Slashdot Mirror
Florida Teen Expelled and Arrested For Science Experiment
First time accepted submitter ruhri writes "A 16 year-old girl in Florida not only has been expelled from her high school but also is being charged as an adult with a felony after replicating the classic toilet-bowl cleaner and aluminum foil experiment. This has quite a number of scientists and science educators up in arms. The fact that she's African American and that the same assistant state attorney has decided not to charge a white teenager who accidentally killed his brother with a BB gun has some thinking whether this is a case of doing science while black."
Lets not attribute to malice what can be attributed to stupidity.
And in this case, I hardly believe its about one being black,although it could play a part, it beingthe us,it seems more a thing about one being gun related and the other science related.
We all know what many americans hate most.
I don't think that this is race related, I think that the punishment is so harsh because everyone is scared of improvised explosive devices after Boston. When I first heard the story it was reported as "An Acid Bomb was Set Off At a Local High School".
Those who know, do not speak. Those who speak, do not know. ~Lao Tzu
You could have responded without turning this into race rant yourself.
America is a bunch of pussies now. Had something like this happened in the 50s-80s..maybe even the 90s, the result would have been a stern reprimand and at most a couple days suspension. This "Daddy" syndrome needs to end. I doubt even the French would freak out the way the school and DA have.
When I was in school, it was basically a full time job for many of us boys to figure out ways to make ever larger and more dramatic explosions happen. We used to fill trash bags full of methane from the lab, seal them with tape, then release them with a lit fuse and watch this huge fireball in the sky (I stopped before the principal took notice, so I didn't get caught:). I mean, kids just do stuff like that.
The difference today is the zero-tolerance rules in many public schools where even a little 6-year-old boy making a shape of a gun with his hand and going "bang!" at another kid is grounds for suspension.
As usual, bureaucracy gets it wrong. That girl should be reinstated and an apology should be issued, otherwise she'll be barred for life from many professions (albeit, as a minor theoretically her record is sealed, but in reality she's screwed).
And racism? That was just an extra little tidbit the OP added to spice things up. Ridiculous.
it's = "it is"; its = possessive. E.g., it's flapping its wings.
Was this really a science experiment? She was mixing household chemicals in a plastic bottle on school property. It had nothing to do with her science class. It's more likely she got this stuff out of the janitor's closet or something like that. It sounds more like a kid being stupid rather than one experimenting.
Not that I agree with the penalty in any way. Detention or suspension would be ok here since no real harm came from it. It doesn't merit police involvement, or comparison to an accidental shooting.
Zero Tolerance means zero intelligence. Circumstances are always different. Thanks to our wonderful school and legal systems, there's less discretion. The bad and good part of discretion is bias. A straight-A good kid will be given the benefit of a doubt over a kid that has a reputation for being a troublemaker. On one hand, it's possibly a good rule of thumb... but it can lead to folks getting railroaded unfairly.
The "solution" then is to treat EVERYONE badly. I'm not that old, and my school had a policy of "both kids in a fight get punished." Didn't matter if you got jumped for being a geek with pacifist philosophy. OTOH, it was a learning experience about bureaucracy, government and pacifism. I dumped the pacifism, and the next kid that jumped me, I earned every ounce of my administrative punishment because I had no incentive NOT to do so. Zero tolerance and "everyone involved is equally guilty" is bunk, and a bad idea.
What does a kid with a BB gun have to do with this? Nothing, but it "creates the narrative".
Funny, if you drop the quotes, instead of "creating a narrative", the BB gun story actually creates a narrative. Namely a narrative where an ADA is out for blood in one instance of possibly reckless behavior from a child that didn't cause anybody any harm, but ignored another instance of possibly reckless behavior from a child that resulted in the loss of life. Whether this has anything to do with race is of secondary importance. The primary issue is the apparent lack of consistency in the severity of prosecution from this ADA.
weinersmith
Not many are saying that punishment isn't warranted. The problem is that the police were involved at all, that's the ridiculous part. Frankly if the police and DA have time to get involved in this sort of thing layoffs are long past due in this district.
This posting is provided 'AS IS' without warranty of any kind, implied or otherwise.
No one is saying it's OK. We're saying it's not a felony. Make the kid clean up the mess and suspend her for a week. Problem solved.
Excessive criminalization is a much bigger threat to us all than kids with drano bombs.
Give me Classic Slashdot or give me death!
I used to dismiss things like "driving while black" until, after a fracas about one such incident in New Jersey, several NJ state troopers came forward and said that it was "unofficial" policy. It's also been statistically documented. If I knew I was more likely to get pulled over because of the color of my skin, I'd be damn resentful for the rest of my life. Want an ever better example? Check out the racial stats on Mayor-for-life "Bill of Rights No Longer Applies" Bloomberg's stop and frisk police state program. Also, given how absurd the government's reaction is, I don't blame anyone for playing the race card or using any other trick to do something about this. I thought it was a temporary suspension, which is no big deal, but apparently she "will be forced to complete her diploma through an expulsion program". WTF? Given the absurdity of "zero tolerance" (aka "zero brains") policies, the principal may have little choice. He did say she meant no harm. But being charged with a felony? WTF? Nobody was hurt. Nobody was likely to be hurt. Schoolyard fights have bigger physical consequences. Since the state has prosecutorial discretion, forget any nonsense about them not having any choice. If I'd been prosecuted this way for some of the "experiments" my brothers and I did as teenagers, I'd be doing life.
How and where can I contribute to the legal costs for the family of this student? I want them to hire the best advocates money can provide, I want to see that judge humiliated for attempting to destroy the future of a curious student who made a mistake leading to an incident where no harm was either done or intended.
I see no mention in the article about a bathroom; it was outside near a gazebo and she stated that she was doing a science fair experiment.
-SaNo
Proportionality. That's what the kid with a BB gun has to do with this. An accidental death caused by a white boy gets no punishment. An accidental chemical hazard that kills no one, but is caused by a black girl gets charged with felonies. That's disproportionate. What exactly is the non-racist explanation for that lack of proportionality?
Maybe they're just sexist?
No, that link you posted to a web comic we've all seen a hundred times is not "obligatory."
Oh sure, let the kid have his pastry, then the next thing you know, he's lunging at you with a banana.
I think you may be missing the point of condemning racism if you find it acceptable to casually condemn an entire region as being of similar mind. That said, the south wouldn't have as much trouble with racism as it does, if it weren't for the pervasive denial of racist things as racist. So don't take my post as defending that.
My now 17 year old Son was expelled from high school two years ago for... get this... popping a regular old helium balloon. He was charged with Disorderly Conduct (the catch-all "when we want to charge you with something" summary crime in Pennsylvania) but we managed to get that dismissed at the Magisterial District Court after about $15,000 in legal fees, most of which was spent trying to obtain school surveillance video showing that the balloon popped when he leaned up against a wall, pinching the balloon between his backpack and the wall, causing it to pop.
We've home-schooled him since then. It's truly amazing how absolutely brain-dead our government has become. It really does destroy everything it touches, including the education system.
As the saying goes, "zero tolerance = zero common sense"
This has nothing to do with religion. This is the fault of so-called "educators." They have become thoughtless, lazy, and self centered. Don't think so? They pass these so-called zero tolerance policies and blindly enforce them. It lets them discipline anyone for the slightest infraction so that they don't have to deal with the real issue of discipline within their own classrooms. It's far easier, from a teacher's perspective, to get a kid suspended or expelled rather than having to deal with discipline and the child's parents. In my school district, these zero tolerance policies are used in to go after the really bad kids instead of instead of going after them for the real issues. The attitude of most teachers and administrators is that so what if an innocent kid gets caught up in the rules, rules are rules. It's just easier to follow the rules than it is to enforce the spirit of them. It's amazing that educators just aren't thinking.
I think it's great that some teachers spoke up for this kid, but the union and the board should do this as well.
I also blame parents, but the parents of this kid are the problem. IT's the problem kids that have the loudest screaming parents only because if their kid gets suspended they have to take vacations days to watch them.
Honestly, I can't stand the way we treat kids today. We say they're important and then do everything we can to show them they aren't.
The democrats are a center right party, we have no left party. The US has huge institutionalized race problems. You can simply compare punishments for the same crime meted out by our justice system to prove that.
If I'd been prosecuted this way for some of the "experiments" my brothers and I did as teenagers, I'd be doing life.
No kidding. We'd be under the jail. There used to be a time in this great land of ours when kids could play with things like black powder, acetylene, and sodium and all we'd get is a finger wag by the authorities and maybe have to pay for a trash can we would turn inside out.
(name withheld by request)
I think you may be missing the point of condemning racism if you find it acceptable to casually condemn an entire region as being of similar mind.
Exactly, and that goes on a lot, even among otherwise intelligent people. "That *large diverse group* is so bigoted!"
Not only are comments like that repulsive because of their innate stupidity, they're harmful because they are recasting the basic elements of racism and bigotry in a more socially tolerable guise, against a group that the poster feels it's OK to condemn based on stereotypes.
And I'm not from the south, so this isn't defensiveness. It's irritation. Just think about what you say.
The way I interpreted the summary is as follows: "Case A wasn't prosecuted, case B was. Case B was less deserving of prosecution than case A. One difference between the two cases is attribute R, which should not have any bearing on the decision to prosecute, but in practice often does (as is quite well documented). Hence, it is worth questioning whether this is one of the instances where attribute R is incorrectly used to decide matters regarding criminal justice".
That seems quite reasonable to me.
weinersmith
It's only an apparent lack of consistency if you use the two items to create the context in which to judge the responses. Here's the more likely scenario:
* There was no punishment forthcoming in the accidental shooting case because, after determining that there was no intent involved, and that it was, in fact, accidental, no punishment was deserved. Since there was no possibility of the parents suing themselves for damages, or that affecting the greater population, it got left at that.
* The incident on school property was punished because A) There was clearly an intent to make the explosion and B) it was on school property. That means lots of children who could potentially have been harmed, and that means lots of parents who could potentially sue the school system. Even if no one got injured, the potential for injury might be enough to have a jury in a civil suit feel that the plaintiff is "entitled" to "damages."
In that second case, everyone suffers. If the school has to pay out money to one set of irate parents, other suits will likely follow as everyone thinks they need to "get theirs," too. But guess who is on the hook? The school district, funded by property taxes or whatever they use in Florida. Thus, the community is the ones putting up the money to pay out to some jack-ass members of the community who want to take advantage of the situation. Being able to say "Look, no one got hurt but we have dealt with the perpetrator to the fullest extent of the law" goes a long way in staving off civil complaints, or having them be validated by a jury if someone thinks of doing it anyway.
It's all a CYA move. Does it suck? Yes. is it fair? No. Is life fair? Hell no. But unfortunately, we live in a chicken-shit, overly litigious society where these things happen. My mother is a public school teacher and the district where she teaches has had to deal with things like this in the past. "Science" wasn't involved, but the schools have been sued in the past, and in one incident $5,000,000 was awarded for "negligence" by the administration because two guys were fighting over a girl and one went through a plate glass window. Public schools are strapped enough for cash as it is, and losing $5,000,000 when you're already in budget shortfalls due to declining real estate values (and thus property tax revenue) is tough.
I would wager anything that was what they were concerned with above anything else.
I'm a non-anonymous Southerner, and I can agree that while it's probably not quite as bad as people elsewhere believe it is, we've still not quite escaped our past. Things are getting better generally (look back at the 1960s and 1970s and you will see that is factual), but yes, things like this at the very least give the appearance of a socially backwards society. A friend of mine from NYC once told me, "I thought I had seen racism. Then I came to college here."
If you abhor racism, the very fact that it is stronger here than in many places is a reason to STAY - I can be an active voice against it.
For conscience is the wound, and there's naught to staunch it
Your last line is spot on.
Zero tolerance policies are for zero brained educators.
As much as I want the post to be funny, I'm slowly thinking it might be truth. You just need to look at the esteemed leaders of the House Committee on Science.
Those who can, do. Those who can't, sue.
No it wasn't, this experiment was done outside. The police report clearly states this if you had bothered to read. When I was a kid I did the same thing with dry ice and water as well as vinegar and baking soda. Water and baking powder were also interesting but pretty weak. Friends did all sorts of stuff with powdered iodine. All of us turned out just fine, we didn't have our lives ruined or curiosity killed. My teachers wouldn't have allowed me to do this but they might have demonstrated the reaction to our class as they did many other things. We're destroying our kids...
Build it, Drive it, Improve it! Hybridz.org
The democrats are a center right party, we have no left party.
Depends on your ideological POV, doesn't it? Consider...
* From the Limbaugh standpoint, the DNC is a frothing group of neo-marxists out to take down the USA by any means possible.
* From the MSNBC fan's standpoint, the DNC is a fair-minded champion of tolerance and diversity whose policy set sits far to the right of that found in the EU.
* From my standpoint, both the DNC and the RNC are a bunch of posturing hypocritical leeches on society who don't give a shit about anything but gaining power, money and control. Their only real difference is in how they each want these things exerted, and on whom, but their goals are the same so long as they are the ones in charge when the dust settles.
Ideology? Pfft! That's simply the truncheon they use to keep their respective troops in line.
A pox on both your frickin' houses.
Quo usque tandem abutere, Nimbus, patientia nostra?
You're talking about the school's reaction. The far more egregious issue is charging her with a felony, which is something the school has no say in. This is more about police overreaction and DA's whose only interest is self-aggrandizement. Law, justice, or even sanity be damned. What do you think happened to Aaron Swartz?
Yes, but the school is supposed to be the a source of wisdom and knowledge for developing adults. Instead of being the voice of reason that acknowledges and points out the heightened sensitivity to the child (and yes, a 16-year-old is still very much a child when it comes to making non-malicious mistakes like this), and teaches her to exercise better judgement, the school system is teaching her that if her curiosity leads her to accidentally crossing the line on what will freak out parents, the who system will come down on her and try to throw the book at her.
Although, after reading what I just wrote, that's probably a pretty accurate and depressing lesson of our current paranoid state. Still, I don't think kids should be subjected to such treatment.
Was it your grammar made her despise you so?
If you think someone isn't free to have a different definition of "freedom" you may be a tyrant.
My immediate response to this item was to wonder whether the student in question was a constant annoyance to the teachers and administrators. The original article makes it clear that she is a model student: "Kiera Wilmot got good grades and had a perfect behavior record. She wasn't the kind of kid you'd expect to find hauled away in handcuffs and expelled from school, but that's exactly what happened after an attempt at a science project went horribly wrong."
That additional information (which really should have been in Slashdot's summary, as it was properly used in the reporter's lede) makes it clear that the student is being wronged. Whether she is being wronged as a result of racism or as a result of the inherent stupidity of zero-tolerance policies (policies from which exceptions are often made for the children of the wealthy and/or powerful) remains to be determined. Perhaps both are involved.
This is a teachable moment for the school. It is an opportunity for students and faculty together to examine the nature of fairness and the nature of bureaucracy. I hope there are some tenured faculty members at the school who are interested in making good use of the opportunity.
My own suspicion is that the administrators should be fired, but I think that way about a great many administrators.
I do think the race issue is worth discussing. As well as the gender issue.
But there's something more fundamental and less likely to stoke passions at play here:
DOING SCIENCE IS ABOUT MAKING MISTAKES. Her "punishment" should be to write a paper on what she was trying to do and why the results were not what she expected. Simple, end of story.
There should be no real punishment of any kind, much less the over the top expulsion and arrest.
The simple fact is that she should be encouraged to make mistakes, not punished for them. And the most basic problem we are dealing with is that our school systems don't understand this fact.
How about interpreting it this way. "Case A wasn't prosecuted, Case B was. At first glance, Case B appears to be less deserving of prosecution than Case A, but Case B took place on school property. In Case B there was clearly intent to create an explosion and given recent high-visibility events involving 1) kids being murdered at a school, and 2) innocent bystanders being killed/maimed by an explosion it is predictable that any explosion at a school will be highly scrutinized. Furthermore, in Case B, the so-called experiment appears to have been done without supervision, permission or any safeguards making the "experiment" excuse seem unlikely. Additionally, schools have published weapons policies and zero-tolerance policies, with mandatory consequences for violation. Had Case B taken place away from school property and/or under controlled conditions, it is extremely unlikely that Case B would have been prosecuted."
Note the complete absence of Attribute R. Also note that there was no judgment on the merits of the school's policies. As the parent of a student that was suspended for a zero-tolerance policy violation that even the principal thought was ridiculous, I have strong feelings about zero-thought policies, but that's a rant for another day.
Embezzling their oil wealth? By taking multinationals mostly out of the trough and using what would have been corporate profit on social programs? I think that you are confusing embezzling the native population with removing predatory companies from taking their customary lion's share of the national wealth. The people elected him and loved him dearly right to the very end. For the most part those who disliked Chavez wanted to go back to the status quo of the rich always getting richer at the expense of both the environment and the poor.
There are systems that can work well which are not heavily capitalistic. I'm not a huge fan of Castro but, read about their vermicomposting program. I am jealous of them because it sounds like they are building a quite sustainable economy on their island, and probably eat better than the average USA consumer (that is what we are called now, right?). One of the main reasons they are able (forced) to do this is that they aren't "helped" by the agrichemicals that US corporations would love to be able provide them with.
Only I can judge you.
OK. How about she was a straight A student and he wasn't?
I'm pretty sure those were covered. For example, she was exploring science and he wasn't. Her motive was to learn; his wasn't. She intended to be better at science; he didn't. As you can clearly see all those other differences point more strongly at a bias, and exploring those things makes it more likely that "she was black and he wasn't" is the big difference that the DA actually cares about.
Guns don't kill people; Physics kills people! - John Lithgow as Dick Solomon on Third Rock From The Sun