Junior high girls suspended for text messages about teacher

The texts identified the teacher and warned "Don’t let this man near you" and "He will rape you." Rumors about the teacher's conduct were previously investigated and found not to be credible. (Tacoma News Tribune)

Comments

[KDP]

This is libel at least. But punishment is kind of a Catch-22 isn't it? The parents would probably end up tangling with child services if they did what any parent should do to administer discipline.

It's too bad that libel isn't prosecuted aggressively. When you need truth to back your accusations it kind of puts a damper on telling lies.

[BlueMary]

Vicious little C8nts

[Lambiepie]

Little Foxes

[Farmer Bob and the City]

Sterilize him.

[big kahuna]

--How did the school "become aware" of the text messages?

--Any communication between students is now punishable?

--Forwarding a message leads to punishment?

--Is this true everywhere in the US now?

No one else is stunned that a private message results in punishment? Students have no free speech rights?

Phew!

[Sheila]

There is free speech, and there is speech which attempts to ruin someone's life. The law has something to say on that score.

[nauip]

There has always been gossip and false rumors amongst students in school. It's just that there is now there is tangible proof as to who said what, when. Something that kids will have to learn is that with all this technology comes traceability and what you say online, over a text message *could* be found. These kids learned the hard way.

[Lambiepie]

sending emails to friends and strangers accusing someone of being a rapist is not free speech, it's defamation of character and libel, which means the teacher can sue in civil court (and win)

[Phranqlin]

A Mean Girl with a cell phone is just a faster, stupider Mean Girl.

[KDP]

Hey! That pretty much says it in a nutshell, Phranq.

[Ben Bohn]

CONGRESS SHALL MAKE NO LAW respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or ABRIDGING THE FREEDOM OF SPEECH, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the Government for a redress of grievances.

[oaw]

Legally any "child" under the age of 18 does not have the right to free speech. Freedom of speech is a right only held by adults just as any child does not own so much as the cloths they are wearing. I was shocked when i got suspended in junior high 22 years ago for something i said but their it is, after that i paid more attention to what my rights were and they are very few.

[Sheila]

Libelous or slanderous speech and writing are not protected by the First Amendment. US libel and slander laws require the plaintiff in a lawsuit to prove malice was intended, not just that the written or spoken words were untrue. Would this teacher have free speech rights to slander the students? No.

[Krash]

For their "crime" they deserve to have their photos displayed! That would be Justice.

Stupid, spoiled rotten little cVnts should face up to the public reaction for what they tried to do.

Free Speech, this is as bad as "Fire!!!" in theatre.

[David]

@Ben Bohn, exactly where in the story is congress telling the young people they can't text?

[Christy]

Well, it's just that there is now there is tangible proof as to who said what, when. Something that kids will have to learn is that with all this technology, thanx for posting.

[Charles]

All things considered, maybe he would just be better off finding a job in another industry. He should cut and run.

[TheTruth]

My question is how did they get the content of the text messages?

If they took the cell phones and looked through them they violated the law...

The cell phones never become property of the school.
They are property of theirs/parents.

I would bring up legal charges.

[Huh?]

"If they took the cell phones and looked through them they violated the law..."

Actually, when you enter into a public school, you do have to abide by their rules. If those rules include students are allowed to have a phone in the school, but turned off, and they turn it on for any reason while in class, they can confiscate the phone. They do not have to turn it over to the student and can hold it for the parents to come get.

Don't like it? Tough, that is what happens when people allow the feral government (and yeah, this is a feral government issue, regardless of what state you live in) to micromanage your lives.

Sucks... but that is what Americans have asked for. Now that they are getting it they want to cry foul.

[TheTruth]

"Actually, when you enter into a public school, you do have to abide by their rules"

Rules and Policies do not over dictate L-A-W-S

If a school had a Policy that everyone had to be naked that does not make it LEGAL

They can TAKE THE PHONE and HAND IT OVER TO THE LEGAL GUARDIAN... BECAUSE IT IS THE PROPERTY OF THE LEGAL GUARDIAN.... Once they pry into the privacy of the LEGAL OWNER they are now VIOLATING THE LAW.

It is policy for BEST BUY to examine computers for child porn when you bring it in to be fixed. BUT THAT DOES NOT MAKE IT LEGAL RIGHT OFF THE BAT! They have you SIGN A LEGAL BINDING AGREEMENT GIVING THEM RIGHTS TO DO SO.

When you visit the white house... YOU SIGN A CONTRACT TO INCLUDE VERY SPECIFIC EXAMPLE OF WHAT YOU ARE NOT ALLOWED TO BRING ONTO THE PROPERTY... One of those items includes Nunchucks... Yes you heard me correct...Now just because it is their POLICY not to have Nunchucks brought by visitors it does not grant them THE RIGHT TO FORCE PEOPLE NOT TO... EVEN WITH THE METAL DETECTORS THAT WERE COMMON IN ALL OF WASHINGTON DC BUILDINGS.... They NEED TO HAVE A LEGAL AGREEMENT.
If they did not ... You could bring them and sneak them past security and IT WOULD NOT BE A CRIME.

You Mr. Huh? are what I find actually a problem with the country... Completely ignorant to anything related to laws or what is proper conduct.

http://articles.cnn.com/2009-08-17/politics/obama.protest.rifle_1_protesters-weapons-assault-rifle?_s=PM:POLITICS

Please review this and get back to me when you get a brain cell.

[cwm2]

Hmmm, any chance at least one of the girls forwarded the message to someone who then showed it to the authorities? Sometimes the simple solution suffices ... certainly not nearly as much fun as blasting on and on about big brother, my rights violated and so forth.

[Ben Bohn]

@Ben Bohn, exactly where in the story is congress telling the young people they can't text?

Posted by: David | Oct 29, 2010 11:40:51 PM
------
I posted to inform the readers that this is not a question of free speech as so many people seem to believe.

[jj2]

I'll bet cwm2 is right. Kids can't keep secrets (especially junior high school kids) and forward is a fun tool. I know jr. high school kids who forward the absolute worst stuff to the "cool" parents who promptly narc when narcing is called for.

[paul]

And of course whenever an internal school investigation finds an accusation to be "not credible" they're right.