Apparently a girl was texting her father in class. When confronted by the teacher, she refused to give her her cellphone and apparently continued to text. The teacher then calls the police (what crime has been committed here)?
The police then ask her if she has a cell phone. When the girl denies having one the police has a female officer apparently strip search her for the phone which the girl had indeed hidden in her pants.
The question here becomes: why was the police officer able to strip search the teen? What crime was she accused of committing? Are police allowed to violate search and seizure laws when it comes to students? I’m pretty sure a police officer couldn’t strip search me, heck, couldn’t search me at all unless there was a reasonable suspicion that I was involved in some sort of crime, correct?
As an aside, she was apparently also charged with lying to the police. So the police can lie to you, but you can’t lie to the police? Who wrote that law? Of course this just goes to show that you should always keep your mouth shut when questioned by the police. But how far can this law go?
If the officer asks me if my cell phone is red, and I’m color blind and say no, it’s brown, can he charge me with lying to the police?
Kind of sounds like over-reaction here and a poorly behaved girl, but without a lot more information, it’s really hard to say. Was she being combative, threatening? Who knows, really.
As I said, not enough information, but cops get called to private homes all the time to deal with domestic disturbances. What’s the difference, really? Sometimes, well, lots of times, their job seems to be defusing situations that really aren’t criminal. Sounds like a waste of money, but it’s not really if it works and, yes, people *should *grow up.
Now this is where I really start having a problem with this. I’m not sure a strip search for anything other than illegal substances and weapons is justified. Particularly when the suspect is underage. Unless the strip search was part of her admission to juvenile detention in connection to her arrest, in which case, I think officers have an obligation to ensure that potential contraband doesn’t enter the system.
Yes, I believe they call it obstruction and it’s bad. Don’t do it.
If you read the actual arrest report that’s linked in that article, and take it at face value:
The girl was texting in class, refused to stop texting, and refused to leave when told to do so by the teacher.
The teacher then called the “School Resource Officer” (who is apparently stationed in the school at all times) to remove her. Presumably, teachers are not allowed to physically remove disruptive students themselves if they refuse to leave when told to.
The student was brought to the principals office, and continually lied about having a phone with her, and texting. She was charged with disorderly conduct when they found the phone, and lying about having the phone was one of the circumstances that led to the charge, not a charge of its own.
I’d quote the actual report, but it’s a scanned image, not text.
Right, because your colorblind hypothetical is just like this one. They had no right to ask her if she had a cell phone in her possession! No right at all!
There aren’t enough :rolleyes:.
ETA: Do you really have no concept of the difference between intentionally trying to deceive the police for your own gain, and well, being fucking colorblind?
I don’t even understand what the relevancy of the phone was. Is it a crime to have a cell phone? If the answer is no, then why are they looking for it?
The point is that she refused to leave the classroom (she might not have been disruptive to the classroom, more likely she was just annoying the teacher, but that doesn’t matter).
She should have been removed and taken to the principal. who then could have asked about the cell phone, and if she said she had none, that’s the end of that.
Principal should have said you have detention for disrupting class and your parents will get a note. End of story. Why was the phone searched for?
I’m just not seeing a problem here, other than the teacher needs to work on her classroom management skills. Kid texts in class (violation of school policy), refuses to stop (violation of school policy, class disruption), is turned over to school security in the form of the Resource Officer. Students denies even having a phone (obviously lying to escape discipline) and is examined for phone. My bet is that the outline of the phone could be seen through her pants. Student gets a ticket and a suspension. No hu-hu.
This was power play. She took it as far as it could go.* SHE *drove it here.
You are NOT supposed to have your phone out in class. You are NOT supposed to text in class. When the teacher tells you to stop texting and give up the phone, you give up the phone. When the teacher tells you to leave because you have back-talked and disrupted the class, you leave. When the cops ask you to give up the phone, you give up the phone.
If she had just stopped texting and put the phone away, there would be no incident. *That’s *when you give her detention and send a note.
Look at the police report. The little hellion was known to the officer, because of “prior negative contacts”. I believe the news report is giving us a very sanitized version of her behaviour. She was bound and determined to escalate this.
And she was searched “incident to the arrest”. Everyone is searched when arrested.
Probably the penalty for having a phone (or using a phone, depending on the school) is to have the phone taken up and your parents have to come get it or you have to pay some sort of minor fine to get it back. If at the end of it, she gets to keep the phone, she’s learned that insubordination pays off.
Sounds to me like she was being a disrespectful, obnoxious brat. When she wouldn’t leave the classroom, the teacher had no choice but to call school security. The girl then trie to lie about the cell phone, but, according to the report, the officer saw her stuff the cell phone into the sleeve of her sweat shirt and then shift it around. Without getting into the blow-by-blow, once they were in the principal’s office, everyone could basically see that she’d stuffed the phone down her pants, so they called a female officer to frisk her for it and recover it.
The report also says this girl had a history of prior behaviors like this. I have no problem with anything that occurred. There was no overreaction and no “strip search.” If anything, she got off too easy. What she needs is a fucking crack in the mouth from her parents. That’swhat I would have gotten for acting like that in a classroom at her age, and that’s why I didn’t act like that.