Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

Pupil Discovers Camera In School Bathroom (and Gets Suspended for It!)
WMAZ ^ | 11/30/2005 | n/a

Posted on 12/01/2005 11:12:40 AM PST by Pyro7480

click here to read article


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-2021-4041-6061-8081-89 next last
To: Pyro7480

Sandy Berger will not be visiting that restroom.


61 posted on 12/01/2005 12:31:52 PM PST by Semper Paratus
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: ArrogantBustard

That would have been my assumption.

We did not have cameras in my high school, but we had a sane principal, and he would not have put them in the bathrooms.


62 posted on 12/01/2005 12:31:55 PM PST by rwfromkansas (http://www.xanga.com/rwfromkansas)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 18 | View Replies]

To: add925

LOL!


63 posted on 12/01/2005 12:32:46 PM PST by geopyg (Ever Vigilant, Never Fearful)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 30 | View Replies]

To: thoughtomator
According to 18 U.S.C. § 2251 child pornography is only sexually explicit conduct. But Such conduct is defined by 18 USCS § 2256 as :sexually explicit conduct" means actual or simulated-- (i) sexual intercourse, including genital-genital, oral-genital, anal-genital, or oral-anal, whether between persons of the same or opposite sex; (ii) bestiality; (iii) masturbation; (iv) sadistic or masochistic abuse; or (v) lascivious exhibition of the genitals or pubic area of any person;

(B) For purposes of subsection 8(B) of this section, "sexually explicit conduct" means-- (i) graphic sexual intercourse, including genital-genital, oral-genital, anal-genital, or oral-anal, whether between persons of the same or opposite sex, or lascivious simulated sexual intercourse where the genitals, breast, or pubic area of any person is exhibited; (ii) graphic or lascivious simulated; (I) bestiality; (II) masturbation; or (III) sadistic or masochistic abuse; or (iii) graphic or simulated lascivious exhibition of the genitals or pubic area of any person;

So unless the videotape captured the child "chocking the chicken" then it would not be illegal. Or somethign along those lines.

64 posted on 12/01/2005 12:39:26 PM PST by ozoneliar ("The tree of liberty must be refreshed from time to time with the blood of patriots & tyrants" -T.J.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 55 | View Replies]

To: dead
It wasn't his camera to remove. He should have mooned it,

Or had sex with the nearest female teacher

65 posted on 12/01/2005 1:31:15 PM PST by gura
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 10 | View Replies]

To: Pyro7480
I had told the high school principal, Mr. Fore, that he needed to come up with another solution. That this wasn't appropriate. His response to me was he was going to continue to film."

Taking pictures of young boys going to the bathroom is kiddy porn. The feds need to check this guy out... There might be more to the story -- much more.

66 posted on 12/01/2005 1:34:25 PM PST by GOPJ
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Pyro7480
Ha! That reminds me of high school. Our principal decided to install a video camera in the main school hallway when I was a kid to "improve security", and the camera instantly became a bubble gum magnet. After cleaning the gum off the lens every day for a month, the camera was put in a security housing. After that, it started attracting MORE gum, along with wet paper balls, mud, silly string, and all kinds of other nasty decorations. Eventually the principal simply started standing guard underneath the camera between classes to keep the students from damaging it.

At some point, someone pointed out to him that by standing in the hallway, he negated the entire purpose of having the camera in the first place. The camera was eventually removed, and the principal simply became a regular at that spot.

Someone should have told this kid about bubblegum. It's highly effective.
67 posted on 12/01/2005 1:46:34 PM PST by Arthalion
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Pyro7480
Bibb County District Attorney, Howard Simms. He says cameras in public school bathrooms are legal because schools have more leeway on privacy issues.

Say it ain't true! What about putting a camera inside a girl's bathroom, is that okay? This DA cannot be right in what he is saying.

The solution would be to have adults stationed inside the restrooms during the breaks to prevent the vandelism.

68 posted on 12/01/2005 1:55:42 PM PST by rawhide
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: rawhide

Sooooo.. someone stationed inside the bathroom is different from a camera stationed in the same position how?


69 posted on 12/01/2005 2:16:46 PM PST by Dubya-M-Dees (Mary Mapes was the first in the MSM that had to participate in an election by the people... she lost)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 68 | View Replies]

To: Pyro7480
I added the part in parenthesis. The camera shouldn't have been there in the first place!

But the comment you added changed the very nature of the issue and made it seem to be something it was not.

Irrespective of whether the camera should have been there (and I trust that this will be dealt with appropriately--a suspension for the Principal?) the boy was punished for taking something that was not his, not for simply finding it.

70 posted on 12/01/2005 2:21:38 PM PST by O6ret
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 27 | View Replies]

To: ozoneliar

So basically, one kid deciding to masturbate in the bathroom makes the principal a child sex offender, yes?


71 posted on 12/01/2005 2:55:16 PM PST by thoughtomator (What'ya mean you formatted the cat!?)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 64 | View Replies]

To: thecabal
What the hell is wrong with FR lately? I can't believe that there are people here that apparently think it's OK for the school to film 8th grade boys in the bathroom. That kid made the right assumption that some pervert put that in there, and he did the right thing by taking it out. Gawd, there's some sick, twisted puppies out there if they think the boy was wrong.

There is a certain attitude that leads some to believe that any authority figure or minor government functionary is automatically correct when dealing with "ordinary" citizens. 1776 was a bad year for that concept, but its making a comeback in the EU and sometimes in internet forums. Hopefully it is merely a passing phase and the trading of essential liberties for a little security will again become unpopular.
72 posted on 12/01/2005 3:58:23 PM PST by Arkinsaw
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 40 | View Replies]

To: cripplecreek
I don't agree with the camera in the bathroom but the kid had no right to steal it either.

Yeah, like our ancestors had no right to throw tea into the harbor.

What they are doing is teaching our children that it is normal for agents of the government to search them, search their possessions, make them pee in a cup, watch their most private moments with cameras, check their underwear to make sure they are not thong underwear, etc. etc. We have seen episodes of raids where they have handcuffed innocent children and searched them on the pretense of a "hunch" about drug activity. We've seen kids strip searched for 5 dollars. We see kids suspended for wearing a tourist t-shirt from a US Army base because it had an image of a statue of a US soldier on it holding a rifle.

They are training your children that they are subjects with no rights. I want my children trained that they are United States citizens with every protection of the Bill of Rights and that every minor government functionary is bound by the chains of the Constitution. That IS what a Free Republic is.

People amaze me sometimes that they do no jealously guard their liberties, and the liberties of their children in exchange for some feeling of security or order. They deserve neither liberty nor security.
73 posted on 12/01/2005 4:08:10 PM PST by Arkinsaw
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 28 | View Replies]

To: Pyro7480
A Jasper County mother says her 8th grade son found a video camera taping in the school bathroom this week.

Champion says her son brought the camera home to show her that afternoon. She says when she contacted the Jasper County Comprehensive School, she found out high school principal, Howard Fore, put the camera there.


Leaving alone the writer's unfamiliarity with the proper use of commas, what the hell was the high school principal doing putting cameras in a junior high bathroom?
74 posted on 12/01/2005 4:09:53 PM PST by Xenalyte (My milkshake brings all the boys to the yard . . .)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Wolfie
....at the soon to be named "Chuck Berry Junior High".

My...Your ****-****. :D

75 posted on 12/01/2005 6:17:49 PM PST by skinkinthegrass (Just because you're paranoid, doesn't mean they aren't out to get you :^)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 38 | View Replies]

To: O6ret
The student was suspended for stealing the camera, not for finding it.

And if it were your kid?


76 posted on 12/01/2005 6:21:56 PM PST by unixfox (AMERICA - 20 Million ILLEGALS Can't Be Wrong!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 22 | View Replies]

To: dead
"It wasn't his camera to remove. He should have mooned it, then called the police and a lawyer."

I condone initiative, but your method would have screwed the school better.

Tough call... What Would Jackass Do?


77 posted on 12/01/2005 7:20:14 PM PST by SteveMcKing ("No empire collapses because of technical reasons. They collapse because they are unnatural.")
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 10 | View Replies]

To: Billthedrill
Sure he did. I agree the kid shouldn't have taken it, though - a conviction is going to be harder to get if you don't have the evidence intact.

If the pervert wants his camera back, he has to admit puttingit there.

78 posted on 12/01/2005 7:44:07 PM PST by Oztrich Boy (Paging Nehemiah Scudder:the Crazy Years are peaking. America is ready for you.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 36 | View Replies]

To: Pyro7480

bump


79 posted on 12/01/2005 7:52:09 PM PST by GOPJ
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Oztrich Boy

He doesn't. He didn't pay for it. We did.


80 posted on 12/01/2005 8:43:23 PM PST by Billthedrill
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 78 | View Replies]


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-2021-4041-6061-8081-89 next last

Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson