Slashdot Mirror


Feds Won't File Charges In School Laptop-Spy Case

jamie writes "Federal prosecutors have decided not to file charges against a Philadelphia school district or its employees over the use of software to remotely monitor students. From the article: 'US Attorney Zane David Memeger says investigators have found no evidence of criminal intent by Lower Merion School District employees who activated tracking software that took thousands of webcam and screenshot images on school-provided laptops.'"

17 of 398 comments (clear)

  1. Ho hum by schmidt349 · · Score: 4, Insightful

    Of course the Fed won't prosecute them. After all, it'd just be hypocritical if they went after a bunch of perverted quasi-Orwellian miscreants for doing, on a much smaller scale, the same kind of espionage the Fed directs against its own citizens on a daily basis.

  2. land of the free, eh? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 4, Insightful

    good lesson to teach the next generation: we will spy on you - sit down and shut the fuck up.

  3. Just because... by eggman9713 · · Score: 4, Insightful

    Just because the feds won't file charges doesn't mean the students themselves or the local DA or state AG can't file civil or criminal charges.

  4. A Horrendous Precedent by RobertM1968 · · Score: 5, Insightful

    This really sets a horrendous precedent, as it gives school officials the ability to use such invasive and insane actions to spy on kids.

    Amazing that the government's "think of the children" response to everything else unrelated isn't being applied to one of the few cases where it actually should be.

    1. Re:A Horrendous Precedent by KahabutDieDrake · · Score: 4, Insightful

      It really doesn't set a precedent of any kind. First off, there may still be local criminal filings, and almost certainly a civil suit. If I had kids in that school, you can fucking well bet I'd be talking to a lawyer. I'd be suing for anything and everything, and I'd also be lobbying the school board, and or local parents to replace the entire school board, and then replace the entire administration and staff that were privy to this.

      Intent or not, this was a serious breach of privacy. It's also potentially a violation of any number of anti-spying laws. Is it actually legal for a school to install a video camera in my home? If it is, maybe it's time to change the law. If it isn't, why aren't these people being put before a judge? This entire thing reeks. School administrations have gotten just a little out of control lately, and it's about time we smack them back into line. Since we aren't supposed to take someone out behind the gym and beat sense into them anymore, that leaves the political, or legal avenues. The Fed declining to prosecute doesn't constitute an end to the legal front.

    2. Re:A Horrendous Precedent by PPH · · Score: 4, Insightful

      Which is why our system of prosecutorial discretion needs to be overhauled. It undermines the concept of equal protection under the law.

      While all are ensured equitable and fair treatment in court, the odds of their ever coming to trial is totally dependant on the whim of the prosecutor. And eventually the majority that elected him/her to office. Which is something that our Constitution and Bill of Rights is supposed to protect us from.

      --
      Have gnu, will travel.
  5. criminal intent? by flabbergast · · Score: 5, Insightful

    U.S. Attorney Zane David Memeger says investigators have found no evidence of criminal intent...

    So, when the speed limit changes from a 55 to a 35 MPH zone in 100 feet and I didn't see the sign, does that mean I don't get a ticket because I didn't intend to commit a crime?

    1. Re:criminal intent? by cyber-dragon.net · · Score: 4, Insightful

      It is very much illegal. It violates so many laws it isn't even funny.

      If even one of those pictures caught a kid with their shirt off for example, they just created kiddy porn.

  6. "Intent"? by v1 · · Score: 4, Insightful

    since when was there a need to prove "criminal intent" before prosecuting someone?

    --
    I work for the Department of Redundancy Department.
    1. Re:"Intent"? by CodeBuster · · Score: 4, Insightful

      but there's obviously room for a lot of unfairness.

      More it seems than most people are willing to say. The wealthy, the powerful, the famous and the politically well connected or their clients always seem to find themselves treated differently, some would say more deferentially, than the common man. It has been this way for as long as there has been courts and recorded history. The best that we ordinary people can do is withhold our votes for those who promise to ever tougher laws because it is invariably the ordinary man who invariably suffers most when these new rules are applied with ruthless zeal by prosecutors seeking to advance political careers regardless of the human cost. Indeed, the present situation here in the United States is enough to convert even the most optimistic citizen into an ardent student of Machiavelli.

  7. Re:Before everyone gets outraged... by Charliemopps · · Score: 4, Insightful

    Ignorance of the law is no excuse for breaking the law. I had a federal judge tell me that once. Guess it's just unlucky for me I don't work for the government.

  8. Terry Childs also didn't have any criminal intent by Darth+Muffin · · Score: 5, Insightful

    Terry Childs didn't have any criminal intent either, and he caused a lot less harm. Look where that got him... I no longer have any faith in the "justice" system.

    --
    Real programmers use "copy con program.exe"
  9. Re:Very stupid question, but... by Ziktar · · Score: 5, Insightful

    The students did detect this. They saw the light blinking on and off, and reported it. These claims were dismissed as something wrong with the light. Of course, the fact that the claims were dismissed by the very group of people who could be taking the pictures should have made it seem a bit suspicious...

  10. So lets get some things straight... by mykos · · Score: 5, Insightful

    Recording children in their rooms without anyone's consent:
    Not wiretapping

    Recording the police on the job in a traffic stop at a public location:
    Wiretapping

    Source: http://www.wusa9.com/news/local/story.aspx?storyid=102616&catid=187

  11. Re:No Criminal Intent by Ossifer · · Score: 5, Insightful

    They took 56,000 pictures of minors in their bedrooms and watched them for fun out of incompetence or stupidity??!!?!

  12. Re:Since when does "Letter of the law" need intent by AhabTheArab · · Score: 4, Insightful

    If it had been an ordinary IT clerk, instead of a school system's policy, they would have faced serious prosecution, no ifs, ands, or buts. (except the kind on film..)

    That's a really good way of looking at it. If one person had done this alone (like one of the school district's IT staff for instance) without any approval and it was discovered, he would have been hung out to dry. Even if he legitimately had no criminal intent. Even if he didn't necessarily capture any images which might be illegal. He would at the very least have lost his job, would likely be in prison, and would probably have to register as a sex offender for the rest of his life.

    Talk about a double standard.

  13. Re:What one generation accepts... by Golddess · · Score: 4, Insightful

    And on that note, just as how all the hippies of the 1970's were totally acceptant of the rules imposed on them by the post-WWII generation and the big federal government

    Yeah, I really love all those changes that occurred once the young adults of that era grew up and took charge of this nation.

    --
    "I'm not sure I like the fugnutish tone you used in your post!" -RogL (608926)-