Posted on 01/28/2006 6:04:00 PM PST by NormsRevenge
I'm pretty sure it is criminal (local or state) to publish personal details without written permission, to defame, to slander and to mock.
Criminal vs. Civil matters to teachers because teachers don't get paid a whole lot, and the victim does not have to pay lawyers up front if it is a criminal case.
I think you need to lighten up. The kid got suspended and he earned that. But the principal wasn't satisfied with suspending the kid and he ended up doing alot more to the kid that was simply out of line.
The article mentions the site as a "parody"...now, how about if this kid had a photo of the principal on his bedroom wall full of darts, and another student saw it and ratted him out to the school administration?..does this warrent punishment as well?...the fact remains this was not done in a school paper nor a school website, and frankly is none of the schools business, if the principal does'nt like it he can sue for slander.......good luck.
School officials are not parents? School officials cannot tell parents how to raise their kids? This is coming from a leftist liberal group?? Has not the left pounded into our heads over the last 3 or 4 decades that the school is there to replace parents and that they know best? What has happened to the ACLU? And more importantly, why is this not the focus of the thread.The ACLU's actually performing their ostensible mission here: defending individuals against government abuses.
My question would be what conservatives are doing defending a "village" mentality that gives the schools control over what kids do at home.
-Eric
The juvenile delinquent created a phony profile. It doesn't say that he indicated it was a parody in the profile. I hope the principal countersues and that a person's reputation is given due consideration. Freedom of speech isn't unlimited, and pretending to be someone else is fraud.Ted Kennedy
-Eric
what if the kid, instead, took an ad out in the newspaper and stated the guy was a drug addict or wife abuser?
"The ACLU's actually performing their ostensible mission here: defending individuals against government abuses."
That is why I am so shocked. Usually the ACLU is on the side of the school against the parent and fighting to allow the school to become the parent. Now this branch is fighting against that.
It does make me wonder about why they (conservatives) are defending the "it takes a village" concept. Politics does weird things to people.
Not what happened. I just saw a movie called "The Chorus". The teacher leaves the room for a few minutes to return to a caricature of him on the chalk board and the student that did it still drawing.
He proceeds to draw a caricature of said student to the laughter of the whole class.
The cure for offensive speech is more speech.
Please refer to post # 84
Yes, if he's foolish enough to sue for slander--his frivolous remedy, at least he'll have a shot at Larry King like Falwell did when he sued for a parody of his family (and lost, I think at the Supreme Court level no less).
A public figure like Falwell poses a more difficult target to prove a slander or libel charge against. Actual malice has to be proven. The principal was not such, or at least I don't see anyone claiming that he was. But the principal should have sued, rather than abusing the school administrative process which was not intended to avenge personal grudges.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.