Coming to a School near you...

[Varmit]

http://www.nytimes.com/2009/04/22/us/22search.html?_r=1&ref=us
This article was too long to post here, so theres the link

Tell me again why I send my children to public school?  The strip search was bad enough, but to even suggest that school officals have the authority to strip search a student should be criminal.  Schools officals do not have police powers or law enforcement expirence or the authority (yet) to do this.  Why wasn't the childs parents contacted prior to doing this?  I could be mistaken but that is a violation of law.  That child had no representive to act on her behalf.  All school officals involved in this should should be arrested for child abuse.  and made to register as sex offenders.  I think that if this happened to one of my kids, I would go to jail.

[sixdogsmom]

I must agree with you Billy, this was way out of line. 

[indygal]

I too would say this was unnecessary and beyond appropriate. I don't, however, believe anyone should be charged as a "sex offender" as no sex offense was reportted to have taken place.

[dnalexander]

This is going to win the award for most agreed upon topic. The school was wrong, very wrong. The Supreme court is going to agree as well as most everyone else in America. To me this is an example where in the name of drugs, security, ... things are done that violate a much higher law, standard, moral...
David

[Wilma]

and common sense.  Amen.

[Varmit]

Dnalexander, don't be so sure...

"My thought process," Justice Souter said, "is I would rather have the kid embarrassed by a strip search, if we can't find anything short of that, than to have some other kids dead because the stuff is distributed at lunchtime and things go awry."

We're talking about tyneol for petes sakes.

As for sex offense taking place, how about Indecent Libertites with a Minor Under the Age of 14.  Remeber, these weren't law officers, but school officals. 

[dnalexander]

Dnalexander, don't be so sure...

"My thought process," Justice Souter said, "is I would rather have the kid embarrassed by a strip search, if we can't find anything short of that, than to have some other kids dead because the stuff is distributed at lunchtime and things go awry."

We're talking about tyneol for petes sakes.

As for sex offense taking place, how about Indecent Libertites with a Minor Under the Age of 14.  Remeber, these weren't law officers, but school officals. 

Billy you can call me David. I consider all of us to be forum family with a common link to Elk County. I am very aware of this case and Justice Souter's comment. If Justice Souter believes that I would be surprised, though I know that is a direct quote of what he has said.  Often the Justices make a statement that requires the attorney to whom it is addressed to respond and argue the legal reasons why that is not a true statement. I don't know if that is his legal interpretation of the law or not. We shall see. No matter what happens the school was wrong, very wrong. I stick by my previous statements.

David

[Wilma]

A minor can't be questioned by the police without a parent present; an adult can't be questioned without legal representation,  how can a school presume to strip search a child on the basis of one other child's statement?  As much as I hate to agree with certain other parties, I have to in this case. 

[Varmit]

 

[kshillbillys]

I agree with ya too Billy!!! (But MY agreeing with you isn't as shocking as Wilma doing it! THIS IS SO SCARY!)