: An officer can arrest a person without a warrant if they have probable cause to believe that the individual has committed or is committing a felony.
Misdemeanor Offenses: Similar authority is granted for misdemeanors if the offense is committed in the presence of the officer.
Continued Custody
For felony offenses, a person arrested without a warrant may be held in custody until the charge is adjudicated.
For misdemeanor offenses, individuals typically have a right to be released with a citation unless specific exceptions apply.
Jay, thanks for proving my point……… officers must “introduce themselves and state their agency” during official interactions, particularly those perceived as enforcement actions like arrests. This applies even to undercover officers once they initiate the arrest.”
Unidentified ICE agents are crooks. Trump hates america.
“…(e.g., by announcing “You’re under arrest” or applying physical restraint). Failure to do so may violate agency policy, potentially leading to internal review or civil complaints, but it does not automatically invalidate the arrest.”
Warrants and badge displays are not necessarily required.
Re: “Unidentified ICE agents are crooks. Trump hates america.”
Clearly, Rosato, you’re the one who hates America.
Well that’s great. So the next time someone, anyone, tries to assault an individual and they say “I work for DHS” they must be trusted, even if they do not. Is that the message we should teach children? “If someone says they are a cop, there’s no need to look for ID or ask for help if they are trying to kidnap you. Just get in the van and shut up.” Thanks for the advice.
Re: “If someone says they are a cop, there’s no need to look for ID or ask for help if they are trying to kidnap you. Just get in the van and shut up.”
It’s just like the Winooski school district circumstance… yelling fire in a crowded theater when no threat actually exists. In this country (that you seem to hate so much), you have the right to say anything you want.
So, the answer to your question is, No. You can resist arrest, or you can stay seated in the burning theater, to demonstrate your constitutional sovereignty. But whatever your choice, be it making a false arrest, resisting arrest, yelling fire in a theater (or a school district), you have the right to act of your own fruition…. and you will be held accountable under the rule of law.
But again, you’re not just moving the goal posts in this discussion. You’re playing a game on an imaginary field of dreams. Recall, if you will, your first attempt to score points in this regard… citing a $50 million lawsuit against DHS by the owner of a Van Nuys Valley Car Wash, implying that the owner (at the very least) didn’t ”… need to commit a crime to be beaten, thrown to the ground, car windows smashed, by federal agents”. When, in fact, the owner of the Valley Car Wash wasn’t kidnapped but was arrested for assaulting and impeding a federal officer.
I don’t know if you can’t function competently as an educated adult, Rosato. But, so far, you’re not making much of an argument that you can. In fact, your juxtaposition of the Valley Car Wash circumstance with the hypothetical example of someone being an “… assaulted person … getting raped or stabbed and [dying]”, seems to me to be delusional. That could be taken as a ‘red flag’ in someone else’s book.
You are proof that knowing things and understanding them are two very different things.
Re: “You are proof that knowing things and understanding them are two very different things.”
I agree. But at least I have the knowledge. It’s a prerequisite for understanding.
This shows the very low proficiency (<13%) in teaching about law enforcement.
If you are here illegally, you are 10000%aware that at any moment you could be detected and deported. Not a surprise at all. If you choose to go ahead and have a spouse/ kids here in the US (or if they came with you illegally too), ALL of you know that you are on risky territory. You are choosing to play Russian roulette. Minor children should be deported with their parents, that is only logical. Again, the only people that seem surprised when immigration laws get enforced are progressive American citizens. Talk to any illegal immigrant and they have a far more pragmatic attitude- (i.e. darn, they finally caught me. Oh well, free plane ride home to see the family until the next time I try to cross). These theatrics are absurd.
Nick,
Propublica is half truths, with a dash of leftwing spices.
Dispute the info, Tim. Not the messenger. Try again? How about that $50 million lawsuit? Tackle that reality or are you comfortable with elderly men getting broken ribs from a “lawful” ice raid?
Nick, once again, think before you speak. Why unmarked cars, no badges, ( not true by the way, they are wearing them), and masks? Death threats, violence, sniper tried to take some out in Texas? If you are here legally, you have nothing to worry about. You will be processed, and sent on your way. If your not supposed to be here, namely you broke the law crossing the border ILLEGALLY, you should be watching out. You’re going home.
If your speeding on the interstate, do you watch for cops? Yes, your breaking the law. If you drive the speed limit, you’re good.
Illegals are not citizens, which means they dont get due process, nor do they have rights.
And I’ll bet if ya take a step back, some of the citizens being arrested, beaten, kidnapped, etc. Probably resisted arrest when told otherwise.
Do us all a favor, cross the Canadian border without permission. Perhaps the Mexican border? What do thinks going to happen without documents? Use your head.
“…. You will be processed and sent in your way” Wow! The price of freedom. Get detained, brutalized, you’ll be sent in your way. Come on man. So sad.
Nick, Give me proof people are getting brutalized, other than one person, taken out of context. And dont forget, anyone can sue anyone, doesn’t mean you have a case. And yes, if you are a law abiding citizen of the United States, you will be moved along, as they get ILLEGAL criminals out of our country. Wow, just wow, you sir are diluted.
Josh, throw a few veterans in the mix. Surely they understand being detained as a citizen is understandable. No worries…. Oh wait, he’s suing the administration as well. We should treat veterans with disdain, eh? Lock them up so they miss their children’s birthdays. If you were in charge, I imagine this would happen more frequently.
https://www.militarytimes.com/
Sorry Nick, I will always support our Veterans over illegal aliens.
As in you support them being detained for days for just trying to get to work? That’s unfortunate. I think ICE should detain people with more caution. But those who voted for trump wanted this, right?
Nick your comments are childish and Uber annoying. You can’t be as dumb as you are portraying yourself. I did vote for this, a crackdown, a stiff hand, not Biden’s limp wrist. We are in this mess because of his presidency, and Trump needs to be the father and crack the whip. Your logic is, at the very least, a waste of all of our time. You know none of us think even remotely the way you portray us. Stop being a troll.
Well said, Josh. I am as dumb as I sound… but at least I attack the message instead of the messenger. I know you don’t think the way I portray you. I’m pushing buttons to find out where you stand. And as your comments suggest, you are unable to comment about the overreach of the current administration detaining US army veterans. I’m glad you support veterans. But it saddens me that when they are detained by the current administration for trying to go to work you are silent. If you cared, you would support George Retes and ask the administration to take their enforcement down a notch and be more cautious. Retes missed his daughters third birthday because of ICE. As a father, I feel his pain. Is that too much to ask of you?
FALSE CLAIM: George Retes was wrongly arrested and held by ICE.
THE FACTS: As U.S. Customs and Border Protection (CBP) and ICE agents were executing criminal search warrants on July 10 at the marijuana sites in Camarillo, CA, George Retes—a U.S. citizen—became violent and refused to comply with law enforcement. He challenged agents and blocked their route by refusing to move his vehicle out of the road. CBP arrested Retes for assault.
Prime example, play stupid games, get stupid prizes. Follow the rules, follow the law. If he had complied, he may have missed the birthday party, but he wouldn’t have been in jail.
Stupidity is a defense in most states, but not recommended.
This isn’t overreach, you just don’t like someone stepping up and doing what needs to be done. You’d prefer the quiet, docile, get along with everyone, Republican party. This is the new one, where America and Americans are first. Where, you go home when you can’t assimilate. Where you support the free country you live in, or go support the one you want to be in.
Trump is my President, he’s also yours. I would suggest you ride the train, instead of complaining as it passes you by. CHOO, CHOO, ALL ABOARD!
Josh, dispute the facts, not the messanger.
The Congress of the United States has passed laws regarding immigration procedures, and how illegal aliens found in the United States are to be removed. The Congress has given near plenary power to the Executive branch in devising the policies and processes by which those responsibilities are to be performed.
When state and local governments interfere, you end up here — 10 U.S.C.
………”Chavarria said the effort was a success, but fears the impact of the incident could linger.”…….and a simple question Mr.Chavarria would be, why is it going to “Linger”???
Nick, I believe you skipped over where I did dispute your claim. The paragraphs proceeding were icing on the cake. Say what you will, many are now seeing you for who you are, air. Hot air.
Josh, you’re just as much annoying, hotair as I am. The difference is I have humility.
There, there, now play nice and use your indoor voice.