[ValerieUSA]

Mott was at the school to take pictures. So?
If he had spotted vandals in the building at the time and caught them and arrested them and prevented further damage, wuld you have a problem with that, too?
It wasn't wrong for him to be there.
It wasn't wrong for him to take pictures.

[fml]

Mott was at the school to take pictures. So?
_________

Right!! If he had been there to take pictures because he was pleased with the teaching this would never have been made an issue of.

[dirtboy]

If he had spotted vandals in the building at the time and caught them and arrested them and prevented further damage, wuld you have a problem with that, too?

That is within his official sworn duties.

It wasn't wrong for him to be there. It wasn't wrong for him to take pictures.

That is NOT within his sworn duties. It's that simple.

It's amazing how people will engage in such convoluted reasoning to avoid such a simple conclusion.

[r9etb]

If he had spotted vandals in the building at the time and caught them and arrested them and prevented further damage, wuld you have a problem with that, too?

I'd have a real problem with that, as would the courts: Mott was outside his jurisdiction, where he didn't belong during his on-duty hours.