Started By
Message

re: Teacher who had phone stolen and nudes stolen may face criminal charges

Posted on 3/2/16 at 2:48 pm to
Posted by upgrayedd
Lifting at Tobin's house
Member since Mar 2013
138153 posts
Posted on 3/2/16 at 2:48 pm to
quote:

Against school policy to possess porn, I'm sure. Not against school policy to change clothes in a bathroom, I'm guessing.

She still allowed "easy access" to images of her naked body.
Posted by shel311
McKinney, Texas
Member since Aug 2004
112642 posts
Posted on 3/2/16 at 2:49 pm to
quote:

I guess if we really wanted to split hairs, simply by carrying a smartphone into school could be construed as bringing in porn simply for the fact that it has internet access
I get it, and I don't have a fancy explanation, but I just think there's a clear distinction between taking her phone and going to PornHub, and taking her phone and finding nudes of herself on the camera roll.
Posted by Topwater Trout
Red Stick
Member since Oct 2010
69574 posts
Posted on 3/2/16 at 2:49 pm to
quote:

he's currently under investigation.


she loses her job and they are still "investigating" the student
Posted by upgrayedd
Lifting at Tobin's house
Member since Mar 2013
138153 posts
Posted on 3/2/16 at 2:51 pm to
I don't think there's a distinction other than one effects the teacher's future authority more than the other.
Posted by shel311
McKinney, Texas
Member since Aug 2004
112642 posts
Posted on 3/2/16 at 2:51 pm to
quote:

She still allowed "easy access" to images of her naked body.
So what if she trips and falls and her dress flies up a bit and a student sees her panties? Same thing?

I'll be honest, I don't know how the law or school policies delineate this stuff, but the difference between nudes on a camera roll and internet access, or her changing in a bathroom or just night and day for me, they're just not the same thing.
Posted by upgrayedd
Lifting at Tobin's house
Member since Mar 2013
138153 posts
Posted on 3/2/16 at 2:52 pm to
One is an act of God, the other is "negligence"
Posted by dukke v
PLUTO
Member since Jul 2006
216144 posts
Posted on 3/2/16 at 2:53 pm to
quote:

She still allowed "easy access" to images of her naked body.


This is true... I wonder how many in this thread have nudes of themselves on their phones???????
Posted by upgrayedd
Lifting at Tobin's house
Member since Mar 2013
138153 posts
Posted on 3/2/16 at 2:55 pm to
Trying to see naked dudes again, huh?
Posted by NoHoTiger
So many to kill, so little time
Member since Nov 2006
46112 posts
Posted on 3/2/16 at 2:55 pm to
quote:

if the kid barged in intentionally, he should face action, but I wouldn't see any reason for the teacher to be responsible.

You have been arguing the exact opposite for 2 threads now. By your own argument, the fact that she didn't lock her cell phone (the door) she is responsible for allowing easy access to nudes and therefore shoulders some of the blame. I'm almost certain it'd be easier for me to see naked pee pees (tee hee)in a locker room than finding nudes on a phone.

Swiping a phone and looking at the camera roll is the digital equivalent of barging into a locker room uninvited.
This post was edited on 3/2/16 at 2:57 pm
Posted by dukke v
PLUTO
Member since Jul 2006
216144 posts
Posted on 3/2/16 at 2:56 pm to
quote:

Trying to see naked dudes again, huh?





Posted by jmitc22
Brrrrr
Member since Jan 2007
1721 posts
Posted on 3/2/16 at 2:57 pm to
I think the offending item being data on a cell phone gives people trouble.

What if the scenario was: student steals teacher's purse, finds booze, gives booze to friends. I think most people would agree that the teacher has some responsibility to prevent someone from obtaining the booze and shouldn't have had it on her person at school.

Fwiw I don't think the teacher should get in trouble, but I understand the school's perspective.

What would make for a more interesting debate would be if the photos were saved to the cloud and the student used the phone to retrieve the photographs.
Posted by soccerfüt
Location: A Series of Tubes
Member since May 2013
72955 posts
Posted on 3/2/16 at 2:57 pm to
quote:

I wonder how many in this thread have nudes of themselves on their phones???????
The addition of seven question marks indicates you are VERY concerned with this issue.



Posted by AwesomeSauce
Das Boot
Member since May 2015
11173 posts
Posted on 3/2/16 at 2:57 pm to
quote:

You have been arguing the exact opposite for 2 threads now. By your own logic, the fact that she didn't lock her cell phone (the door) she is responsible for allowing easy access to nudes and therefore shoulders some of the blame. I'm almost certain it'd be easier for me to see naked pee pees (tee hee)in a locker room than finding nudes on a phone.

Swiping a phone and looking at the camera roll is the digital equivalent of barging into a locker room uninvited.


quote:

NoHoTiger


BOOM! Sessi and brains
Posted by MikeBRLA
Baton Rouge
Member since Jun 2005
17130 posts
Posted on 3/2/16 at 2:59 pm to
quote:

Swiping a phone and looking at the camera roll is the digital equivalent of barging into a locker room uninvited.


I agree 100% and don't see how anyone could argue otherwise.
Posted by NoHoTiger
So many to kill, so little time
Member since Nov 2006
46112 posts
Posted on 3/2/16 at 3:00 pm to
quote:

Sessi and brains

Back atcha babe Now who gets to spank the kid?
Posted by upgrayedd
Lifting at Tobin's house
Member since Mar 2013
138153 posts
Posted on 3/2/16 at 3:12 pm to
I guess, but booze is directly harmful to those that find it not to mention highly illegal. It's probably a hell of a lot easier to swipe booze from a purse than dig through someone's phone for a specific item. If the pic was the background on her phone, I'd be more inclined to agree.
Posted by KG6
Member since Aug 2009
10920 posts
Posted on 3/2/16 at 3:12 pm to
I'm not asking if there should be. I'm asking if there is a law. The homeless guy example is breaking and entering. I'm asking if there is an actual law that exists against snooping when something is in a public space.

Not arguing anything. Merely asking.
Posted by upgrayedd
Lifting at Tobin's house
Member since Mar 2013
138153 posts
Posted on 3/2/16 at 3:15 pm to
Well, I think there has to be some common sense here. Everyone knows that a smartphone contains highly personal information. Just because it's in a "public space" doesn't mean it's public property. I wonder if it can be interpreted as "trespassing".
Posted by KG6
Member since Aug 2009
10920 posts
Posted on 3/2/16 at 3:21 pm to
Common sense and decency aside, I'm talking about the law here. Because if there is a law against "snooping", then she may even have ever a case against the school for wrongful termination. But I've never heard of anything that covers "privacy". If she isn't afforded the legal right of privacy while on public, then that changes the whole tune of the conversation compared to if she is.
Posted by jmitc22
Brrrrr
Member since Jan 2007
1721 posts
Posted on 3/2/16 at 3:27 pm to
quote:

booze is directly harmful to those that find it not to mention highly illegal


Well, one would assume that graphic images are as well since the government has made it a crime to show them to minors. One could argue the graphic images are more directly harmful because you have to consume booze in order for it to be harmful.
Jump to page
Page First 5 6 7 8 9 ... 13
Jump to page
first pageprev pagePage 7 of 13Next pagelast page

Back to top
logoFollow TigerDroppings for LSU Football News
Follow us on X, Facebook and Instagram to get the latest updates on LSU Football and Recruiting.

FacebookXInstagram