Lower Merion students' laptop spy cams "wound up secretly capturing thousands of images"

[Papa Boule]

The story gets closer to confirming suspicions.

The system that Lower Merion school officials used to track lost and stolen laptops wound up secretly capturing thousands of images, including photographs of students in their homes, Web sites they visited, and excerpts of their online chats, says a new motion filed in a suit against the district.

More than once, the motion asserts, the camera on Robbins' school-issued laptop took photos of Robbins as he slept in his bed. Each time, it fired the images off to network servers at the school district.

Back at district offices, the Robbins motion says, employees with access to the images marveled at the tracking software. It was like a window into "a little LMSD soap opera," a staffer is quoted as saying in an e-mail to Carol Cafiero, the administrator running the program.

"I know, I love it," she is quoted as having replied.

Source.

I'm wondering why someone hasn't thought of explaining they were just looking for terrorists?

[Occulus]

1. There are severmal DUers who owe a MAJOR apology for their behavior on this topic n/t

[kas125]

3. I wouldn't hold my breath waiting for that if I were you... n/t

[Hekate]

6. Nor I. But it's comforting to know that Big Brother loves us to pieces. nt

[dotymed]

92. This is exactly

Big Brother. Do you realize that George Orwell used his worst case scenario imagination to create, 1984, during the 30's? I'd say life does imitate art. Especially when despotic people aim in that direction.

[Sen. Walter Sobchak]

17. have some patience, their still working on their Duke apologies,

[ProdigalJunkMail]

18. indeed...

[nadinbrzezinski]

98. You forgot the more recent Toyota apologies

[Hannah Bell]

9. why's that? there are several DUers who continue to mistake allegations for proven fact.

and who seem to process only the points in news articles which support their own biases.

[tkmorris]

15. Then you are OK with this?

The material disclosed by the district contains hundreds of photos of Robbins and his family members - "including pictures of Blake partially undressed and of Blake sleeping,"

Seriously. Tell me there is some side of this you can take that makes this OK. Explain it to me like I am 3 years old. Please remember, the above is NOT DISPUTED.

[Hannah Bell]

16. and many DUers have a talent for leaping to unwarranted conclusions.

[old mark]

20. PLEASE read the posted article and think about the employees

spying on the kids - and everyone else-in student's homes, evidently for fun.

How can ANYONE justify this-is it OK because the people doing it are from a SCHOOL? Because they are EDUCATED? Because they are AUTHORITIES?

Crime is crime, even for school administrators.


mark

[Hannah Bell]

22. i read the article, & i repeat: some duers have a talent for leaping to unwarranted conclusions.

you leap to several in your post as well.

[woo me with science]

27. Here we go again...

:eyes:

[SidDithers]

29. My thoughts too...nt

Sid

[msanthrope]

64. The Philadelphia Daily News published one of the pictures of a kid sleeping.

How is that an "unwarranted conclusion?"

[liberalhistorian]

87. Notice her sudden crickets

in answer to your question. No big surprise, unfortunately.

[Name removed]

88. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[liberalhistorian]

97. Yes, indeed, she is, isn't she?

I was really surprised at her reaction. Because both my parents were teachers for forty years, damned good ones, and they would have been the last to tolerate this shit. In fact, they and their colleagues and every other teacher I've known would have been up in arms about this. They were and are strong, unfailing supporters of public education, but they were not uncritical blind supporters of everything done by school admins, officials and board members, nor were they tolerant of authoritarian teachers or those who committed wrong-doing. And most of the teachers I've known were/are the same.

[Hannah Bell]

106. yes, it's too bad i can't be at DU 24/7. but you'll find that i did indeed respond, though

not on your time schedule.

but it really doesn't make any difference whether i respond, does it?

your conclusions are the same in either case.

[liberalhistorian]

142. Please explain why the school would have pictures

of him sleeping and undressing in his own room if everything was on the up and up? What possible reason would they have for having those pictures? And remember, this is from the material the SCHOOL ITSELF disclosed in response to court-ordered discovery, so if you're thinking of claiming that the kid and his family somehow "doctored them", that kinda puts the kibosh on it.

[Hannah Bell]

104. what conclusion do you draw from that picture?

[Ken Burch]

94. The article PROVES the conclusions.

Why would you ever take the school district's side in this?

It's not like there's any possible greater good that could justify even the risk of things like this happening.

Stop with the "unwarranted conclusions" thing already. The article proves the conclusions ARE warranted. No more proof is needed.

[Hannah Bell]

107. it does nothing of the sort.

[old mark]

135. HB, I have been watching Philly news stations all morning carrying this story- emails

between school staffers stating that the pics from student computers were,"Like watching a little soap opera." And the reply, "I Know - I love it!" Reports now say that HUNDREDS of pics of students and others were taken by various staffers.
Several staffers are suspended and the scope the mess is just being revealed.

Do you think this is somehow teacher bashing? I do not understand anyone supporting violation of privacy like this.

mark

[elehhhhna]

43. what are you, Du's Mom?

[Hannah Bell]

108. no, are you?

[elehhhhna]

42. i want to know how many people knew about this. sounds like more than the 1 0r 2

the district claimed.

[TheMadMonk]

102. And one who continues to insist actual admissions are unfounded allegations.

• Students WERE secretly imaged in places where they had a reasonable (absolute with respect to their school and its officers) expectation of privacy.
  
• Students, teachers and parents were deliberately and repeatedly lied to when the issue of the cammera activation LED flashing was raised.
  
• The tracking "feature" WAS ACTIVATED on laptops that were NOT ELIGIBLE to be tracked by the district's own rules.
  
• At least one image from the system was used in an attempt to discipline a student for a perceived wrongful activity that took place when the student WAS NOT IN THE CARE OF THE SCHOOOL or in any situation where it could reasonably claim an implied duty of care.
  
• Earlier "admissions" by the district were crafted to downplay the level of intrusion and give the impression that there were only a limited number of images (42) when in fact there were thousands of images. And furthermore, that thousands more images had been scrubbed from the district's computers. Forgive my idle speculation here, but it is a pretty fair bet that those deleted files would have incuded images of sudents (and or their siblings) in a state of undress sufficient to qualify as child pornography.
  
• At least two of those with access to the images, have exchanged emails which can only be interpreted to mean they'd been viewing the images voyeuristically, for personal gratifcation/entertainment that had absolutely nothing to do with their jobs, or the purpose for which the software was intented.

Not one of the claims you dismissed as unfounded allegations has been demostrated to be false. Every subsequent revelation in this case has only served to strengthen those allegations and bring evidence of further wrongdoings to light. Every single one of your "reasonble" alternative scenarios has subsequently been clearly demonstrated to have no basis whatsoever in fact.

Now I'm one that will go to bat for allegedly dirty cops and even paedos when the evidence to hand suggests that they're getting a raw deal, and that the evidence does not support the accusations being made against them. However, there is no stretch of the immagination which will allow me to believe (or even argue) that no wrongdoing took place here, or even that the wrongdoing was an unintended outcome of actions taken with only lilly white intentions.

The potential for abuse and misuse is clearly implicit in the software's list of features. And yet it would appear that whatever safeguards that might have exsisted were in policy only, with no concrete measures in place to either deter or detect inappropriate use of the software.

[Hannah Bell]

109. I'll respond to just one of your "admissions" because it can be answered quickly without looking

anything up:

*Earlier "admissions" by the district were crafted to downplay the level of intrusion and give the impression that there were only a limited number of images (42) when in fact there were thousands of images.


The district said, & continues to say, that the security feature was activated in 42 cases. It has never said or implied there were 42 pictures, because the security feature was designed to take a picture every 15 minutes once activated, & to continue taking pictures until deactivated.

Taking pictures every 15 minutes on 42 computers = over 4000 pictures per day.

= "thousands" of pictures.


You heard "thousands of pictures" & decided that = widespread, indiscriminate picture-taking of many/most/all students.

But it doesn't necessarily mean that.

The other items on your list overreach similarly.

It's very tiresome.

[Ken Burch]

117. Is there a reason you're so obsessed with minimizing this?

What do you have to see before you stop with the endless "nothing is proved" thing?

How much more proof do you need?

And why does a right-wing school district deserve the loyalty of someone who puts a picture of Karl Marx in their posts?

It's not like any possible defense could be made of the security devices.

[Hannah Bell]

119. Is there some reason you're so obsessed with convicting before trial on the basis of "evidence"

released by one side?

It's hysterical to see you write "what further proof do you need"?


The case hasn't even been certified as a class action yet.

The preliminary investigation isn't even complete.

No judge or jury has ruled on any evidence.

I haven't defended the security devices; in fact, I've said the arrangements were stupid & asking for trouble. However, that's not what the majority of posters are discussing, & that's not the main thrust of the case.

For example, in the most recent filing, plantiffs allege the tech supervisor was possibly "a voyeur".

The "evidence" for this is some emails which they apparently quote out of context (per this latest article in the Inquirer, to whom the full text of the emails was supposedly provided):


"Cafiero's lawyer, Charles Mandracchia, said Friday his client was eager to cooperate but first wanted to meet with the criminal investigators. An FBI agent plans to interview her Tuesday, he said.

Mandracchia also said Cafiero, who is on paid leave from her school post, never looked at or tried to look at any pictures of Robbins.

"Carol Cafiero did not look at any Blake Robbins pictures - not one," Mandracchia said in an interview. "The only time she would ever go in was if someone asked her to or directed her to - and it was only two or three times."

In each case, he said, Cafiero was asked to help find a missing laptop. None of the photos she saw were inappropriate, he said.

Mandracchia also took issue with Haltzman's use of district e-mail excerpts in the motion filed Thursday. The motion said another Lower Merion schools employee, after viewing photos from the Web cameras, had written to Cafiero: "It's like a little LMSD soap opera."

According to the motion, Cafiero e-mailed back: "I know, I love it!"

Mandracchia said the e-mail exchange between Cafiero and the employee, Amanda Wuest, took place more than a year before the district activated the tracking system on Blake Robbins' computer. The attorney gave The Inquirer a copy of what he said was the entire exchange, dated Sept. 19, 2008.

The copy appears to show that the two women were responding to a report from four students that a laptop was missing from a Harriton High gym. Officials first checked surveillance cameras in the building but saw nothing suspicious, according to the e-mail.

Referring to the tracking program's tools, Wuest wrote back to Cafiero: "Hopefully, if they were taken, we'll get some screen captures/pictures over the weekend."

http://www.philly.com/inquirer/front_page/20100417_L__Merion_to_let_parents_see_secretly_snapped_photos.html



On the basis of the two excerpted quotes in the filing, I've seen DUers decide/allege:

1. That many school staff must have had access to any photos
2. That Cafiero is a pervert who should be jailed
3. That the quoted material "proves" the school was engaged in widespread spying
4. etc.


However, the latest article leaves a different impression; that Cafiero & Wuest were actually discussing surveillance cameras inside the school.


But I don't know, because I'm not privy to the full text & context of the emails.

And neither are you, & neither are all the witchhunters at DU.

[CreekDog]

163. Because admitting this is wrong is not something you need a conviction to prove

you are arguing against jumping to conclusions without evidence and a trial...that's just one aspect, the criminal aspect.

what we are also discussing here is that this is just plain wrong, regardless of the criminal outcomes.

sheesh you're obtuse about this.

[Hannah Bell]

184. you seem to be confused. 1) to say "this" is wrong, you need to know what "this" is.

2) my posts are about questions of fact. i have no idea what yours & the many others who keep attacking me for not denouncing the "wrong" in this case.

i've already said multiple times that schools shouldn't be able to look at students at home.

i'm not sure what else you'd have me do.

[TheMadMonk]

187. How about simply admit that what took place was so utterly inexcusable,...

...that absolutely no defence is possible?

Forget about specific violations of an individual's privacy even though it is clear that violations did take place and it is a statistical near certainty that students would have been caught naked, if not even more compromised.

What is so wrong here is the simple fact that these people unilatterally gave themselves the ability to peer into other people's private spaces (including the bedrooms of children) on a whim and no one appears to have seen anything wrong with that. The reason they gave themselves the ability DOES NOT MATTER. Their motivations DO NOT MATTER. All that matters is that they took it upon themselves to violate common decency, common law, and the constitution.

AND I'll lay London to a housebrick that these same individuals are pissing and moaning about the way the press is invading THEIR privacy.

[TheMadMonk]

158. It implied by ommision that only a limited number of images existed.

You also forgot to mention the unspecified number of times the "feature" was activated prior to September.

I certainly do not recall any mention in earlier discussions that the sofware was configured to take a snapshot every 15 minutes. In fact it was specifically stated that the images were taken at the time the laptop was opened/woken from sleep mode, which actually makes a cetain amount of sense in a theft recovery role. Every 15 mins smacks way too much of keeping an eye on what the little monsters are up to.

Given the amount of upset this event has caused, failing to mention at the time that they actually were in possession of several thousand images and waiting until cirucumstances brought the actual figures to light as part of the discovery process does not put the school administration in a good light. The fact that at the same time it is revealed that thousands more images have been scrubbed from the system is pretty damning too. If it turns out those deletions took place after this whole mess exploded, it will be more than pretty damning. BTW my money's on this being the case.

You might want to consider this too. Given the number of images taken, what the meaning of 'is' is is largely irrelevant. With thousands of images the probability is so close to unity that it makes no matter, that multiple images of naked students would have been captured. Also there would be a very high probability that at least one image would clearly catch a student in an act of self gratification, with a lesser but still very appreciable chance that a bit of mutual gratification might be caught.


As for overreaching the first four points are bald statements of known facts. There is no overreach there.

The first is inexcusable under any and all circumstances. That school rules/policy regarding computer use actually conspired to make a highly probable intrusion into a near certain one makes it even worse.

The second might conceivably be explained away as concealing an anti theft feature that could be easily thwarted given prior knowledge of its existence. Security by obscurity has repeatedly been demonstrated to be an exercise in futility, but people still try it, so I must allow that it might have been the case here. But while it explains it still does not excuse.

The third, also is inexcusable, since the feature was activated on numerous occasions when administrators knew the laptops were not lost or stolen, but simply strayed. Furthermore it is now quite clear that the tracking feature was not consistently used in the case of merely strayed computers. Might I also mention that one or two representative images would suffice to make a case for actual theft, or taking without permission, hanging onto the rest smacks of either voyeurism or hoarding information on the premise that it might be useful someday. Niether particularly admirable traits.


The last is what got this whole ball rolling, and where you performed contortions worthy of a Russian circus performer in order to explain how it might not be the case that the image was obtained with the security software. Several of us, myself included, even acknowledged that your explanations were plausible (even if highly unlikely given the overall circumstances) until the school itself admitted to the source of the image. Even then IIRC, we had to smack you once or twice with that revelation before you gave up on those alternatives. You also went to great lengths to tell us how a responsible administrator would never do something so stupid. And I'll even agree with you on that point. No responsible administrator would do what this one did. However, one without scruples, who believes they finally have a troublesome student by the short and curlies very well might, as could a religious nutter who puts their belief system ahead of legal niceties.

You might want to note at this time that our "unfounded speculation" and blind acceptance of "unsubstantiated allegations" have subsequenty been pretty much spot on the money, right down to staff perusing the images and screen captures for no reason other than vicarious titilation. That it wasn't janitors is a rather small point. Particularly since the point being made at the time was about possession of (or access to) the "keys to the henhouse" not whether the keyholder swung a mop or a mouse.


When defending the vice principal became untennable, you moved onto defending the district. But even appealing to the committee theory of incompetence could not explain this mess in entirely innocent terms.

Even now it seems, you are utterly incapable of seeing what is wrong with placing remotely controlled surveilance software on a computer that has a very high probability of being used in a child's (or anyone's for that matter) bedroom.

Whether or not there was misuse (and it is abundantly clear that there was misuse here) is not the point. Or even for that matter, that the images captured might catch Little Johny feeding the chooks or Susie saying you-hoo to her hoo-hoo. These are simply reasons why unregulated and unsupervised intrusion is a doubleplus ungood idea.

The point here is far more fundamental than that. The point is that these people (and a lot more just like them, including it would appear you) believe that they have the unilateral right to covertly intrude into the private space of anyone with whom they have established some sort of ongoing authoritarian connection at any time they personally decide that circumstances warrant it.

[Hannah Bell]

179. mentioned numerous times in numerous articles since the beginning of this story.

3/6

Once activated, the LANrev software program took webcam photographs of the user and screen shots every 15 minutes the computer was in use. Privacy experts say there are far less intrusive ways to track lost laptops.

http://worldnews.hometips4u.com/school-webcam-spying-probe-prompts-lower-merion-to-place-two-on-paid-leave


2/21

Laptops with LanREV "phone home" on a given schedule, a default of every 15 minutes. Once administrators activate the Theft-Track feature every "heartbeat" -- 15 minutes by default -- a screenshot and webcam photo is taken and sent to the server.

While I initially read "activated 42 times" as meaning 42 photos taken or tried to take, we're probably talking hundreds if not thousands of photos taken.

http://talkback.zdnet.com/5208-12355-0.html?forumID=1&threadID=75497&messageID=1468302


you just weren't paying attention. it was known from day 1.

[CreekDog]

162. But how was the play Mrs. Lincoln?

:eyes:

[elehhhhna]

41. the one who likes fava beans & chiant?

hannahbell lecter?

[TexasObserver]

2. And just as some of us suspected, it was sordid spying.

From the news column:

The system that Lower Merion school officials used to track lost and stolen laptops wound up secretly capturing thousands of images, including photographs of students in their homes, Web sites they visited, and excerpts of their online chats, says a new motion filed in a suit against the district.

More than once, the motion asserts, the camera on Robbins' school-issued laptop took photos of Robbins as he slept in his bed. Each time, it fired the images off to network servers at the school district.

Back at district offices, the Robbins motion says, employees with access to the images marveled at the tracking software. It was like a window into "a little LMSD soap opera," a staffer is quoted as saying in an e-mail to Carol Cafiero, the administrator running the program.

"I know, I love it," she is quoted as having replied.

[frustrated_lefty]

35. Although I think this webcam thing was (stupidly)

put in place with reasonable intentions, the behavior of the administrators shows just why it's unacceptable. Who will watch the watchmen? Cafiero needs to be barred from ever working with kids again. Other penalties may be in order, but I think that needs to be first and foremost.

[pocoloco]

96. "reasonable intentions"

Are you out of your fucking mind?

Un-fucking believable.

Have you no sense of decency?

[Warren DeMontague]

4. They didn't try using terrorism as an excuse 'cuz they assumed teh fear of DRUGZZzzzz!!! was enough.

They probably figured that someone would build a statue of them, for busting the kid with the ju-ju-bees or whatever.

[Divine Discontent]

5. "I know, I love it" - she needs put in jail for a long period of time

talk about invasive creepiness. seeing you've taken images of kids in their rooms and not thinking twice about it, and gloating that you enjoy the spying to another administrator? weird...

what the hell do they think they were doing, playing The Sims - Stalker Version?

[saigon68]

26. needs put in jail for a long period of time

She is like a dog scratching to cover up her dung

[Hannah Bell]

116. has it ever occurred to you that your conclusions are based on partial information?

here's more:

Mandracchia also took issue with Haltzman's use of district e-mail excerpts in the motion filed Thursday. The motion said another Lower Merion schools employee, after viewing photos from the Web cameras, had written to Cafiero: "It's like a little LMSD soap opera."

According to the motion, Cafiero e-mailed back: "I know, I love it!"

Mandracchia said the e-mail exchange between Cafiero and the employee, Amanda Wuest, took place more than a year before the district activated the tracking system on Blake Robbins' computer.

The attorney gave The Inquirer a copy of what he said was the entire exchange, dated Sept. 19, 2008.

The copy appears to show that the two women were responding to a report from four students that a laptop was missing from a Harriton High gym. Officials first checked surveillance cameras in the building but saw nothing suspicious, according to the e-mail.

Referring to the tracking program's tools, Wuest wrote back to Cafiero: "Hopefully, if they were taken, we'll get some screen captures/pictures over the weekend."

http://www.philly.com/inquirer/front_page/20100417_L__Merion_to_let_parents_see_secretly_snapped_photos.html


So, a little more information, which puts into question the plantiffs' spin on the remarks lifted out of context from the emails.

[TorchTheWitch]

7. "including pictures of Blake partially undressed..."

The material disclosed by the district contains hundreds of photos of Robbins and his family members - "including pictures of Blake partially undressed and of Blake sleeping," the motion states.

These people need to be in jail.

[jmowreader]

31. So this server contains child pornography!

If this server contains photos of Blake Robbins partially undressed, you know it ALSO contains photos of girls not wearing tops or bras. So yeah, you're right, those people need some jail time to think about the consequences of their actions.

[Love Bug]

34. Yet if these kids had sent the same photos by cell phone they

would be in trouble for "sexing." If I were a parent, I'd be storming the gates, pitchfork in hand.

[Occulus]

8. I think I'll kick this before I go to bed.

It's worse than what we thought it was. By far.

[etherealtruth]

83. Yes it is

Sadly, "we" thought it was bad without imagining they had so grossly disregarded the privacy of these families.

[Citizen Worker]

10. But the system was only used 42 times

Wasn't that assertion part of the initial story? And wasn't it further explained that it was only used to locate unaccounted for computers?

[Mojeoux]

11. So they only spied on stolen laptops?

Unclear?

[woo me with science]

37. Nope.

They spied when they knew full well who had the laptop. Some families just missed or were late with a fee payment, and the school knew exactly where the laptops were, but they spied anyway.

At least one kid was spied on when her laptop was not lost, stolen, or behind on fees.

Not that they had a right to spy on ANYONE in the first place.

[elehhhhna]

teachers also reported THEIR laptops had the camera light go on

and were TOLD by their employer/s that it was just a software glitch. Only female teachers have reported this, btw.
It was in the news a week or so ago.


The E & O insurance carrier for the district is gong to take a massive financial hit when they settle this one. Massive.

[elehhhhna]

46. teachers also reported THEIR laptops had the camera light go on

and were TOLD by their employer/s that it was just a software glitch. Only female teachers have reported this, btw.
It was in the news a week or so ago.


The E & O insurance carrier for the district is gong to take a massive financial hit when they settle this one. Massive.

[TorchTheWitch]

55. teachers?

Apparently the laptops were only given to the students. I don't remember anything about this also happening to any teachers. Do you remember where you heard this?

[elehhhhna]

58. here, w/ links, posted by a duer who lives in the district & whose name escapes me at the moment.

last week, iirc.

[TorchTheWitch]

61. thanks

I guess the teachers would have to have the laptops as well... makes sense. I just hadn't heard anything about the teachers also being spied on.

[elehhhhna]

63. onen of 2 things have happened snce then:

it's either been disproved or there's a class-action suit being formed and the victims aren't talking to the press. Yet.

[TorchTheWitch]

65. they'd be in the same class action already running

The present lawsuit IS the class action suit. There can't be another one for the teachers... they'd have to join the suit already established whether they wanted to or not if they wanted to sue.

[Hannah Bell]

113. it hasn't yet been certified as a class action, so far as i've seen reported.

By filing a class-action lawsuit, the Robbins family is requesting to represent all other parents of laptop-lugging students. These parents are not comfortable allowing the Robbins family to speak for them. Secondly, in their view, the lawsuit’s gag order on the school district means they’ll only get the so-called facts from an internal investigation. Finally, class-action lawsuits are extravagantly expensive. The parents dismiss suing your own tax-funded school district as “robbing peter to pay peter,” and argue that parents who participate in the suit would essentially be suing themselves...

...The goal is to stop the lawsuit from becoming certified as a class action. If they succeed—and this simply becomes the Robbins’ case—the group says they may hire their own investigators to get to the bottom of what happened.

http://www.philadelphiaweekly.com/news-and-opinion/Robbins-Hood.html

[TorchTheWitch]

132. it would be far cheaper for the school if it's a class action

You don't need to inform me about class actions, I worked them for years at one of the biggest exclusively class action firms right in the district where this took place. I grew up in this area and still live here.

If each student's family filed their own lawsuit against the school over this same issue the settlement money piled up would FAR outweigh that which would pile up if each family were included in a single class. The more plaintiffs attached in a suit, the less each one gets. Class actions always benefit the defendants and the attorneys involved ultimately stiffing each plaintiff.

You better believe the school is praying this becomes a class action if it isn't proclaimed so already because they already know it's going to cost them and their only option is to minimize that cost. Those parents that are grumbling about this case because they're afraid their taxes will go up will be the first ones jumping on the bandwagon to get their cut of a settlement once they realize a settlement is likely to be paid. The loudest grumblers are the ones who live in the district and have to pay the taxes but send their kids to the private schools which makes them ineligable to get any cut of a settlement... they grumble about having to pay the taxes for the public schools they don't send their kids to anyway and always have.

The case was originally filed as a class action and I've yet to see any indication by the court that it was not accepted as such. The suit does not speak for all the families of the schools in the district, it speaks for those families of the schools in the district who wish to join the suit. Any families who have a problem with it are free to NOT join the suit. Any families who pay the district for the schools but don't want to hold the schools accountable when they do wrong because they're afraid their taxes will go up can cheerfully go fuck their selfish greedy selves because that attitude means they're more concerned about what's in their pocket than what's happening to their kids and/or their neighbors kids and sends the message to the schools that they can do whatever the hell they want with the tax money they pay them because they're too chickenshit to hold the schools accountable.

[Hannah Bell]

133. the information in the post you responded to indicated that as of late march, it hadn't been

certified as a class action.

if you have some more recent information showing that it has, please post it.

the rest of your post seems totally irrelevant to anything i discussed.

[msanthrope]

68. The teachers spied on are the next bombshell.

But understand, they have a union that isn't supporting them, and they are afraid of getting shitcanned. They would be "whistleblowers" with both the union and the admin against them. And guess what--the union is heading into contract talks this year....

People in Lower Merion talk. A lot.

[TorchTheWitch]

69. I wondered - I always lived in this area

Although where I went to public school was in the district next door. I figured there would be something like this making them afraid to speak out.

[elehhhhna]

72. going public would protect them, and it he union doesn't go ballistic

on their behalf, they need a new union, too.

What a nightmare for them.

[bananas]

71. Here's one, but w/o links

"A reliable source has stated to yours truly that School District computers' IN THE POSSESSION OF FACULTY MEMBERS ALSO HAD GREEN LIGHTS COME ON PERIODICALLY, indicating that the webcam was activated AND, strangely, this occurrence was limited to women, to the best of the source's knowledge."
http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_topic&forum=389&topic_id=8106810

[Hannah Bell]

12. yes, if you actually read the article, it still is. 42 computers taking a picture every 15 minutes.

if each were activated just one day, that's over 4000 pictures.

but you know, to figure that out, you'd first have to read *all* the material in the article & stop jerking your knee.

[PCIntern]

21. Your P.O.V. is a disgrace...

[Name removed]

23. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[msanthrope]

57. Her POV is self-interest. No less disgraceful IMHO. n/t

[Hannah Bell]

103. self-interest? how's that? i don't live there, don't work there, & don't work in education,

computers, law, or media.

so please explain on what basis you charge me with "self-interest".

or admit you just make up shit because you don't like my comments.

[msanthrope]

152. On what basis do I charge you with "self-interest?"

Hannah, one need only to read your vociferous, repeated anti-Obama, anti-Duncan posts defending public school systems to understand that you have a self-interest.

Is it monetary? No. It's deeper, and more personal. It's about pride--you seem to pride yourself on being knowledgeable, and on being a crusader against the "corporatist" approach you see the Department of Education taking.

That's all fine, well, and good, but I suggest that here, you've chosen the wrong side, and instead of backing down, you seem all the more invested in defending your judgment. That is what I mean about self-interest---you cannot accept that you might be wrong--and that every single bit of evidence in the public domain increasingly suggests that you are.

If you are wrong about Lower Merion, it does call your other defenses and judgments into question, does it not?

For me, it certainly has. I do not think it is merely coincidental that you, and others, who have loudly defended this school district have also been the same posters who have repeatedly and loudly posted anti-Obama threads regarding Department of Education reforms.

Your defense of LMSD hasn't helped your larger cause, IMHO. But I do understand your personal investment.

[Hannah Bell]

176. oh, brother. i.e., there's no "self-interest" involved except your interest in amateur psychology.

[Forkboy]

177. +1

[JTFrog]

153. +1

[Generic Other]

70. It turned out to be so much worse than you reported originally!

Pretty damaging words these admins are quoted as saying!!

I bet PTA night was grim after this latest round.

[MicaelS]

33. I think your protestations are fertilizer....

Carol Cafiero, LMSD IT coordinator, fought every attempt to subpoena her. Then when forced to testify by a Federal judge, she took the Fifth on every question but her name. Even when other LMSD employees had testified.

[Hannah Bell]

105. what conclusion do you draw from these facts?

[Occulus]

115. It indicates she believed a truthful answer to all of those questions would incriminate her

While not damning in and of itself, when combined with her refusal to turn over her home computer during discovery in spite of a court order to do so, she looks guilty as homemade sin.

Every post you have ever made on this subject appears to be in apologetic justification for this district's actions, from the very beginning. You have not ever, to my knowledge, made the admission that the school district may have ever done wrong regarding this incident. If you are trying to avoid being perceived as being personally invested in this incident, you are doing it wrong. From your posts, as of now, you come across- in spite of all your claims to the contrary- as being directly connected to this in some way.

The "we don't know all the facts" argument, such as it is, does not wash at this point. There is now far too much evidence that not only did this school district step way over the line with their use of these cameras, but also that individuals within that district's administrative staff may have themselves committed criminal acts.

If this were about a case that is somehow ambiguous, it would be one thing, but the more information that comes out in this incident, the worse the district looks. Per the article, the district even tried to greymail the plaintiffs, a mostly corporate tactic used when the defense knows there's dirt.

There's plenty of reason to be suspicious and not nearly enough reason- call it a "preponderance of the evidence" if you wish- to believe that the district, including individuals within the district's administration, is at all innocent. Their intentions may be good, but they built with those intentions a road, and this is where it has led.

What we want to know is why you keep pointing down that road.

[Hannah Bell]

118. Perhaps it "looks" that way because the article reports the claims of the plantiffs' lawyer.

Perhaps you ought not to leap to conclusions based on the claims -- unproven, uncertified -- of one side only.

Here's another article:

Mandracchia said the e-mail exchange between Cafiero and the employee, Amanda Wuest, took place more than a year before the district activated the tracking system on Blake Robbins' computer. The attorney gave The Inquirer a copy of what he said was the entire exchange, dated Sept. 19, 2008.

The copy appears to show that the two women were responding to a report from four students that a laptop was missing from a Harriton High gym. Officials first checked surveillance cameras in the building but saw nothing suspicious, according to the e-mail.

Referring to the tracking program's tools, Wuest wrote back to Cafiero: "Hopefully, if they were taken, we'll get some screen captures/pictures over the weekend."

http://www.philly.com/inquirer/front_page/20100417_L__Merion_to_let_parents_see_secretly_snapped_photos.html


"The judge said Cafiero could assert her Fifth Amendment right not to testify at a deposition in the case. He said she has not been indicted or named in a target letter."

http://www.philly.com/philly/news/local/89974282.html

[Occulus]

121. You broke DU rules by quoting that much of the article

You're complaining about making statements provided from one side and not the other when you on the same evening quoted the president of the school board without revealing the source of the quote you provided?

Pot, meet kettle. Kettle, this is pot.

As I said in that other thread, Hannah, we don't have to wait for all the facts; all we or a jury needs to see is a preponderance of the evidence, which doesn't look good at all for the district at this point.

This is not a criminal case and "innocent until proven guilty" does not apply.

[Hannah Bell]

123. i have corrected my egregious violation of du rules.

some things, however, appear too hopeless for correction.

[woo me with science]

137. Ms. Cafiero, is that you? nt

[MineralMan]

36. Is there no misbehavior you will not countenance?

Feh!

[Ignis]

59. +1

:thumbsdown:

[Hannah Bell]

110. which misbehavior is it that you believe i "countenance"?

[MineralMan]

168. I haven't seen you even suggest that there was anything wrong

with what happened. You're so busy defending these people that I don't believe you're seeing the whole picture.

[Hannah Bell]

180. your remarks imply that you already know "what happened". i believe that's what the preliminary

investigation is for.

[Matariki]

47. Still NOT OKAY!!!

You sound as if your are rationalizing and justifying this?

[Name removed]

48. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[dionysus]

49. wow, does this spying fondly remind you of mother russia or something comrade bell?

you're going out of your way to defend this heinous shit.

[Occulus]

60. And again, one wonders why.

Especially now that more damning evidence has come to light.

[Hannah Bell]

127. only if you believe "evidence" consists of allegations made by one party without

any verification by an impartial fact-finding body, judge, or jury.

[Hannah Bell]

111. gee, unwarranted conclusions, false accusations, & red-baiting -- all in two sentences.

you've really outdone yourself.

[liberalhistorian]

76. You DO realize that the pictures of the kids sleeping

and dressing in their OWN ROOM AT HOME were released by the SCHOOL DISTRICT, do you not? Or does that not even matter to you? Are you so eager to defend the schools that nothing short of God himself appearing in thunder and lightning and writing it across the sky would convince you? Then again, you'd probably believe whatever the school admins and IT admins tell you and to hell with the very evidence that THEY THEMSELVES were forced to release.

[EOTE]

188. So what number is an acceptable number for children spied on?

Is 42 OK, but 43 would be over the line? I really can't figure out why you're constantly defending these evil actions.

[TorchTheWitch]

13. except they lied about that

Blake's computer was never reported lost or stolen. The school admitted that they activated the spycam to see if he was bringing his computer home as it was a loaner since his issued computer was turned in for repair. The school claims that the loaner computers are not to be taken off school property until a $55 insurance fee was paid. In other words, the school knew he had the computer and used the spycam to catch him at home with it.

Evidence the district turned over to plaintiff apparently shows that other students who had not reported their laptop lost or stolen had been subjected to the spycam while in their homes.

Latest Motion... http://media.philly.com/documents/MotiontoCompel.pdf

[elehhhhna]

50. female teachers complained about their school-issued laptops, as well.

see my post above

[eShirl]

25. Wanna buy a bridge?

:rofl:

[elehhhhna]

45. 42 thousand maybe.

[TorchTheWitch]

14. PDF doc - plaintiffs Motion for Sanctions

http://media.philly.com/documents/MotiontoCompel.pdf

Some interesting stuff in there...

f) there were numerous webcam pictures of Blake and other members of his family, including pictures of Blake partially undressed and of Blake sleeping; and

g) there are additional webcam pictures and screen shots of Blake Robbins which, to date, have not been recovered because the evidence was purged by the IT Department.

...

7. First, Carol Cafiero, unlike any of the witnesses asked to testify, invokes the Fifth Amendment to every question asked of her, including a question asked as to whether she had ever downloaded pictures to her own personal computer, including pictures of students who were naked while in their home.

[Papa Boule]

39. Thx for that link n/t

[TorchTheWitch]

53. you're welcome

Covers some interesting things that for some reason the article didn't mention.

[Goblinmonger]

99. Carol sounds like a turd, but you can't plead the 5th and then answer some questions.

So taking the 5th on the naked pictures on her own computer doesn't mean anything. She can't answer that and still take the 5th on the other questions.

[Cal Carpenter]

19. "..wound up..." - what passive panguage

Like they are just robots with minds of their own.

No, they were either programmed that way or some human was making it happen as it went.

I'm the first to imply that my computer does things of it's own accord and anthropomorphize it, but let's get real here. A person made this happen, it didn't just 'wind up' happening like this.

[woo me with science]

95. No kidding. nt

[woo me with science]

24. K & R

Knew this was coming...

[woo me with science]

28. The school's original defense is shattered now.

They claimed the software was for tracking lost computers, which was no excuse for photographing students in their homes anyway. But apparently now it is clear that they were turning on the cams for any reason, including late payment of fees, when they knew full well where the laptops were.

The latest motion says they repeatedly photographed one student just because her name got mixed up with that of another student whose laptop was actually missing.

[Echo In Light]

38. +1 ... idiots will still side w/the school irregardless

[WinkyDink]

79. Original LIES, I think you meant to write. :-)

[woo me with science]

93. I stand corrected. nt

[Hannah Bell]

114. "apparently now it is clear that they were turning on the cams for any reason"

evidence for that being?

[woo me with science]

138. They have admitted they turned on the cams for LATE FEE PAYMENT, Hannah.

and they have admitted there are photos of kids whose laptops were never reported stolen or lost, Hannah.

You still have not explained why you think illegally obtained photos of kids in their bedrooms are okay.

[liberalhistorian]

144. She seems to be assiduously avoiding that particular

question, and that particular evidence, every single time it's brought up. Wonder why? Hmmmm........

[Hannah Bell]

157. it's not clear what "they admitted," nor does that = "for any reason,"

& i've never said anything close to "illegally obtained photos of kids in their bedrooms are ok".

[woo me with science]

159. What DO you say about the illegally obtained photos in the kids' bedrooms, then, Hannah?

Got any problem with that?

Got any problem with the school's snapping pics of a kid sleeping and undressing, because a family didn't pay a fee?

[aikoaiko]

30. I forget, was the terms of this pictorial tracking disclosed in writing and was the activation

done according to policy?

[woo me with science]

32. Nope. No disclosure to families.

If they had disclosed, I'm sure some families would have told them exactly what they could do with their laptops. To make things worse, the laptops were REQUIRED for certain classes, and students were prohibited from bringing their own or using laptops other than the school-issued ones.

And the school district initially claimed their "policy" was to activate webcams only to locate lost or stolen laptops. But that's clearly not what they were actually doing, given these recent revelations.

[elehhhhna]

51. NO! And they LIED to student s who asked about it. Repeatedly,

[msanthrope]

54. They also screenshot IMs---no policy on that. n/t

[WinkyDink]

80. No, and no. THERE IS NO DEFENSE. THE SCHOOL PERSONNEL WERE VOYEURS.

[Spazito]

40. Wow!

I hope there is some serious jail time for the assholes involved.

Recommended.

[Matariki]

44. Oh yeah right - "The Laptops" did it

no creepy people were involved :eyes:

[msanthrope]

52. The school also screenshot IM communications. So that blows the

whole "we are activating to see where the computers are" bullshit.



http://media.philly.com/documents/MotiontoCompel.pdf

[WolverineDG]

56. Throw everyone of those asshats in jail for a long, long time

I truly hope a long stint in jail was worth the "fun" of your little soap opera, Carol.

dg

[Blue_Tires]

62. i'm getting the feeling this is a test case for the rest of us

how many workplaces would use stuff like this if they could??

[woo me with science]

66. And how many other school districts have been doing this

or are doing this now?

[TorchTheWitch]

67. probably loads of them

there's YouTube vids of the same spycams being used to watch kids in other schools. If they could watch them in school, they could watch them at home.

[CoffeeCat]

75. Workplaces probably...

...monitor your every keystroke at work. I'd always assumed that your every
move was being thoroughly reviewed.

However, work laptops brought home would be a different thing--because you are
in your own home and that would be a constitutional invasion of your right to
privacy. I've never heard of that happening.

You're right though. Anyone could be blackmailed.

[TheMadMonk]

101. Sorry to tell you this. That fight's been fought and lost.

Employees have no reasonable expectation of privacy at any time when using employer supplied equipment.

[Occulus]

122. What about children, who are legally unable to enter into any contract?

I would suggest that any policy or law allowing an employee's children or other minor occupants to be even inadvertently monitored when such corporate equipment is being used on property not owned by the corporation in question is bad law or bad policy, but that's a whole other ball of wax.

[TheMadMonk]

140. I have no idea how this was argued at the time.

I can only assume it comes under the heading of: "Your house. Your child. Your problem." If you can not expect privacy for yourself, then it's fairly obvious that privacy can not be expected for any other person in the same location.

[liberalhistorian]

77. What makes you think there are some who aren't

already doing it?

[colbertforpresident]

73. Wow

I know Carol and am sorry to hear that she is involved. She's a very nice woman.

[WinkyDink]

81. Many criminals are "nice" to the world beyond their victims. She's a creepy, lying voyeur.

[Hannah Bell]

126. Mandracchia also took issue with Haltzman's use of district e-mail excerpts

in the motion filed Thursday....

Mandracchia said the e-mail exchange between Cafiero and the employee, Amanda Wuest, took place more than a year before the district activated the tracking system on Blake Robbins' computer. The attorney gave The Inquirer a copy of what he said was the entire exchange, dated Sept. 19, 2008.

The copy appears to show that the two women were responding to a report from four students that a laptop was missing from a Harriton High gym. Officials first checked surveillance cameras in the building but saw nothing suspicious, according to the e-mail.

Referring to the tracking program's tools, Wuest wrote back to Cafiero: "Hopefully, if they were taken, we'll get some screen captures/pictures over the weekend."

http://www.philly.com/inquirer/front_page/20100417_L__Merion_to_let_parents_see_secretly_snapped_photos.html



Sure that the excerpts the plantiffs released to the press & the context they provided fairly represented the exchange, are you?

[CoffeeCat]

74. Everyone involved should be sued beyond repair...

Unconscionable. Stupid. Perverted. Reckless. Arrogant.

Actionable.

[Goblinmonger]

100. Don't know the laws in this state

but most states have limits on how much you can sue a governmental agency for and make it very difficult to do so. Another reason tort reform sucks.

[CoffeeCat]

148. Could these administrators be sued personally?

After all, what they were doing surely wasn't sanctioned by
any school authority. It's not in any school handbook that
these people electronically spy on students. They made these
decisions on their own and made their own rules.

How about suing them personally?

[WinkyDink]

78. I'd like to hear from the DU school-defenders right about now. It's called "SPYING."

[Papa Boule]

82. **UPDATE*** "Substantial number" of webcam photos recovered

The Lower Merion School District today acknowledged that investigators reviewing its controversial laptop tracking program have recovered "a substantial number of webcam photos" and that they expect to soon start notifying parents whose children were photographed.

.

[elehhhhna]

84. could get dangerous.

my personal husband would possibly/probably become violent over this happening to me or our girls.

[Rex]

85. What I don't understand is how anyone can defend the actions.

This is a pure violation of a persons rights and a class actionable offense. If it was ONE or ONE MILLION pictures, doesn't matter...I hope they round up everyone involved and throw them in a STATE prison.

[elehhhhna]

166. you mean the disruptor form lala land?

she can moan and whine but in this caase, she''s got nothing.

[friendly_iconoclast]

189. Some not only love Big Brother (or Sister), but will defend them here.

You'd think they had a gig at the Ministry Of Truth...

[TorchTheWitch]

89. oh, this is just RICH...

"We hope to start that process shortly," Ebby said in a statement addressed to parents and guardians and posted on the district's website. "During that process the privacy of all students will be strongly protected."

Somebody should have thought about their privacy rights before installing spy cams in the students' laptops without their knowledge that spied on them and took pictures of them in their own bedrooms!

[etherealtruth]

90. During that process the privacy of all students will be strongly protected

Does the district think they have any credibility regarding their respect for the privacy of others?

[Grand Taurean]

86. Based upon my experiences with school systems.

I am not sympathetic to them.
My family had enough trouble with our small town school system prying into our lives telling us how do to things.

[liberalhistorian]

145. Don't think for one minute that private schools are or would be

any better. I attended a private high school and have known the dealings of many others and this kind of thing would be no stranger to them, either. It all gets down to whether or not the admins are authoritarian control freaks or not.

[Grand Taurean]

173. I agree. My brother attended a private high school and the kids were much worse

than in the local public high school.
Reminds me why I do not plan on having children.

[dem mba]

91. this outcome was 100% predictable

of course this system was going to be abused.

the airpost 3D full body scanners were abused within 24 hours of being implemented. is everybody in this world just dense, or what?

http://uk.reuters.com/article/idUKTRE62N1T020100324?pageNumber=1&virtualBrandChannel=0
http://www.prisonplanet.com/exposed-naked-body-scanner-images-of-film-star-printed-circulated.html

[Vickers]

112. "secretly" ??? Seemed intentional to me. n/t

[Hannah Bell]

120. inquirer has full text of emails:

Mandracchia also took issue with Haltzman's use of district e-mail excerpts in the motion filed Thursday. The motion said another Lower Merion schools employee, after viewing photos from the Web cameras, had written to Cafiero: "It's like a little LMSD soap opera."

According to the motion, Cafiero e-mailed back: "I know, I love it!"

Mandracchia said the e-mail exchange between Cafiero and the employee, Amanda Wuest, took place more than a year before the district activated the tracking system on Blake Robbins' computer. The attorney gave The Inquirer a copy of what he said was the entire exchange, dated Sept. 19, 2008.

The copy appears to show that the two women were responding to a report from four students that a laptop was missing from a Harriton High gym. Officials first checked surveillance cameras in the building but saw nothing suspicious, according to the e-mail.

Referring to the tracking program's tools, Wuest wrote back to Cafiero: "Hopefully, if they were taken, we'll get some screen captures/pictures over the weekend."

http://www.philly.com/inquirer/front_page/20100417_L__Merion_to_let_parents_see_secretly_snapped_photos.html

[PCIntern]

124. Doesn't matter...

the fact that they had the capability to do so is enough. Case closed.

[Hannah Bell]

125. that's not the issue the case filed turns on, so i'm not sure which case you're referring to

that's "closed".

[PCIntern]

128. The whole thing...

you just don't get it or you're deliberately obfuscating...

THE FACT THAT THE CAMERAS WERE WITHIN THE HOMES WITHOUT PARENTAL CONSENT IS THE ONLY THING WHICH MATTERS. NOT THEIR OSTENSIBLY LIMITED USE, NOT WHAT YOU THINK TEACHERS CAN AND CANNOT DO, NOT THE USE THE ADMINISTRATION WAS INTENDING TO IMPLEMENT, NOT THE LAWSUIT, NOT THE DEBATE BETWEEN QUAALUDE'S AND MIKE AND IKE'S, NOT THE LOSS OF COMPUTERS, NOT THE TAX DOLLARS, NOT ANYTHING BUT THE RIGHT TO PRIVACY WHICH WAS ABROGATED.

YOU ARE A DOGGED DEFENDER OF THE INDEFENSIBLE...EVEN THE DISTRICT ADMITS, YOU INTRANSIGENT INDIVIDUAL, THAT THEY WERE WRONG IN THEIR IMPLEMENTATION, BUT YOU INSIST UPON PROMULGATING THIS HOLIER-THAN-THOU, NEARER-TO-GOD-THAN THEE, SELF-RIGHTEOUS ARGUMENT WHICH DOES NOT HOLD ANY WATER. JUST STOP IT...YOU'RE MAKING A COMPLETE AND UTTER FOOL OF YOURSELF.

[Hannah Bell]

129. no matter how big you type it & how many names you call me, the case

doesn't turn on only on the point you say it does.

it makes specific allegations.

and as DU posters are hyping the excerpts from emails as "proving" that, e.g., the head of tech is a voyeur (as the plantiffs are also alleging), the actual content of the emails does indeed "matter".

[PCIntern]

130. You are either of low IQ or are a deliberate misanthrope...

you don't get it...

I don't fucking care about the case...the cameras were there, IN MY HOME.

Dope...

And I don't care if the post is deleted...

[Hannah Bell]

131. the fact that cameras were in your home has no bearing as to *what the lawsuit says*.

which was what i was discussing.

if you don't care about that, don't answer my post.

easy solution.

[trumad]

134. Hannah...

You're going until you hit the iceberg with this aren't you.

I suspect that Iceberg is right around the corner.

[woo me with science]

136. Ms. Cafiero

has already hit the iceberg.

[whistler162]

141. Since it isn't on the WeirdS**tWebSite then it can't be true!

[PCIntern]

139. Who gives a flying eff what You're talking about?

It's the equivalent of saying that these people are not rapists, so what are you all concerned about?

It's a higher order of morality, something about which you know absolutely nothing.

[The Straight Story]

143. Ok - I'll bite - say you are 100% right about the case - what do you think about the cameras though?

Should the schools have the ability to see your kids when they are at home without their knowledge?

And don't bring anything about this case in, is not relevant to my question.

[Hannah Bell]

182. i've already said what i think about that, several times. no, i don't think schools should

have that capability.

happy?

my question is, why do posters continue to misrepresent my position?

and why don't the same moral crusaders who harp at me ever take issue with posters who wildly invent facts & matters of law, i.e. concocting scenarios where janitors steal keys to access computers so they can peep at pictures of students in their underwear?

see how witch-hunts happen?

[liberalhistorian]

146. OK, then. How about you go to your employer on Monday

morning and tell them you don't mind if they give you a laptop with a camera that they can then access and turn on anytime they want, including when you're in your own home doing your own private business, say, dressing and undressing, sleeping, talking with your family, what have you. If you're so blase about a school putting such cameras on the laptops they issue, that they REQUIRE students to use, and the fact that they then have such access to the cameras, then you shouldn't have any problem with your employer doing that.

[PCIntern]

147. You won't get an answer,,,

this is a disruptive situation we have here.

Next, someone on DU'll be defending convicted rapists...

[Hannah Bell]

183. i've never said anything that would in any way suggest i thought it was a good idea for schools

to be able to photograph or watch students in their homes.

that's entirely your unwarranted assumption.

[liberalhistorian]

185. No, it's not unwarranted at all.

You have been directly confronted with evidence that that is exactly what the school is doing, with pictures released by the SCHOOL ITSELF showing kids in their homes, including sleeping in their own rooms. It is not conjecture or leaping to conclusions, it is fact provided by the very school you're so assiduously defending. You cannot deny that. And, yet, you have never condemned it and seem to have no problem with it and jump on anyone who shows that evidence. So, no, it's not unwarranted conclusion at all. Nor have you in any way condemned the very possibility of them doing it or shown any indication that you think it would be wrong. You've done nothing but defend them and hold their hands no matter what evidence is presented, even if provided by the school itself.

Nice backpedaling there.

[woo me with science]

186. +1

It does get old, doesn't it?

[friendly_iconoclast]

190. So, when *is* the chocolate ration going to be increased again?

Unfortunately for you, screen caps are quite easy to save. The Memory Hole is more like the Memory Cupboard these days...

[msanthrope]

150. "are a deliberate misanthrope" Gotta be the former-even this msanthrope can't support the district.

[PCIntern]

151. !

sorry...I forgot that was your 'handle' here...I wouldn't have tarnished it otherwise!

:hi:

[msanthrope]

154. No tarnish!!! I'm glad for the opportunity to defend misanthropes everywhere! n/t

[msanthrope]

155. Hannah--look at the article you cited. It blows your own points out of the water.

1) The emails released show that this scheme was going on at least one year before the Robbins violation occured. That makes it long term, and unfortunately, shows a pattern and intent on part of Cafiero that isn't helpful to her. As in, the violation to Robbins wasn't precipitated by individualized concern for the student, but was part and parcel of a pattern of spying.

That helps certify the class.

Further--nearly 400 images were taken of robbins over a 2 week period. Why so many? For so long?


2) You repeatedly, and insistently have posted that there were only "42" cases of activation. But from the same article you posted:

"They have said they activated the system 42 times during this school year and a number of times last year."

So how many times was it? It's not 42, we know that.

[Hannah Bell]

156. i asked for some evidence the case had been certified by the judge as a class action,

since as of march it hadn't been. you didn't provide any.


once the system is activated, it takes a picture every 15 minutes which, for 42 cases, = 4000 pictures/24 hours. not sure how you "know that" 42 is a false number.

[woo me with science]

161. You have no problem with that system?

Really, Hannah?

[msanthrope]

164. I didn't say anything about class certification. You mixed me up with

a different poster.

Further, per the article that you cited, the district admitted to more than 42 activations....and I gave you the cite. You cannot have failed to read that.

[msanthrope]

165. I didn't write of class certification. You are mixing me up with another poster.

Further, per the article that you cited, the district admitted to more than 42 activations....and I gave you the cite. You cannot have failed to read that.

[PCIntern]

149. Just made CNN again a few minutes ago...

and a hearty "UP YOURS" to anyone who thinks that this is trivial...

[woo me with science]

178. I'm glad to hear it's making the major news networks now. nt

[divvy]

160. Where can I download the pictures of Teenage Girls?

I would like to see the evidence before making determination...

<written with strong sarcasm if you cannot detect it>

[Withywindle]

167. Well, hopefully if this ever happens again at any other school anywhere.

The kids will be savvy enough to know what that light means. And one of them will take off his or her clothes, have a wank, and then immediately call the FBI to report possession of child porn. :evilgrin:

[woo me with science]

169. It is happening at other schools.

Proud2BlibKansan reported happily that the same system is in place at her school.

[Withywindle]

170. Un-fucking-believable.

Yes, yes, minors are technically inferior citizens with fewer rights than full adults. HOWEVER, as far as I know, there is no law that allows school administrators to usurp the authority of BOTH parents AND the police.

Either the Fourth Amendment applies to everyone, or it doesn't! And if there is any authority that can legitimately override the Fourth Amendment, I guarantee you it isn't the principal and faculty of Weaseltit High School, Weaseltit, Bumfuck, USA.

That was the point of my post. I want teenagers to apply their notorious anti-authoritarian deviousness in ways it will help the world the MOST. Like, using legal channels to take down petty authoritarians whose self-declared "good" intentions are leading straight to the sex-offender ward. So those tin-pot dictators won't ever again be in a position of power where they're ever again allowed to photograph other kids in their goddamn pajamas without their knowledge or consent.

[defendandprotect]

171. r-

[Grand Taurean]

172. Based upon my experiences with school systems.

I have no sympathy for these thugs.

[MkapX]

174. Schools today america tomarrow

Read Robert O'Harrow Jr's "No Place to Hide". Technology is making it more and more easier for the officals to spy on averge americans. Their are private companies out there, willing to sell information about you to the highest bidder

[MkapX]

175. laptops?

im surprise they even give out laptops to kids now and days. When i went to catholic school all i got was some textbooks and rape whistle (lol catholic sex abuse joke)

[Lucian]

181. This makes me want to vomit.

And how can some people support this???