You are a scary person.
He was busted for eating candy? No one even bothered to do anything except to go right to the confrontations and accusations?
I’d be calling for that idiot’s head. My lawyer would be too.
Invasion of privacy, false accusations, general sloppiness, and monumental stupidity. It keeps getting better and better. I’d be suing the shit out of somebody myself.
He has nothing to hide. Hell, do the full cavity search in a public place. After all privacy isn’t a big thing. It doesn’t have to be conducted by “the law” either. Any petty bureaucrat will do. After all, he has nothing to hide.
Right?
Some did figure out there was something crummy going on, see post 94.
I can tell you that right now one of my gripes with my university is how they handle “appropiate internet usage”, and being able to demonstrate that they are ip-blocking WoW for their residential customers does me exactly zero good.
There have been cases of landlords installing cameras in their houses and spying on renters. They have had cameras in showers. But I believe in some jurisdictions, it was not illegal. Logically, it should have been, but if no statute exists, they can not prosecute.
I’d imagine its different if children are involved and the taper is now in possession of what is, effectively, child pornography.
Maybe I’m a delicate flower but I HATE the idea of being seen when I don’t realize I am. It’s not about doing something wrong. When I’m alone, and I’m just…being unself conscious, private me, I don’t want to be seen. Even setting aside nudity or masturbation or anything. Right now I’m sitting in my apartment alone, but I just hate the idea of someone watching me because this is my private, alone time. I can’t explain it, but being spied on feels like having something robbed from you.
And it’s just so. fucking. creepy.
Has it been mentioned on this thread yet that the FBI is looking into possible federal criminal charges?
Yep, I called it, earlier in the thread when I mentioned probable cause, the need for a warrant, etc.
From the article:
Slight update:
…"
The lawsuit, filed Tuesday on behalf of Harriton High School student Blake Robbins, claims that an assistant principal reprimanded the 15-year-old for “improper behavior in his home” that was captured by the embedded camera on Robbins’ school-issued Apple MacBook.
Robbins told reporters outside his house last night that the improper behavior he was cited for was eating Mike & Ike candies, which he said the school mistook for illegal pills…"
http://www.philly.com/dailynews/local/20100220_Spying_on_L__Merion_students_sparks_probes_by_FBI__Montco_detectives.html
It’s perhaps illustrative to note that the bolded language from the linked article is false. This is typical; the article linked in the OP made the same error. The complaint (pdf) in fact makes no allegation that the student was reprimanded.
Just goes to show that we can’t always trust what we read.
This is what Mike and Ike candy looks like for anyone wondering and not wanting to google it.
Or that we can’t always grasp what we read.
(bolding mine)
That is a reprimand.
[
](Reprimand Definition & Meaning | Dictionary.com)
a person in a position of authority telling someone under their authority that they have done something wrong is a reproof, a rebuke, a condemnation, an admonishment, and yes, a reprimand.
Stunning and bizarre.
That’s why I only allow my kids to eat Hot Tamales.
I don’t think that’s necessarily true, especially in a situation where formal reprimands are a matter of record. Just telling something that what they did was wrong might be a correction, but a condemnation? A rebuke? Suppose I coach a youth basketball team and I tell a player that he is taking off on the wrong foot when he lays it in. Is that a reprimand? Is it a rebuke? Suppose I say “No biggie, you’ll get it next time,” have I reprimanded him? Really?
I was once detained by two San Diego police officers for eating a Kit Kat bar.
Nor would I, and the fact that we have to say it shows something horribly and terribly wrong with the legal system in the U.S.
You just know the lawsuits against the school district looking for piles of cash in punitive damages are going to start stacking up. The people filing the lawsuits will be fully aware of the fact that the money isn’t coming from anyone who did anything wrong. It’s coming from the school district. Where does the school district get its money? The taxpayers.
So any parents of kids in that school that file a lawsuit looking for cash damages are basically taking money away from the other parents of kids in that school, and their friends and neighbors who don’t have kids in the school, too.
Yeah, I know – some of that money will come from insurance companies, who will proceed to raise their rates and once more land the bill in the laps of their friends and neighbors.
The philly.com article linked above says that the incident was placed in the student’s record.
Why would the lawyers withhold the detail about the Mike and Ike candy, and then allow the family to release the information in a press conference after the story had made the news? (I assume the information was released with the attorneys’ consent). It strikes me as grandstanding.