[EBH]

Yes and No.

I thought it was illegal to record stuff in a person's home without prior notification or a warrant. Thereby the school is wrong on at least one level.

But, what if this had prevented or at least provided documentation of a crime. Would one feel the same way regarding the web facilitated intrusion?

Instead of it catching this boy, what if it had tracked the rape of child?

[christianhomeschoolmommaof3]

We have liberties in this country. The end doesn’t justify the means EVER.

[Tired of Taxes]

I could be wrong, but I read EBH’s post differently. It didn’t seem as if EBH was justifying the school district’s behavior. It read as if EBH were asking: How would people react if a violent crime had been caught through these laptops? I’m guessing we all would be glad the perp was caught, but we still would be shocked by the two-way camera part of the story.

[SeeSharp]

Instead of it catching this boy, what if it had tracked the rape of child?

Then we would all see the rape on YouTube, but the perpetrator would go free since the evidence would be completely inadmissible.

[muawiyah]

Whether it's their job or not, the school is an agent of the state. Here's a case where that agent was caught wearing jackboots.

They needed a search warrant to do what they were doing. If they'd found evidence of a crime underway the perp would walk because of the absence of a warrant.