Slashdot Mirror

← Back to Stories (view on slashdot.org)

Lower Merion School District Update

Posted by kdawson on from the someone-to-watch-over-me dept.

Mike_EE_U_of_I and jargon82 were among a number of readers who sent an update on the Lower Merion School District webcam spying case (see Related Stories for our discussions of the affair over the last couple of months). The school had originally stated that capturing laptop photos in students' homes had only happened 42 times. It turns out what they meant was that there were 42 instances when they began intensive surveillance on the suspected stolen computers. This consisted of (among other things) transmitting a picture from the laptop's webcam every 15 minutes. This may have gone on for weeks. In total, it appears that there were thousands of photos. One of the key administrators involved has been answering all questions about the program by invoking the Fifth Amendment.

18 of 367 comments (clear)

  1. Surprise, Surprise by WrongSizeGlass · · Score: 5, Insightful

    Pics of the kid sleeping and "half dressed". Who knows what else they have of other kids. They are in deeeeeeep guano.

    1. Re:Surprise, Surprise by fuzzyfuzzyfungus · · Score: 5, Funny

      "No, no, your honor! It isn't what it sounds like! The images are called naughty_underage_schoolgirls0001.jpg through naughty_underage_schoolgirls0987.jpg because they are schoolgirls we suspected of stealing laptops, which is naughty, and we didn't want them to be charged as adults, because they are just students still... You have to believe me!!!"

  2. You know what they caught... by AnonymousClown · · Score: 5, Insightful

    I'm sure they must've caught some of the kids masturbating.

    --
    RIP America

    July 4, 1776 - September 11, 2001

  3. Lightbulb? by MozeeToby · · Score: 5, Interesting

    One of the key administrators involved has been answering all questions about the program by invoking the Fifth Amendment.

    No doubt he was instructed by his lawyer to do so. At least this means that the 'Oh Shit' lightbulb has finally gone off in someones head, someone finally is realizing that this could very easily end up with jail time and a spot on the sex offenders registry.

    1. Re:Lightbulb? by Sponge+Bath · · Score: 5, Funny

      He is a she...

      ...as you are me and we are all together.
      Goo goo ga joob.

    2. Re:Lightbulb? by ElSupreme · · Score: 5, Insightful

      Well you don't have to be guilty. If there was a murder, and I did not commit it, I can refuse to answer questions that may incriminate myself. Like if I were to say I was in the same hotel in the next room that could be used against me in the court of law.

      You should NEVER answer questions when being questioned. NO MATTER WHAT. Get a lawyer and have them speak for you. As they CAN NOT incriminate you.

      --
      My addiction: Arguing with idiots. AKA Slashdot!
    3. Re:Lightbulb? by corbettw · · Score: 5, Funny

      Pfft, just like a chick to assume that men are sexist.

      --
      God invented whiskey so the Irish would not rule the world.
    4. Re:Lightbulb? by Deadstick · · Score: 5, Insightful

      I have to say...seeing school administrators being treated to "zero tolerance" would be very sweet schadenfreude.

      rj

  4. Fifth Amendement Right by CheshireCatCO · · Score: 5, Insightful

    One of the key administrators involved has been answering all questions about the program by invoking the Fifth Amendment.

    Which, to be fair, is entirely his or her right. Trying to infer guilt from this (tempting though it may be) violates what most of us stand for. Tossing that statement in at the end of the summary seems to be an attempt to imply guilt, though.

    (Which isn't to say that I don't think this program was stupid and criminal.)

    1. Re:Fifth Amendement Right by twidarkling · · Score: 5, Insightful

      I don't think it's an attempt to imply guilt, but more show the cracks in the formerly unified stance of the board et al. Fifth Amendment invocation is different than "no comment," and it shows that some members are starting to think of themselves, rather than the message.

      --
      Canada: The US's more awesome sibling.
    2. Re:Fifth Amendement Right by mooingyak · · Score: 5, Informative

      Anyone can invoke the 5th amendment if they believe that answering the question will incriminate them. It doesn't matter if they are on trial or not. If you were accused of murder, and I saw you do it while I was across the street robbing a convenience store, I might choose to invoke the 5th rather than explain what I was doing while I saw you commit your act.

      --
      William of Ockham had no beard. The most likely explanation is that it was chewed off by squirrels every morning.
    3. Re:Fifth Amendement Right by MrOctogon · · Score: 5, Insightful

      No way. The fifth amendment also protects the completely innocent.

      Remember, "Anything you say can and will be used against you in a court of law". The cops have no obligation to use anything in court that may help you, so saying you are innocent serves no purpose.

      Often the best course is to shut up, get a good lawyer and let the evidence speak for itself.

    4. Re:Fifth Amendement Right by 0100010001010011 · · Score: 5, Interesting

      Never Talk To Police. It's 27 minutes. There aren't many visuals so you can listen to it in the background.

      Basically NEVER TALK to police. Just don't. If you do have to say something let it be along the lines of: "Am I under arrest or am I free to go", "Do you have a warrant".

      I was once arrested. AFTER being read my rights one cop kept pressing the issue. "What were you doing, why were you there" over and over and over. After the 4th time I asked him to please read me my rights again. Which he did. But he continued to ask. At which point I told him I was invoking my right to remain silent. He still pressed the issue.

      This was brought up in court and helped my case, since it was seen as 'badgering'.

    5. Re:Fifth Amendement Right by belmolis · · Score: 5, Insightful

      First, taking home a school laptop in this situation would be a violation of school rules and possibly a civil matter, but not theft. For it to be a theft, there would have to be a reason to believe that the kid intended to keep it.

      Second, the school district's excuse doesn't fit the facts. There's no indication that they didn't know that the kid had the laptop. It was issued to him, and there's no indication that, however they discovered that it wasn't at school, they even bothered to ask him about it. In any case, if they had actually been trying to find a missing laptop, why would they have kept the camera on for two weeks? Did it really take that long to identify the kid? And when he was finally confronted by the school administration, why did they not punish him for improperly taking the laptop home if that was the issue? According to the press accounts, that issue was not raised. Instead, they raised the bogus issue of him popping pills that were actually candy.

  5. Insanity in School Districts by Cheviot · · Score: 5, Insightful

    I have never understood how school districts think.

    On one hand they're terrified of getting sued. They have huge lists of things, even common, ordinary actions, that are not allowed to prevent even the slightest chance of getting sued.

    Then, on the other hand, they take actions that random people on the street realize will cause a lawsuit. Strip searching students for searching for asprin, cancelling proms when gay students wish to attend, secretly spying on students with webcams. What the hell are they thinking?

  6. Re:Hip hip hooray! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Funny

    Can you send me a picture of your junk?

    I don't know how but you can ask my school to send you a few...

  7. They are dealing with the insanity of parents by hellfire · · Score: 5, Interesting

    In the US, Schools are tasked with the impossible job of trying to please parents, who are also voters, and who are also incredibly rude and stupid about what they think is right for their kids. And what happens is that if you DON'T take action, then you get sued anyway!

    Drugs? Zero tolerance because some parents and all politicians have zero tolerance, even for aspirin! Someone wrote the rule that way because some crazy person pushed it.

    Gays at the prom? Because there is no equal protection under the law for gays, and too many people in american society still view gay relationships as evil. Allowing gays in the right conservative school district will get you just as sued.

    Computer survellience? Well for this one there simply is no excuse. Someone obviously didn't do their homework and thought it was a good idea and forgot to check where the legal line crossed. This example is not like the others because the first two are more about social values in those areas and this is clearly a breach in well established law.

    And don't forget these people are voted into office, and they are of the people and by the people. They are politicians as well, and if someone wants them to do something or risk being voted out, well this is how it works when the law isn't more clearly spelled out.

    Then again, sometimes parents have an attack of sanity, like the Dover, PA case where the old school board tried to implement intelligent design, and they were voted out en masse the next election and the curriculum was scrapped.

    --

    "All great wisdom is contained in .signature files"

  8. Do Not Fall For This Dangerous Scam by spun · · Score: 5, Interesting

    If you ever hear the phrase 'sovereign individuals,' run. Run away, as fast as you can. You are in the presence of either a moronic patsy or a dangerous con artist. Do not fall for this scam. You will lose money, and perhaps go to jail yourself for attempting to follow the ludicrous and expensive instructions for becoming this imaginary thing called a 'sovereign individual.' Please read this: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sovereign_Citizen_Movement

    --
    - None can love freedom heartily, but good men; the rest love not freedom, but license. -- John Milton