There is detainment, then there is arrest. A cop can put you in handcuffs (afaik) when you are detained - particularly if s/he feels there is a flight risk. Detainment has a much lower threshold than arrest. I believe it's something along the lines of 'suspicion without evidence of a crime' while they investigate.
When detained a cop can pat you down for weapons but CAN NOT search you, your belongings, vehicle, or house. 'Plain sight' still applies though so keep the heroin under a blanket, eh?
Arrest is when evidence of a crime is available and is then turned over to the judiciary system. You and your immediate area can be searched without consent or a warrant at that point.
P.s. Please *PLEASE* don't use entertainment TV shows to get your legal knowledge.
Obstructing justice is NOT the same thing as declining to be interrogated. You have see WAY too much "law" TV and they stretch things to the extreme for the sake of 'good' TV. He declined to provide identification to the rent-a-cops. No where does he state that he declined to identify himself to the police officer.
You have the *RIGHT* to remain silent. This is a fundamental constitutional right in the USA. You can not be forced to explain yourself, your actions, or say anything at all other than to identify yourself and shut back up. A cop can not (legally/legitimately) arrest you for doing so.
Go look up the actual definition of obstruction of justice.
First off, forget the barriers. If it was safe for an individual to look at, then it should be safe for a picture. Privacy or security through obscurity is the worst kind because you have the impression you're protected when the exact opposite is true. If the layout of an ATM is secret, it should never *ever* be opened outside of a controlled environment. Cameras haven't change anything other than removing the false sense of security a bit.
Second - you're right that a little bit of kiss-ass probably would have avoided this situation.
Third (and WAY more important than #2) - there's no legal justification, no constitutional requirement, no valid reason why being an asshole should result in the laws being enforced any differently. If the law states XYZ, then XYZ is the law. It's not supposed to matter if you're mother theresa, an unwashed douchebag with a missing leg, black, white, rich, poor, smart, or stupid. Any time consideration like that comes into play, it's discrimination and a corruption of our constitution. "All men are created equal"
Finally - Cops receive 'asshole' training. They're taught NOT to react to silly taunting, to keep their personal feelings in check and to act in the responsible manner their position requires. Granted most seem to consider that training a joke. Still, a cop is SUPPOSED to be an impartial 3rd party acting on behalf of our judiciary system.
Allowing the dick swinging that leads to things like this...is one of several steps to outright oppression. Once you have to treat the cops as "better" people and go out of your way to obey them regardless of the law you're on a very dangerous path to oblivion. Which civil liberty should we kill off first? Privacy? Speech? Protection from unreasonable Search and Seizure?
And this is thrown around as the holy grail of SAAS.
Except publishers get greedy. Look at iTMS with their multi-tier pricing now. Publishers are always looking for a way to jack up pricing/revenue on new titles because they know 1) people will rush to buy it immediately 2) it won't matter how much it sucks for the first big burst of buying 3) there are no returns or quality guarantees.
Get real. When was the last time a popular game* was released and it wasn't available that day via P2P? In fact you often see them days BEFORE release on P2P already cracked and ready to go.
I remember when Spore came out the first day or two had something like 30,000 seeders on TPB. Even right now there's about 15k people seeding both the star trek movie and the latest episode of fringe... and as many people downloading. And this is just ONE tracker. It's actually faster to download the game/movie than drive to the store and buy it half of the time.
Any software company that deludes themselves into believing DRM stops piracy by any significant amount delusional. It's all about preventing resale...which is still detrimental to the customer. Stupid how a library can rend DVDs, CDs and books but somehow software managed to squeak in such an exception.
* Excluding exclusively online games (aka WoW, etc.)
18c is a very large increase in delivery fees. Granted netflix is an order of magnitude (or more) bigger than gamefly but their total cost per shipped DVD is something like 60-80c each. This includes labor to "rip" the DVD out of the mailer, check it for defects, scan it back into the system, pack it in the new outgoing mailer, and ship it.
Even if they paid 1/4 of that (about 4c) that's a significant added cost.
idk why this is modded funny. The biggest problem with open platforms is the huge quantity of junk. By setting a bar (which, honestly, is fairly low) they help eliminate some of the crap. This just refines the process.
Better that they don't have the good apps buried and not making enough sales.
I don't really like apple much at all but they built the platform. If you want to develop for it AND use their app store AND use their billing/payment system to earn yourself money...well you play by their rules or go to another platform. It still kinda sucks, but it's their game so their rules.
This will be the shining light for Android. An open platform will show the true desires of the majority population. If everyone felt the same way about 'piracy' then it wouldn't happen on anything approaching it's current scale. Unfortunately the laws are in conflict with the desires of the general public.
Offer up something like this, i see a lot of people jumping on it and it bringing a lot of popularity from those who purchase phones and apps. Sure the MAFIAA will have a heart attack but their hissy fit will only serve to educate more people about the existance of this program.
Other phone makers will hate Android for stealing marketshare when people realise they can get what they want from an open platform and abandon the DRM-ed to death closed trust-us-and-pay-dearly options.
You confuse idealistic desires with the common behavior of the general public.
First, schools (much less school nurses) do not have legal guardianship of children while they're there. They are legally RESPONSIBLE for them and in an emergency can make decisions to protect the welfare of a child - within limits. This incident qualifies for none of those exceptions.
Airlines can not FORCE you to submit to a search. You don't want to be searched before boarding? Sure, just leave them. This child was not given that choice.
Police conducting a strip search happens after someone is arrested - at which point some of your civil rights are suspended. In addition, there are clearly documented procedures to be followed when conducting a search. You also have the right to legal representation.
As for the nonsense about "DOING SOMETHING ABOUT LETHAL DRUGS"... First off plain old water is perfectly lethal so go bark up another tree instead of crying over the dangers of advil. Second, taking action is all find and dandy and I don't object to them questioning her or searching her belongings (she volunteered for that matter) but before the next action should have been to call the parents and then possibly the police. There's action and then there's appropriate action. Finally, forcing a person to expose their genitals against their will most certainly qualifies as sexual assault.
Odd though that you'd rather someone strip your teenage daughter of her dignity, innocence, civil rights, and sexually assault her than take the chance she might double up on advil one day. I sincerely fear for your children's welfare.
Warrant, perhaps not. They simply needed to detain her and call the police who could then arrest her. Then, as part of her booking, she would be searched under circumstances legally allowable. For example I would highly suspect the parent(s) have a legal right to be in the room during such a search. Your babble about 'detaining' kids in class is irrelevant.
This is most *CERTAINLY* sexual abuse.
They made her expose her genitals against her will. Period fucking dot.
Same-sex is NOT a valid defense for sexual abuse
Actually the school suspected her of illegally distributing an otherwise legal substance. There was no extraordinary circumstance (such as someone's life being in jeopardy and needing to identify a drug) that could have possibly required the school to take such extreme measures themselves.
What the school found (nothing) is entirely irrelevant. The ends do NOT justify the means.
If you think an authority figure forcing a child to expose themselves is not sexual abuse, I suggest you stay far away from children for the rest of your life.
Just like the limitations police must face when dealing with criminals and suspects - you have to accept and follow the law while pursuing justice even if it means failure to punish a guilty party.
We do this because the danger of convicting an innocent person outweighs the danger of letting a guilty person go free. They could have called the police and let a professional trained in such matters make the determination if sufficient evidence was present to make an arrest. They didn't. I'm not particularly pro-police but they have a hell of a lot more experience and knowledge of laws regarding this than a school principal.
The lockers are school property - have at it. There's a very limited expectation of privacy, particularly if a school makes it known to parents.
When you come to search my person or direct possessions I'm going to take issue. Call the police or get your hands off me before you find them both broken.
School officials "usually" conduct strip searches?
The nurse - much less a *secretary* - are trained for this?
They were unable to call the parents?
Failing that they were unable to call the police?
Their entire justification was based on the claim of another student, already under duress for being CAUGHT with pills. He-said, she-said and not a very balanced case at that.
I don't know where YOUR mind is, but everyone else seems to clearly understand how disgusting this act was.
I honestly couldn't care if they saw the girl put a kilo of coke down her pants 2 minutes before.
School administrators should not under *any* circumstances force a child to expose themselves. Ever. Call the parents, call the police, or let the kid walk away scott free if you have to. Don't ever sexually assault a child - it's that simple.
I detest what the school did, but 'benefit of doubt' is not only one of the fundamental arguments in this discussion about the girl, but also one of your constitutional rights in the US.
If you want to extend 'innocent until proven guilty' to the girl you MUST extent it to the school as well. Convict them, then treat them like the criminals they probably are.
Firing someone and refusing a reference based on their conduct, however, is perfectly acceptable because that's backed by your reputation, not a penal system.
If they'd found that the girl would have been arrested. Then her defense lawyer would have torn the case apart for wrongful search, gotten the judgment, and filed a civil suit for damages having that decision already in their pocket.
The underlying improperness of the search would have been taken in a different light but would still be there.
I would still vehemently object to the actions of the school. They fully had the opportunity to call the parents, much less the police, if they felt so strongly about this 'evidence'. It's not like the kid was trying to run away, refused to discuss the matter, or was violent. Given that she submitted to an embarrassing, degrading strip search without fighting I'd venture to guess she would have sat quietly in the principal's office until her parents showed up.
While perhaps toning down the severity a bit and taking 2 or 3 seconds to understand a given situation before reacting, this is exactly what people need to do. Stand up to BS like this. Call out the crooked administrators, police, etc. and tell them that zero tolerance goes both ways.
Hell, we should try zero tolerance with politicians.
"I have a sneaking suspicion that if we saw a picture of this girl we'd have no more concerns about this being some bunch of perverts. Sounds like there was more than one of them, and they got her to show that she wasn't hiding anything rather than taking everything off."
Does this imply if the girl was ugly or something it would automatically dismiss any claims that the administrators did this for a sexual thrill? That's like saying it's not rape if the girl was ugly.
Besides, forcing a 13 year old to strip to their underwear is not only a violation of their body but also a violation of the trust placed in our schools, teachers, and administrators. Under no circumstances should a school administrator or teacher *EVER* force a child to strip. Context has nothing to do with it. There is NO context under which this should happen. Period. I don't care if they SAW her put 3 kilo's of pure heroin inside her nether region, it's still not acceptable. Call the parents and, if necessary, the police.
If it means a child gets away with something then so be it. I'd rather a 'criminal' child with a couple motrin get away with it than an innocent child be abused and violated as happened here.
Well, bunches of people replace laptop batteries but anyhow...
Your rant about drivers and crashes and tweaks is so 1995. You don't *have* to update drivers in windows and, assuming you don't install some stupid spyware, you can pretty much leave a windows box alone and just install the standard updates. Apple does updates too . Nothing to see here, move along.
And still, that's all about the OS. The *hardware* is the same once you discount the pretty case Apple puts it in.
My reply was to a comment about business practices. Just because someone has the "right" to do something doesn't make it a fair or acceptable business practice.
Furthermore, the hole we've dug with "licensing" software might make it possible for them to require you use their hardware but that's actually up for debate in the courts right now.
My original point stands - MS will not sue you for installing their OS on whatever hardware you want. They may have their faults but MS does far, FAR less to limit what you can do with their software/hardware then apple.
Slashdot Mirror
There is detainment, then there is arrest. A cop can put you in handcuffs (afaik) when you are detained - particularly if s/he feels there is a flight risk. Detainment has a much lower threshold than arrest. I believe it's something along the lines of 'suspicion without evidence of a crime' while they investigate.
When detained a cop can pat you down for weapons but CAN NOT search you, your belongings, vehicle, or house. 'Plain sight' still applies though so keep the heroin under a blanket, eh?
Arrest is when evidence of a crime is available and is then turned over to the judiciary system. You and your immediate area can be searched without consent or a warrant at that point.
P.s. Please *PLEASE* don't use entertainment TV shows to get your legal knowledge.
(Standard IANAL disclaimer)
Obstructing justice is NOT the same thing as declining to be interrogated. You have see WAY too much "law" TV and they stretch things to the extreme for the sake of 'good' TV. He declined to provide identification to the rent-a-cops. No where does he state that he declined to identify himself to the police officer.
You have the *RIGHT* to remain silent. This is a fundamental constitutional right in the USA. You can not be forced to explain yourself, your actions, or say anything at all other than to identify yourself and shut back up. A cop can not (legally/legitimately) arrest you for doing so.
Go look up the actual definition of obstruction of justice.
First off, forget the barriers. If it was safe for an individual to look at, then it should be safe for a picture. Privacy or security through obscurity is the worst kind because you have the impression you're protected when the exact opposite is true. If the layout of an ATM is secret, it should never *ever* be opened outside of a controlled environment. Cameras haven't change anything other than removing the false sense of security a bit.
Second - you're right that a little bit of kiss-ass probably would have avoided this situation.
Third (and WAY more important than #2) - there's no legal justification, no constitutional requirement, no valid reason why being an asshole should result in the laws being enforced any differently. If the law states XYZ, then XYZ is the law. It's not supposed to matter if you're mother theresa, an unwashed douchebag with a missing leg, black, white, rich, poor, smart, or stupid. Any time consideration like that comes into play, it's discrimination and a corruption of our constitution. "All men are created equal"
Finally - Cops receive 'asshole' training. They're taught NOT to react to silly taunting, to keep their personal feelings in check and to act in the responsible manner their position requires. Granted most seem to consider that training a joke. Still, a cop is SUPPOSED to be an impartial 3rd party acting on behalf of our judiciary system.
Allowing the dick swinging that leads to things like this...is one of several steps to outright oppression. Once you have to treat the cops as "better" people and go out of your way to obey them regardless of the law you're on a very dangerous path to oblivion. Which civil liberty should we kill off first? Privacy? Speech? Protection from unreasonable Search and Seizure?
And this is thrown around as the holy grail of SAAS.
Except publishers get greedy. Look at iTMS with their multi-tier pricing now. Publishers are always looking for a way to jack up pricing/revenue on new titles because they know 1) people will rush to buy it immediately 2) it won't matter how much it sucks for the first big burst of buying 3) there are no returns or quality guarantees.
Get real. When was the last time a popular game* was released and it wasn't available that day via P2P? In fact you often see them days BEFORE release on P2P already cracked and ready to go.
I remember when Spore came out the first day or two had something like 30,000 seeders on TPB. Even right now there's about 15k people seeding both the star trek movie and the latest episode of fringe ... and as many people downloading. And this is just ONE tracker. It's actually faster to download the game/movie than drive to the store and buy it half of the time.
Any software company that deludes themselves into believing DRM stops piracy by any significant amount delusional. It's all about preventing resale...which is still detrimental to the customer. Stupid how a library can rend DVDs, CDs and books but somehow software managed to squeak in such an exception.
* Excluding exclusively online games (aka WoW, etc.)
That's why you BET her you can fix it. Bet her dinner - her treat. That not only guarantees you a free meal but the date you were denied as well.
You'd think a CS guru would know a bit about social engineering ;)
Magic should have it's uses!
18c is a very large increase in delivery fees. Granted netflix is an order of magnitude (or more) bigger than gamefly but their total cost per shipped DVD is something like 60-80c each. This includes labor to "rip" the DVD out of the mailer, check it for defects, scan it back into the system, pack it in the new outgoing mailer, and ship it.
Even if they paid 1/4 of that (about 4c) that's a significant added cost.
idk why this is modded funny. The biggest problem with open platforms is the huge quantity of junk. By setting a bar (which, honestly, is fairly low) they help eliminate some of the crap. This just refines the process.
Better that they don't have the good apps buried and not making enough sales.
I don't really like apple much at all but they built the platform. If you want to develop for it AND use their app store AND use their billing/payment system to earn yourself money...well you play by their rules or go to another platform. It still kinda sucks, but it's their game so their rules.
Are you kidding?
Did I miss the /sarcasm somewhere?
This will be the shining light for Android. An open platform will show the true desires of the majority population. If everyone felt the same way about 'piracy' then it wouldn't happen on anything approaching it's current scale. Unfortunately the laws are in conflict with the desires of the general public.
Offer up something like this, i see a lot of people jumping on it and it bringing a lot of popularity from those who purchase phones and apps. Sure the MAFIAA will have a heart attack but their hissy fit will only serve to educate more people about the existance of this program.
Other phone makers will hate Android for stealing marketshare when people realise they can get what they want from an open platform and abandon the DRM-ed to death closed trust-us-and-pay-dearly options.
You confuse idealistic desires with the common behavior of the general public.
They don't need to make money on the cases. In fact, they can spend $1m on legal fees for a $100k judgment and still come out ahead.
Why?
Because it motivates the other 99,999 people that got 'settlement offers' of $5-10k to pay up. Sad, but true.
I can only reply to you so many times.
First, schools (much less school nurses) do not have legal guardianship of children while they're there. They are legally RESPONSIBLE for them and in an emergency can make decisions to protect the welfare of a child - within limits. This incident qualifies for none of those exceptions.
Airlines can not FORCE you to submit to a search. You don't want to be searched before boarding? Sure, just leave them. This child was not given that choice.
Police conducting a strip search happens after someone is arrested - at which point some of your civil rights are suspended. In addition, there are clearly documented procedures to be followed when conducting a search. You also have the right to legal representation.
As for the nonsense about "DOING SOMETHING ABOUT LETHAL DRUGS"... First off plain old water is perfectly lethal so go bark up another tree instead of crying over the dangers of advil. Second, taking action is all find and dandy and I don't object to them questioning her or searching her belongings (she volunteered for that matter) but before the next action should have been to call the parents and then possibly the police. There's action and then there's appropriate action. Finally, forcing a person to expose their genitals against their will most certainly qualifies as sexual assault.
Odd though that you'd rather someone strip your teenage daughter of her dignity, innocence, civil rights, and sexually assault her than take the chance she might double up on advil one day. I sincerely fear for your children's welfare.
Warrant, perhaps not. They simply needed to detain her and call the police who could then arrest her. Then, as part of her booking, she would be searched under circumstances legally allowable. For example I would highly suspect the parent(s) have a legal right to be in the room during such a search. Your babble about 'detaining' kids in class is irrelevant.
This is most *CERTAINLY* sexual abuse.
They made her expose her genitals against her will. Period fucking dot.
Same-sex is NOT a valid defense for sexual abuse
Actually the school suspected her of illegally distributing an otherwise legal substance. There was no extraordinary circumstance (such as someone's life being in jeopardy and needing to identify a drug) that could have possibly required the school to take such extreme measures themselves.
What the school found (nothing) is entirely irrelevant. The ends do NOT justify the means.
If you think an authority figure forcing a child to expose themselves is not sexual abuse, I suggest you stay far away from children for the rest of your life.
Just like the limitations police must face when dealing with criminals and suspects - you have to accept and follow the law while pursuing justice even if it means failure to punish a guilty party.
We do this because the danger of convicting an innocent person outweighs the danger of letting a guilty person go free. They could have called the police and let a professional trained in such matters make the determination if sufficient evidence was present to make an arrest. They didn't. I'm not particularly pro-police but they have a hell of a lot more experience and knowledge of laws regarding this than a school principal.
The lockers are school property - have at it. There's a very limited expectation of privacy, particularly if a school makes it known to parents.
When you come to search my person or direct possessions I'm going to take issue. Call the police or get your hands off me before you find them both broken.
Really?
School officials "usually" conduct strip searches?
The nurse - much less a *secretary* - are trained for this?
They were unable to call the parents?
Failing that they were unable to call the police?
Their entire justification was based on the claim of another student, already under duress for being CAUGHT with pills. He-said, she-said and not a very balanced case at that.
I don't know where YOUR mind is, but everyone else seems to clearly understand how disgusting this act was.
I honestly couldn't care if they saw the girl put a kilo of coke down her pants 2 minutes before.
School administrators should not under *any* circumstances force a child to expose themselves. Ever. Call the parents, call the police, or let the kid walk away scott free if you have to. Don't ever sexually assault a child - it's that simple.
I detest what the school did, but 'benefit of doubt' is not only one of the fundamental arguments in this discussion about the girl, but also one of your constitutional rights in the US.
If you want to extend 'innocent until proven guilty' to the girl you MUST extent it to the school as well. Convict them, then treat them like the criminals they probably are.
Firing someone and refusing a reference based on their conduct, however, is perfectly acceptable because that's backed by your reputation, not a penal system.
Actually you're wrong.
If they'd found that the girl would have been arrested. Then her defense lawyer would have torn the case apart for wrongful search, gotten the judgment, and filed a civil suit for damages having that decision already in their pocket.
The underlying improperness of the search would have been taken in a different light but would still be there.
I would still vehemently object to the actions of the school. They fully had the opportunity to call the parents, much less the police, if they felt so strongly about this 'evidence'. It's not like the kid was trying to run away, refused to discuss the matter, or was violent. Given that she submitted to an embarrassing, degrading strip search without fighting I'd venture to guess she would have sat quietly in the principal's office until her parents showed up.
While perhaps toning down the severity a bit and taking 2 or 3 seconds to understand a given situation before reacting, this is exactly what people need to do. Stand up to BS like this. Call out the crooked administrators, police, etc. and tell them that zero tolerance goes both ways.
Hell, we should try zero tolerance with politicians.
Name 3 places where you need permission to go to the bathroom (with the potential for being denied that permission):
1) Jail
2) Military
3) Public school
"I have a sneaking suspicion that if we saw a picture of this girl we'd have no more concerns about this being some bunch of perverts. Sounds like there was more than one of them, and they got her to show that she wasn't hiding anything rather than taking everything off."
Does this imply if the girl was ugly or something it would automatically dismiss any claims that the administrators did this for a sexual thrill? That's like saying it's not rape if the girl was ugly.
Besides, forcing a 13 year old to strip to their underwear is not only a violation of their body but also a violation of the trust placed in our schools, teachers, and administrators. Under no circumstances should a school administrator or teacher *EVER* force a child to strip. Context has nothing to do with it. There is NO context under which this should happen. Period. I don't care if they SAW her put 3 kilo's of pure heroin inside her nether region, it's still not acceptable. Call the parents and, if necessary, the police.
If it means a child gets away with something then so be it. I'd rather a 'criminal' child with a couple motrin get away with it than an innocent child be abused and violated as happened here.
2009 here ... reminding you that Apple runs x86 hardware from Intel and to look at the pricing on the mini.
Hate to break to you but Intel/nvidia/seagate/etc supply the same hardware to Apple, Dell, HP, and so on.
Besides. $100 for a *wired* keyboard and mouse and that's the *cheapest* option? Get real.
Well, bunches of people replace laptop batteries but anyhow...
Your rant about drivers and crashes and tweaks is so 1995. You don't *have* to update drivers in windows and, assuming you don't install some stupid spyware, you can pretty much leave a windows box alone and just install the standard updates. Apple does updates too . Nothing to see here, move along.
And still, that's all about the OS. The *hardware* is the same once you discount the pretty case Apple puts it in.
Ok, I did exactly that.
Mini
2GHz
2GB RAM
250GB HDD
no monitor
wired keyboard/mouse
DVD multi burner
Total base price with options $897
Dell Studio Hyrbid
2GHz
2GB RAM
250GB HDD
no monitor
wired keyboard/mouse
DVD multi-burner
$499
Yes, there's minor differences still but the mini is nearly twice the price on what's supposed to be the 'inexpensive' system.
My reply was to a comment about business practices. Just because someone has the "right" to do something doesn't make it a fair or acceptable business practice.
Furthermore, the hole we've dug with "licensing" software might make it possible for them to require you use their hardware but that's actually up for debate in the courts right now.
My original point stands - MS will not sue you for installing their OS on whatever hardware you want. They may have their faults but MS does far, FAR less to limit what you can do with their software/hardware then apple.