Posted on 02/25/2010 5:18:17 AM PST by Kid Shelleen
Well thanks. That is a new one for me. You must not know me at all. The nasty biker on my profile wouldn't like me to bare or share. He doesn't play well with others.
Yes, I agree with most of that. Unfortunately, courts have often found schools to indeed be above the law. The technician who activated the camera has already been put on leave by the district, which wouldn’t make sense if there really were a theft report.
From the article, the family did not pay the insurance fee, so the boy was not allowed to take the laptop home with him. If that’s the case, then the school could well have reported it missing. From my own experience, I suspect the district knew very well it was not stolen, but by a technicality, it may well fall within a legitimate “missing” report.
The district did some really bad things (and typical things) but that doesn’t mean they’ll lose the lawsuit.
I have to disagree. Your posts sound as if you've been taking this story very personally. You keep saying a lynch mob is forming. But, if you go back and read the first page on this thread, you'll see that FReepers were beginning to wonder about the family who filed the lawsuit. Literally hundreds of parents in Lower Merion are trying to stop the lawsuit. I don't see a lynch mob forming to go after the IT department.
When you revealed that you work in IT for a school district, it all made sense then. But, you could've shared information here without the insults. We all would've been interested in learning more from an insider.
I've tried to explain the property rights aspect. I've tried to point out that not all the facts are in.
But, we've tried to explain it, too. We all understand the importance of property rights and contractual agreements. We differ with you on whether or not the school policy was clear enough and whether or not a school has the right to photograph someone at home by remotely activating a webcam. The case hasn't gone to court yet, but there's nothing wrong with discussing what we do know so far.
If they had not acted on information not related to the *missing* laptop, this whole thing would have been a non-issue.
There are other factors in this, as there are other kids who reported their webcam lights going on at random, indicating that someone was activating the webcams.
Something doesn’t smell right about the whole thing. I think the district slipped on this one and got caught. Their reactions don’t indicate that they’re innocent, but that they know they got caught red-handed. Too much back pedaling.
When it goes to trial and if they get off on some technicality, all it means is that they managed to get out of it. It doesn’t mean that what they did wasn’t wrong; it just means they don’t pay for it. Not all of us are mindless enough to not be able to recognize wrong doing without a verdict from a jury.
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.