Ah, I see what you’re saying. The school had to take some sort of action quickly after the fight, and you believe they didn’t have the full evidence available at that time. You’re arguing that they did the best they could with the information they had at the time.

Did you happen to click any of the links in the article?

She just felt like she was victimized multiple times — by the pictures and by the school not believing her and by them putting her on a bus and then expelling her for her actions,” her father, Joseph Daniels, said in an interview.

From that link:

When the girl stepped onto the bus 15 minutes later, the boy was showing the AI-generated images to a friend. Fake nude images of her friends were visible on the boy’s phone, the girl said, a claim backed up by a photo taken on the bus. A video from the school bus showed at least a half-dozen students circulating the images, said Martin, the superintendent, at a school board meeting.

The preponderance of the evidence available to the school at the time she was suspended was in her favor, and against the boy. Yet they chose to take action against her rather than him.

Does any of that win me a little more goodwill on the timeline?

I would note that the school had fucked up before the physical altercation, by putting her and her harasser in close proximity on the same bus, effectively unsupervised, after they were aware of the complaints she made against him.