Student Suspended For Posting Photo Of Principal Breaking The Law

from the seems...-backwards dept

Earlier this month, we had the story of some students who were suspended for videotaping their teacher lose his temper. The punishment seemed somehow backwards (even if all the attention later resulted in videos of those same students destroying property coming to light as well). Here's another case that sounds quite similar. A high school student photographed the school's principal smoking on school grounds, in violation of state law and posted it to the web. He also passed out fliers around the school pointing to the website -- which seems to be the argument the school is using to suspend him. The principal is claiming that the suspension was for "harassing and slandering her and being a disruptive influence." Of course, since it appears she actually was breaking the law, then it seems the slander part is tough to show. Of course, part of this points out a cultural change that people need to get used to: the fact that you can be watched and recorded almost anywhere at any time.


Reader Comments (rss)

(Flattened / Threaded)

  1.  
    identicon
    Tim, Mar 24th, 2005 @ 2:34am

    No Subject Given

    It's only a mildly interesting one, that. While it's obviously the teacher's fault in the first place, and if anyone should get the rap, she should be the one, it's also less than polite to go about making a big public fuss about it - tackling that sort of thing should start small and private, and involve an expanding circle of people to fix it.

     

    reply to this | link to this | view in thread ]

  2.  
    identicon
    Jonathan, Mar 24th, 2005 @ 5:44am

    Re: No Subject Given

    Eh, sometimes problems don't get fixed if there isn't a big public fuss. Sometimes things like this simply get swept under the rug if it's kept small and private. Still, it's a matter of form and etiquette, and doesn't change the fact that the principal is 100% wrong.

    Additionally, I could be wrong, but I'm fairly certain that it's 'libel' and not 'slander'. Libel refers to published works (I imagine fliers and websites qualify), while Slander refers to spoken words. You'd think, as a principle and supposedly educated person, she'd know this. :P

     

    reply to this | link to this | view in thread ]

  3.  
    identicon
    Phillip Morris, Mar 24th, 2005 @ 8:31am

    Smoking is still legal you PC's



    Smoking is a LEGAL product.

    If all these uptight people want to ban smoking from school propert, public places, etc then make the damn things illegal ...
    ( I know, you can't because it wouldn't work any better than prohibition )

    Booze & fatties are a much bigger problem in this country but thats socially acceptable ... smokers are treated like second class citizens even though through cig taxes they are paying a fair portion of taxes that you non smokers would otherwise have to pay.

    If all the smokers stop, someone else will take on that tax burden.

    BTW ... I'm a non-smoker. I just believe in people's individual rights to do as they choose.

    Id some woman can kill her baby with an abortion why can't I choose to harm myself with a cig or a joint for that matter ?

     

    reply to this | link to this | view in thread ]

  4.  
    identicon
    Anonymous Coward, Mar 24th, 2005 @ 9:15am

    Re: Smoking is still legal (provided you meet cert

    Ahem…

    CIGARETTES are a legal product, provided you meet certain criteria.

    SMOKING is a legal ACTION, provided that you do it in a location where it is legal.

    It is not legal to smoke on school property, just like it is not legal to drive on the sidewalk.

    The principal knows this, or she should be dismissed for incompetence.

    And yes, smokers have the right to spend money to kill themselves however they please… but they do not have the right to kill me while they are at it.

    To say nothing of the stench that comes off of a smoker. Yugh.

     

    reply to this | link to this | view in thread ]

  5.  
    identicon
    digifool, Mar 24th, 2005 @ 9:21am

    Re: Smoking is still legal you PC's

    If smokers are happy to damage their health then thats their choice. There are others who may wish to exercise their choice in not inhaling smoke and as this wish does not cause any health problems then this choice should take precendence over the smokers choice which does effect the health of others.

    Seems rather simple. Otherwise it seems to me that your saying that smokers have the choice to go round directly effecting other peoples health without those effected having a say in the matter.

    To take it one step further... would it be OK for me to decide to blow myself up - I guess so after all its my choice. However, is it OK for me to blow myself up in a crowd of people?

     

    reply to this | link to this | view in thread ]

  6.  
    identicon
    aNonMooseCowherd, Mar 24th, 2005 @ 8:54pm

    the moral of the story is...

    So maybe the next person to do this will take the pictures to the local press instead of distributing them directly. That will generate a lot more negative publicity for the principal, as well as for the school board if they don't take any action.

     

    reply to this | link to this | view in thread ]


Add Your Comment

Have a Techdirt Account? Sign in now. Want one? Register here
Get Techdirt’s Daily Email
Save me a cookie
  • Note: A CRLF will be replaced by a break tag (<br>), all other allowable HTML will remain intact
  • Allowed HTML Tags: <b> <i> <a> <em> <br> <strong> <blockquote> <hr> <tt>
Follow Techdirt
A word from our sponsors...
Essential Reading
Techdirt Reading List
Techdirt Insider Chat
A word from our sponsors...
Recent Stories
A word from our sponsors...

Close

Email This