Printable View
Home of the brave,
Land of the free,
Why won't you let him be what he wants to be?
Here is another one that stinks to high heaven................
http://www.djournal.com/pages/story....85311&div=News
eighth-grader (wtf?)................I hope the whole goddam lot are sued for everything that they have...........no pension..............nothing.Quote:
a South Pontotoc Middle School eighth-grader was accused last year of hacking into the school's computers
:firedevil
Unfortunately, the way our laws are written, the morons that made the poor decisions will NOT be held accountable. The taxpayers of that school district will pay dearly.
I am not sure I understand your disbelief.Quote:
eighth-grader (wtf?).
It appears that the student was well known for his computer knowledge, and proved it when he provided the Principal ( during initial questioning ) with a demonstration disk of how a key logger works. { from the court fillings }
Maybe, maybe not. It is going to depend on a lot of things, including State laws, case law, etc.Quote:
Unfortunately, the way our laws are written, the morons that made the poor decisions will NOT be held accountable. The taxpayers of that school district will pay dearly.
It is the DEEP POCKETS THEORY
The Principal and Superintendent don't really have that much money, and the big government entity does, so sue them! Every shyster lawyer uses the same tactic.
If the School district can prove the Principal and the Superintendent acted outside of their authority, and in violation of existing policy, they may be able to remove themselves from the suit.
I probably see this a little differently then many ( and certainly then their attorney. )
Before making any judgement a court is going to have to look at the events.
One of the things they will consider is the fact that a school acts in loco parentis for the students.
They have a right to question a student, and it may indeed have been proper for them to temporarily transfer that student while they were investigating the allegations.
Where I see the big problem is with the termination of the student's mother.
We do not know all the facts, and if, as alleged, she was terminated for requesting full disclosure of the investigation of her child, I would probably have gone with a Fifth Amendment violation.
But, having said that, I probably would not have filled in Federal Court without first seeking remedy as provided via state law and contractually.
But then again, I am not familiar with the Mississippi Judicial System!
I don't think that I could have got a better admission of guilt if I had beaten it out of him with a length of pressure hose :lildevil:Quote:
- When Derek said his principal's wife, who also worked at the school, had asked him about such programs, the principal accused Derek of helping spy on him.
Actually I suspect that this lawyer is a lot smarter than you give him credit for. What he is trying to do is drive a wedge between the education authority and two of its employees?Quote:
It is the DEEP POCKETS THEORY
The Principal and Superintendent don't really have that much money, and the big government entity does, so sue them! Every shyster lawyer uses the same tactic.
Kind of "go down with the ship or toss the drowning rats overboard"?
I doubt if an arbitrary 45 day suspension would be classed as acting in loco parentis. It is, in fact, a forfeiture of such implied authority.Quote:
One of the things they will consider is the fact that a school acts in loco parentis for the students.
They are obviously not competent to undertake such a task.Quote:
while they were investigating the allegations.
I guess they have already displayed their respect for due process?Quote:
I probably would not have filled in Federal Court without first seeking remedy as provided via state law and contractually.