Replies

"That's exactly what I said ~ the kid told the janitor, and he told the administrators, and they called the cops.

Now unless the janitor lied about what the kid said, all the administrators knew when they called the cops was that a kid said something.

This is the uncooborated word of a minor, or possibly even no word at all!"

Go back and reread the article. The janitor overheard the kid tell his friends the bag contained cocaine. He reported it, as he is required to do. I bet if you check the law in your state, you will find that you are legally required to report the commission of a felony that you are aware of, too. The statement was not uncorroborated, it was simply reported. The cops even corroborated it for him. Yes, it was sugar. They still arrested the kid, not the administrators. And you're still being foolish in insisting that the administrator should have determined if the stuff was sugar or cocaine before making that call to the local PD. If he had attempted to do so, he would have tainted the evidence. Maybe you should think over why you are so reflexively hostile to school administrators and teachers. You're not doing so well in buffing up your reputation for intelligence, tonight, either.

You are failing to read what I've posted and are beginning to infer that I've said things other posters have said.

So, here's the question for you ~ do you want to send the kid up the river for 30 years, or turn him loose to peddle sugar on the streets?

The janitor overheard the kid tell his friends the bag contained cocaine.

Wrong. "He joked that it was cocaine, before telling them, 'just kidding'". To summarize that as "tell[ing] his friends the bag contained cocaine" is like summarizing a movie review saying "A staggering waste of time and money" as "Staggering" for the print ads.