- My Forums
- Tiger Rant
- LSU Recruiting
- SEC Rant
- Saints Talk
- Pelicans Talk
- More Sports Board
- Fantasy Sports
- Golf Board
- Soccer Board
- O-T Lounge
- Tech Board
- Home/Garden Board
- Outdoor Board
- Health/Fitness Board
- Movie/TV Board
- Book Board
- Music Board
- Political Talk
- Money Talk
- Fark Board
- Gaming Board
- Travel Board
- Food/Drink Board
- Ticket Exchange
- TD Help Board
Customize My Forums- View All Forums
- Show Left Links
- Topic Sort Options
- Trending Topics
- Recent Topics
- Active Topics
Started By
Message
Interesting Lawsuit in Madison, Mississippi
Posted on 9/22/14 at 11:03 am
Posted on 9/22/14 at 11:03 am
LINK
A female student sent out nude selfies of herself to several people at Germantown High School in affluent Madison, MS.
One of the recipients, having been forwarded the picture, posted it from school to a public Instagram page during break.
That student was suspended immediately, and then later expelled.
Parents of the expelled student are suing school district for free speech, and also citing the 8th amendment because expulsion is apparently cruel and unusual punishment.
They are also charging the school district under the No Child Left Behind act, because the education at the Alternative school is not as good as it is at Germantown.
I'm torn here - the girl who sent the nude pics of herself is a moron. But posting them from school to a public page is moronic as well.
Thoughts?
A female student sent out nude selfies of herself to several people at Germantown High School in affluent Madison, MS.
One of the recipients, having been forwarded the picture, posted it from school to a public Instagram page during break.
That student was suspended immediately, and then later expelled.
Parents of the expelled student are suing school district for free speech, and also citing the 8th amendment because expulsion is apparently cruel and unusual punishment.
They are also charging the school district under the No Child Left Behind act, because the education at the Alternative school is not as good as it is at Germantown.
I'm torn here - the girl who sent the nude pics of herself is a moron. But posting them from school to a public page is moronic as well.
Thoughts?
This post was edited on 9/22/14 at 11:05 am
12
Posted on 9/22/14 at 11:07 am to anc
quote:there's your problem
Mississippi
Posted on 9/22/14 at 11:07 am to anc
quote:
Parents of the expelled student are suing school district for free speech, and also citing the 8th amendment because expulsion is apparently cruel and unusual punishment.
They are also charging the school district under the No Child Left Behind act, because the education at the Alternative school is not as good as it is at Germantown.
IMO, seems like 3 moronic stances to take.... However, if the student didn't do it while in school, via school machines, etc... Then I don't see how the student can be expelled.
However, I think they could be criminally charged with child porn
Posted on 9/22/14 at 11:11 am to anc
quote:
On or about January 27, 2014, J.B., using his home computer while at his home established an Instagram page which he entitled "Germantown Whores". The following day, January 28, 2014, J.B. was attending class at Germantown High School and during the break from one of his classes, he uploaded a copy of the nude photograph of the female student to the Instagram Page entitled "Germantown Whores.
If the kid uploaded and posted the image while at school, especially if he used their internet networks, he should have been expelled.
Posted on 9/22/14 at 11:13 am to Lsut81
quote:
willymeaux
Thank you for your insightful reply. We on the Poli Board are honored to have such intellect with us.
quote:
Lsut81
I'm with you - it seems to be a stretch. The student did post at school during school hours (albeit between classes). The distribution of child pornography during school hours is the angle that the school is taking to defend its decision to expel the student.
Posted on 9/22/14 at 11:16 am to The Third Leg
If he uploaded it without using school resources it's out of school jurisdiction. Otherwise we'd have to punish the female involved for producing and distributing CP and expell them both.
Posted on 9/22/14 at 11:18 am to anc
Everyone involved is stupid, but that's not a surprise.
With regards to the expelled student, I'd say that the act is stupid but not enough to warrant expulsion.
Suspend the kid for a while, put some other administrative punishments on him, but leave him at the main HS unless he does something else while on probation.
A prank in the same ballpark, but not exactly like this, was enough to get a student suspended for a week or two at my school but not expelled. They just happened to withdraw and go somewhere else rather than return.
With regards to the suit, I think both challenges fail if they're going to poise this on the 8th Amendment and NCLB.
They're better off trying to parse technicalities on the punishment put on the kid to show that the principal overstepped their bounds by punishing the kid for Instagram stupidity in the same manner as if he'd brought a gun to school.
With regards to the expelled student, I'd say that the act is stupid but not enough to warrant expulsion.
Suspend the kid for a while, put some other administrative punishments on him, but leave him at the main HS unless he does something else while on probation.
A prank in the same ballpark, but not exactly like this, was enough to get a student suspended for a week or two at my school but not expelled. They just happened to withdraw and go somewhere else rather than return.
With regards to the suit, I think both challenges fail if they're going to poise this on the 8th Amendment and NCLB.
They're better off trying to parse technicalities on the punishment put on the kid to show that the principal overstepped their bounds by punishing the kid for Instagram stupidity in the same manner as if he'd brought a gun to school.
Posted on 9/22/14 at 11:19 am to inthemorning
The case does not cite whether the school WiFi network was used. The school does have a student network, so thats an angle. It was posted during school hours on property though.
Looking at what they are suing over:
1st amendment: Is distributing child pornography a protected free speech?
8th amendment: Not a chance.
No Child Left Behind: They may have a case here. The Alternative School is basically a pre-juvenile prison without the resources and quality of education of the home school.
My thought is that Mississippi has way too many attorneys. Who would take this case?
Looking at what they are suing over:
1st amendment: Is distributing child pornography a protected free speech?
8th amendment: Not a chance.
No Child Left Behind: They may have a case here. The Alternative School is basically a pre-juvenile prison without the resources and quality of education of the home school.
My thought is that Mississippi has way too many attorneys. Who would take this case?
This post was edited on 9/22/14 at 11:21 am
Posted on 9/22/14 at 11:22 am to anc
So he set up the page the night before and waited to post the actual picture until the next day at school so he could watch the reaction. stupid games > stupid prizes.
Posted on 9/22/14 at 11:22 am to inthemorning
quote:
If he uploaded it without using school resources it's out of school jurisdiction. Otherwise we'd have to punish the female involved for producing and distributing CP and expell them both.
If he was physically on their property when he uploaded the image, he was distributing pornography at a school during school hours. I could be mistaken but I am confident courts have taken the stance that pornography in schools is not protected speech.
Also, people keep saying CP, and I admit I only skimmed the article, but where does it say the female in the image is a minor?
This post was edited on 9/22/14 at 11:24 am
Posted on 9/22/14 at 11:24 am to anc
My angle was that the female in question should not have produced the photo and distributed it if she didn't want it to get out.
If we are going to expell the male student that shared the photo we should be equal and expell the female involved too. After all she made the photo and distributed it.
If we are going to expell the male student that shared the photo we should be equal and expell the female involved too. After all she made the photo and distributed it.
Posted on 9/22/14 at 11:29 am to inthemorning
quote:
My angle was that the female in question should not have produced the photo and distributed it if she didn't want it to get out. If we are going to expell the male student that shared the photo we should be equal and expell the female involved too. After all she made the photo and distributed it.
Because we all know when you send someone a text message, you should expect that text message to appear on global social media.
The school has no grounds on which to punish the girl unless the picture was taken at school. She didn't bring it into their environment, this douchebag geek did. And yes, he did just that, by waiting until he was at school to post it, so he could be cool. What a fricking piece of shite; kid is probably a virgin like half the OT.
Posted on 9/22/14 at 11:32 am to anc
Suit should get thrown out.
Girl is stupid, expelled student is stupid, parents of expelled student are stupid.
The child is dumb, he should fit in well.
Girl is stupid, expelled student is stupid, parents of expelled student are stupid.
quote:
They are also charging the school district under the No Child Left Behind act, because the education at the Alternative school is not as good as it is at Germantown.
The child is dumb, he should fit in well.
Posted on 9/22/14 at 11:33 am to The Third Leg
There is definitely precedent for her being charged with distributing child pornography, even if she is the child.
Weird huh?
Weird huh?
Posted on 9/22/14 at 11:34 am to Teddy Ruxpin
I understand that, and I think it's ridiculous.
But where does it say she is a minor?
But where does it say she is a minor?
Posted on 9/22/14 at 11:41 am to The Third Leg
quote:
But where does it say she is a minor?
We don't know that she's a minor. We do know that she was post #1 on Germantown Whores.
Posted on 9/22/14 at 11:42 am to The Third Leg
It's amazing how little responsibility you are holding the producer of the photo in question, which is 0, and then going on to make a hateful screed about a kid you don't know.
It's Orwellian that he could be expelled for something that got the photo producer 0 punishment for, only because of his arbitrary location.
It's Orwellian that he could be expelled for something that got the photo producer 0 punishment for, only because of his arbitrary location.
This post was edited on 9/22/14 at 11:43 am
Posted on 9/22/14 at 11:51 am to inthemorning
I'd feel sorry for you but you would likely take it as an insult.
Screed? Get a dictionary, a-hole. People that post pictures like this online, in public forum, are fricking pieces of shite. It's really not that hard of a concept to grasp for those equipped with the ability to reason.
By your logic, Hefner is responsible for any copy of playboy taken into a school. Gun manufacturers are responsible for every gun death.
Screed? Get a dictionary, a-hole. People that post pictures like this online, in public forum, are fricking pieces of shite. It's really not that hard of a concept to grasp for those equipped with the ability to reason.
By your logic, Hefner is responsible for any copy of playboy taken into a school. Gun manufacturers are responsible for every gun death.
Posted on 9/22/14 at 11:52 am to inthemorning
quote:
It's amazing how little responsibility you are holding the producer of the photo in question,
The producer didn't upload on school network/ property...
Posted on 9/22/14 at 12:08 pm to Zephyrius
This board has become so knee-jerk anti government that it defends complete assholes from the consequences of their actions.
Parents, you suck because your kid is an a-hole. Society should sue you.
Parents, you suck because your kid is an a-hole. Society should sue you.
Page 1 of 2
Popular
Back to top
Follow TigerDroppings for LSU Football News