Posted on 12/15/2005 12:58:27 PM PST by NCjim
An East High freshman faces expulsion for something the district says never should have happened. Monday Charles Rogers discovered a camera in the foyer of the boy’s bathroom. "The camera there period surprised me. It was a little spy camera, I didn't think anything like that was in the bathroom. I didn't think it was the schools, I thought it was a perverted janitor," Charles said.
He took the camera. He says it was in a little hole in the ceiling tile. He also took the receiver which was in the schools auditorium. "It looked like an irregular setup. It wasn't in a security room," his mom Melinda Rogers said.
Mrs. Rogers says what her son did was wrong. But she wants to know why there was a hidden camera to begin with. Eyewitness News asked the district that question.
It says cameras were installed in two boy’s bathrooms at East High to see who was drawing graffiti. "The camera was outside the bathroom part, so nobody’s privacy was violated. It's just so they could monitor people going in and out," spokeswoman Susan Arensman said. She says East High is the only school that used them. "It was a mistake and we admit this was a mistake and it won't happen again," Arensman said.
Arensman says the school put up the cameras sometime this year without telling the district. She says the other camera has now been removed.
Rogers has also been removed from East High. Next week he has an expulsion hearing for stealing the camera. "I think he should be punished. But to be expelled for the rest of the year is kind of tough. As misguided as it was, he thought he was doing good in taking down a hidden camera," his mom said. The hearing is next Tuesday, we’ll keep you posted on what happens.
?
NFN but situations like this scream probable cause for someone to check and see what Mr Principle has stored on his hard drive.
2 Wrongs don't make a right, but three lefts do.
The school shouldn't have placed the camera there on the sly.
This boy shouldn't have stolen it.
A visible camera outside in the hall would've sufficed to record who was going in and out of the bathroom. Regular checks by the janitor for graffiti on a random schedule would've sufficed for setting up time checks. If graffiti appeared between any two checks, the tape could then be used to identify who had used the bathroom during that period. Compile enough data with enough incidents, and they'll be able to narrow it down significantly.
The hidden camera, because of its position, could provide no more data than a visible camera outside in the hall.
Why would Massachusetts politicians be questioned about an incident in a Kansas school?
I'm actually impressed that the kid found the receiving unit.
I was actually wondering if he may have found that first and then went off to find the camera. From the receiving unit he could have determined by the pictures where the camera was located. Interesting...
They didn't have any cameras hidden or otherwise when I attended East High 1978 - 1981. So you know, its the oldest high school in Wichta. The neighborhood isn't very good and I attended from a better area during the busing days. I wonder if they still do that today?
Did you miss the joke? :)
You got it right. thanks for enlightening the rest of us.
Someone is covering something up. Putting a spy camera in a little boys' bathroom over grafitti? BS.
The school district is covering for some pervert to save themselves from embarrassment and a lawsuit.
This should be a police issue.
I was thinking the same thing. To bad they ddn't name him Tomorrow, or something normal like that!! :0 )
I think the boy was well within his rights to remove the camera - he obviously did not steal it as he took it home and reported it to his mother before the school district could cover it up and now they want to expel him for daring to challenge the Almighty Liberal Education Establishment.
This is a good kid who trusts his mom more than the teachers.
We need more just like him. No wonder they fear him.
Exactly how I caught someone at work vandalizing the bathroom. Not cameras, but eyes and a clock. He gets fired tomorrow, he just doesn't know it yet. Not just for that and not by me. Just another one of his antisocial antics.
He had no rights to steal the camera.
The camera should not have been there, yes, but that doesn't grant him authority to take it, then track down the receiver and take that as well.
I didn't read the article the same way. It looks like he was busted for stealing and then crafted the good citizen story afterwards. I think he wanted the camera for his own use (that's my personal opinion.)
I also think the person(s) who authorized the camera to be put there in the first be punished, and possibly fired. They over stepped their bounds by a tremendous margin.
The fact that the camera there is highly offensive and infringing on other rights, doesn't grant this kid any special powers to break the law.
No. I'm sure I got the inference.
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.