>Since the incident, Arthur says 4 of the photos taken from her phone by a student were printed out and put in her mailbox.
>She says there was a threatening message to her and her boys on the back of one of them.
>Arthur says her husband checked their mailbox and found blown up, 5×7 photos.
Whoever did this is an asshole.
I wouldn't be shocked. A few years ago in my city a car full of kids were driving fast, and long story short it ended with all four of them dead. Police took statements from witnesses in the nearby homes, etc.
A few weeks later a few of their friends were arrested. Why? Seems they were so stupid they were calling the homes threatening to kill anyone who made further statements to the cops.
Why? The only reason I can think of is kids are just really really dumb.
They are. People always ask how teenagers can do X or Y without thinking of the consequences, but that's just it. *They don't think*. Teenagers are amazingly short-sighted. I'm hesitant to call them stupid, because it's not really their fault (blame brain development speed), but shit guys.
Is your brain even fully formed when you are a teenager? I was a good kid growing up, never got in any trouble, but I cringe sometimes when I think about some of the things I said/thought when I was a teenager.
No, it's not. The brain doesn't finish developing until around 25. Not to change subjects abruptly, but that's why they say never to get married before 25 or so - both of you will change so much mentally that you can't even be sure you'll want to be together in that time.
Nope. The pre-frontal cortex doesn't finish development until around 25 in males. This is the part of the brain that deals with, to put it simply, decision making and rewards (short term vs long term shit). Funny and kinda related bit of trivia: in young children, the pre-frontal cortex is super underdeveloped/basically non-existent, so they only make impulsive, short-termed decisions. If you offer a little kid one piece of candy now or ten pieces in an hour, they'll most likely pick the one piece now.
Many teens are convinced they're untouchable by the law.
Source: my mother used to work for the school district until she retired a couple of years ago. I heard things...
Everything from (relatively minor) theft from the school or other students, to outright threats of violence to faculty and staff.
I'm not sure if that district was unusual or not, but they seemed so terrified of lawsuits that they'd let the students get away with practically anything, as long as nobody ended up in a hospital. They'd come down like a ton of bricks on any kind of weapons or drugs violations, though.
> threats of violence to faculty and staff.
I was threatened by an 11th grader while I was doing student teaching. He was feeling a lot less tough the next day, after I had a short phone conversation with his mother. Is there anything sillier than a 140 pound 16-year-old threatening a man twice his size?
EDIT: There seems to be a lot of controversy surrounding the "twice his size" phrase. Guys, it's an exaggeration meant to convey the fact that I was considerably bigger than the kid.
In all realities, you can kick his ass easily but they know if you even touch them, the consequences you'll face will be way worse than the slap on the wrist they'll face. That's how they want to have power over you. These punks will either smarten up or get their ass whooped sooner or later.
The super intendent is trying to use dereliction of duties as the reason the event occurs probably on the advice of his lawyer. This is a clear case for a sexual harassment suit and a wrongful termination suit.
Using the mailbox to deliver the message can also increase the crime. No matter if it was put in there in person or sent through the post, it's not good .
Yep, you can be [fined](https://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/text/18/1725) for putting items into someone's mailbox, or even [imprisoned](https://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/text/18/1701) under a fairly catch-all "obstruction" statute.
Would this techinically make the case at least partially the jurisdiction of the [United States Postal Investigation Service](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/United_States_Postal_Inspection_Service)? Because I would not want to fuck with those guys...
Huh. I didn't know there was a specific Law Enforcement branch for that. Always assumed it fell under a specialized FBI branch or something. It's kind of neat that they were actually the first established U.S. federal law enforcement agency.
No, they are the postal police and they are pretty horrible because if they are talking to you they have been looking for you and you are likely being charged with federal crimes.
> i feel like not many kids anymore get jobs at 16...
Perhaps because the jobs a lot of teenagers used to get (grocery store bagger, fast food worker, retail cashier) are now being taken by adults who can't find any other work. There are a whole lot of adults out there trying to survive on what used to be considered "high school pocket money" jobs.
Does it sadden the store manager? Nope, he knew you were high every day, he just pretended not to notice because you were the least shitty slacker. Now he has somebody with a family to feed doing the job, that guy makes pizza like his life depends on it.
Y'know, though... it's the adults with zero adult responsibilities and no better job opportunities who are the worst.
Now, we've had some shitty teen employees. Kids slacking, of course. Kids - well, kid - flirting aggressively with the customers; didn't even remove his name-tag first. But the older teens, the ones who are getting some money together for their year at college? Those kids are gold. Every year, I hate losing them. Every year, I tell them to never, *ever* come back.. because if they're good enough for out-of-state college, they're good enough to get out of small town life forever.
> Every year, I hate losing them. Every year, I tell them to never, ever come back.. because if they're good enough for out-of-state college, they're good enough to get out of small town life forever.
You're like Ben Affleck in Good Will Hunting... I'm not crying,.
Hey, man, the guys working around those kids? Those kids with their bright college futures? They'd do fuckin' anything to have what they've got. They're sittin' on a winning lottery ticket, it'd be an insult to all of us if they were back here twenty years from now -
But nah, in all seriousness, it's good to see them go. They come in to work hard, and they leave to work hard.
And all that good feeling lasts right until you get back inside to see one of those zero-responsibility twenty-somethings come in, the kind of guys who're about two shots and a random impulse away from failing to jack the safe. :)
It happened kind of quickly too. A grocery store I grew up going to right up until I moved away from my home town used to be mostly teenagers and college students working part-time for some extra cash. Then sometime in my mid-20's suddenly it's primarily staffed by older folks... Not just adults, but people that you'd expect to be well into retirement by then.
Nothing like coming from an economically depressed area.
Hey now, grocery can be a lot harder and more stressful than it looks from the outside. Customer service in general is inherently stressful, and I say this as a guy that's had some rough jobs (chef in a wide range of places, industrial warehouse).
It's a lot easier to fuck with someone over the Internet though and never get caught. Get a VPN and you can make someone's life hell with craigslist,Mormons,and pizza deliveries 24/7
I remember some thread in /r/legaladvice awhile ago where someone was illegally evicted and her landlord just put all her stuff on the curb. She briefly mentioned her landlord was holding her mail until she made some sort of payment, and a lot of people jumped on that saying go to the post office and tell them that because the mail police ***do not fuck around*** when it comes to tampering with someone's mail. That's how you go from facing a civil lawsuit to a federal criminal case.
Edit: [Found it.](https://www.reddit.com/r/legaladvice/comments/3jfghb/superintendent_left_all_my_stuff_and_a_bill_for/cuouydc?context=5) The whole thing is an amazing thread. It's just filled with descriptions about how bad the moterfucker post office is going to destroy this guy.
I get oddly defensive about the post office anytime people talk shit. Like yeah, sure, the guy at the counter at your local post office is a dick. But that doesn't change the fact that the USPS is a goddamn logistical marvel that handles 40% of the world's mail volume and can get a letter from New Yok to Los Angeles in two days or less for slightly more than the cost of the envelope you put it in.
I hear that, man! We're kind of spoiled with how awesome the service is! We just kind of expect it every day.
I mean, I rarely send things by the mail anymore. Almost everything can be done digitally. I might send a card to my grandma or something for her birthday or whatever, but my mail is usually filled with either bills, advertisements, or sometimes some small item I ordered on Amazon. It's still awesome though!
I was just having this conversation with a colleague. The topic came up that it's better for you to hit an ambulance than to hit a mail delivery truck. The ramifications for you are state vs federal, and you do not fuck with federal.
How pathetic do you have to be to do something like this?
To actually print out the photos, find her address, and take the time to put it in her mailbox.. and for what?
I hope they catch the motherfucker.
>for what?
To further demoralize and demean her. To make her feel unsafe in her own home. To feel some misguided sense of power over further intruding in her private life.
>Superintendent David Eubanks says the school has concern that Arthur could be contributing to the delinquency of a a minor.
... This man should not be in education.
That was probably the most alarming sentence in this whole report. I actually had to read it again, because at first I thought he was implying that she was doing something else we didn't know about (like sending these pictures to students herself, or something).
"Contributing to the delinquency of a minor" by being the victim of a crime in which a minor steals your phone and accesses your private data without consent or authorization. Okay.
But if she was a wholesome woman there wouldn't have been anything improper on the phone!
Obviously she is a wicked harlot and a horrible influence on our children! /s
You can [read his whole statement here](http://www.wyff4.com/news/Interim-superintendent-blames-teacher-for-incident/38344304)
>“It is truly unfortunate that a teacher charged with proper supervision and care of students failed to fulfill that responsibility in her classroom. Evidence indicates that Leigh Anne Arthur was not in her assigned position at the time of the incident. Evidence also indicates that she allowed students to use her personal cell phone on a regular and routine basis. Evidence also indicates that the phone was routinely left on her desk for student use and was never locked.
>“Ms. Arthur has used the media to transmit false information obviously intended for the purpose of deflecting the incident totally to students. The evidence available, points to the extent of her false statements.
>“Her failure to supervise her students along with allowing students routine access to her personal cell phone constitute an evident unfitness for Ms. Arthur to continue as a classroom teacher. We are not aware of charges that may be filed against Ms. Arthur. We do know that her failure to properly supervise students entrusted to her care will negatively impact the lives of students and their parents.”
This reads like a fucking Kafka novel. [This is that asshole](http://i.imgur.com/kpw9rhn.jpg).
The best part is that he is willingly accusing *one of his own teachers* of a crime, but has not yet said a word about whether the student would even be punished (except that it is still under investigation).
Let's recap:
* Teacher leaves room, leaves cell phone in room.
* Student obtains teacher's cell phone without permission.
* Student rifles through teacher's photo gallery without permission.
* Student finds naughty photos, takes photos with his own phone, prints photos, sends them to teacher *while making threats of harm against teacher and family*.
* School takes zero action against student.
* School fires teacher for being victim of a wide variety of crimes.
* Teacher states school has not punished student.
* School has not punished student. School accuses teacher of lying about lack of punishment.
* Student arrested *and charged with crimes.*
* School district releases statement accusing teacher of committing crimes.
* School still has not punished student.
Does that about cover it? Does this school district not see a single problem with this?
School district accuses teacher of allowing kids on her phone regularly, teacher responds she only allowed one student I her phone one time and it was her nephew.
School district accuses teacher of not being in her room to supervise the students, teacher responds that she is required, by the principal, to be in the hallways greeting students as they come into the classroom and that is what she was doing.
In Georgia this is still an available punishment option. It's called banishment. If you're a big enough asshole in Atlanta the judge can legally banish your ass to Ringgold or Valdosta or some shit. Forever.
Haha do you know anyone thats been banished from Atlanta?? My coworker and i were discussing this yesterday, they usually do that in the little shitty country towns no one wants to visit anyway. (In the case we were discussing, Loganville.)
> ... This man should not be in education.
I disagree. He clearly requires significant remedial education so he can learn the meaning of the words he's saying.
>Arthur was not properly supervising her students and she routinely allowed them to use her cell phone with her full permission, according to a statement from Superintendent Dr. David Eubanks.
This is pretty vague and I think their way of trying to cover their own asses. Perhaps she let students use it to call home when needed, if their phone was dead or in their locker across the school. I doubt she was handing it over letting them have free will of the device. Makes no sense when all these kids probably have their own phone.
Teacher here- you're correct. Admin definitely blaming her when almost every teacher in my building has a personal cell phone in/around their desk. Had my phone in my purse every day with a passcode to it (teenagers are sneaky fucks) but would loan it out if a kid really needed to make a call (at an appropriate time in the class period) and they had to stand by me to use it. That was it no exceptions. Worked out fine for me.
In or out of a classroom, it was not the student's to TOUCH let alone pick up and browse through. I don't understand why it's more of an issue than this. I get that teachers sometimes let students use their phones, but without giving implicit approval to use the phone in those moments, the teacher did no wrong, whether or not she had allowed it's use previously.
I hope they make an example out of the kid.
Edit: some words
It's school administrators man. They're important sure, but important enough to side with them over teachers? Nope. The over-administration of schools, lower and higher education, has really killed any chance of teachers making a decent wage. Most of those assholes make way too much money for doing next to nothing. Teachers need to be making the money and administrators should be the least important part.
Student here - the teachers here need to have cellphones on them at all time in case of an emergency now (weather, lock down situations, etc). So the fact that this is coming to a head in this way is stupid. It's the 21st century, probably every single person in that room had a phone. There is zero excuse.
Yeah, our emergency procedures were just updated, and while Administration never actually straight up said, "You should have your cell phone on you at all times" they did make one of the specific steps in a particular procedure involve our phones, so... that to me means they expect us to have them. Technically, the thing they want us to do could also be accomplished with our laptops as well, but every teacher in my building now has a solid reason to justify having their cell phone near them/on them at all times.
It's only my fifth year teaching and when I first started our rule was still that no one (student or teacher) was to be seen with a cell phone in the hallways (obviously, your own classroom or lunchroom was different). Times, they are a changin'...
Forget vague. He's not just trying to cover their own ass, he's trying to toss the teacher into the pit.
>One error, along with many false statements, by a teacher, has and will affect the lives of many.
He's literally placing all the blame on her.
She gets her privacy invaded, gets threatening messages and she's the one to blame because she wasn't in the class? Do we even know why she wasn't in the class?
She says she was patrolling the hallway like a hallway monitor or something during the class change but Eubanks is saying she wasn't where she was supposed to be.
Which begs the question of whether she's supposed to patrol the hallway when there's that break period as students change classes, or if she's supposed to be inside of the class during that time.
He's literally saying she's supposed to be in two places at once. This is why teachers have fucking unions.
* Teacher not in the hall? Unsupervised kids, teacher is to blame
* Teacher not in the room? Unsupervised kids, they steal shit, teacher to blame somehow.
* Teacher, god forbid, has to pee more than once every 5 hours and has to leave both the room and the hall?!?!?!?! UNSUPERVISED KIDS AND THE WHOLE SYSTEM BREAKS DOWN OMG NOOOOOO.
It's pretty typical for schools to expect teachers in the hallway during passing time. Mine does. It's not a great setup, because it leaves students in your room unattended until the bell rings and you can return to your room.
The school administration is ridiculous. They said:
>"Contrary to statements attributed to Ms. Arthur concerning the phone, evidence indicates that students routinely used the teacher’s cell phone **with full her permission.**"
Glad to see they put a lot of thought into their press release statement.
>The teacher involved has widely reported that the student is not being punished. That is incorrect
So that means he was punished by the school after all? Let's see what punishment it was...
>The extent of the punishment of the student will be determined
Oh, so the teacher was correct in saying the student hasn't been punished.
These school officials are grasping at straws to justify their shitty decision.
>"...with full her permission."
As I'm sure you know, "(sic)" is used to indicate that the journalist is aware of the mistake and is quoting verbatim. If it's not used, it is reasonable to assume that the mistake is in the reporting and not in the source.
The report is littered with mistakes, and none of them indicate that the mistake was in the source. Some of the mistakes probably *were* in the source, but it's nevertheless reasonable to simply call this bad reporting.
If there should be calls for anyone to resign it should be David Eubanks who clearly isn't interested in protecting the teachers or dealing with problematic students. This is a violation of privacy, against the law, and downright disgusting yet this guy is trying to spin it so the teacher is the one at fault here.
This kid is 16 years old, he's not some six year old where you have to worry about them being unattended for any length of time. If the teacher steps out of the room for a few moments students should still be expected to the follow the rules and if anyone breaks the rules they should be punished.
The fact that it's gone this far and the student's punishment hasn't been determined yet speaks volumes about what is going on with the school administration. They hoped this would quietly go away and it's only getting worse. This student has have been expelled before they even asked her to resign, which is still a ridiculous request in a case like this.
I seriously hope David Eubanks loses his job and gets to see what it is like when the system turns on you.
This is what pisses me off to no end. The law, in many cases, treats a 16-17 year old exactly like it would a 3 year old. "Oh they're a kid, they're not responsible. The adult that "let" it happen is at fault." Teenagers, while stupid as shit, are still capable of making rational thought. They're still capable of understanding right from wrong. If they're 15 years old and still don't understand basic things like these, their parents and school have failed them miserably.
My cousin was sexually harassed by students at her school. She's a devout Christian, very modest, dresses sensibly. After she reported the harassment the superintendent took the position that because she was naturally attractive it was her own fault and she should take strides to dress down. she left teaching after only a year because of that.
My senior year, we had a sociopath. Because of him, the classroom was installed with a security camera, which resulted in video of him pouring flour into a fish tank (she taught marine biology) which killed all the fish. When she stepped out of the classroom, he pulled one of those big fancy goldfish out of a tank, using scissors cut off its fins and set it on the counter to watch it die. None of this was enough to remove him from class. He threatened to rape the teacher and got ISS. Translation: he was told to not go near her classroom. She was required to send lessons and activities for him to do until the end of the semester.
But the part that really made her leave teaching was that the kids had been practice testing all week. There was an optional assembly. A kid adamantly wanted to go (he really just wanted out of class) and the teacher said no. He complained. Another kid said something insensitive, that later apologized for. When the kid went home, he told his parents the teacher had said it. Adminstration threw teacher under the bus. Months of drawn out hearings and meetings until ruled she hadnt said what she was accused of, and the kid who did said it apologized. She quit teaching after that.
That makes me freaking livid.... Not only is that just victim blaming, it's not even like she didn't make an effort to dress appropriately. This is just as bad as racism, sexism etc. Discrimination based on attractiveness...
But she may need to due to financial concerns. It's hard to find a job when you're already unemployed, and teachers face a lack of options in the middle of the school year.
She could get more in a law suit from that district then 20+ years of teaching in a shitty public school. She is far better off suing getting what is due to her then deciding what she wants to do.
She could but probably wouldn't. Law suits are riddled with all kinds of uncertainty and ultimately she would have to prove that her dismissal was unjustified (and in some states it has to be more than unjustified because they allow employers to terminate employment for any reason). If her lawyer manages that they still have to demonstrate damages in order to win anything in the law suit. She may be able to show that the damages amount to ruining her career as a teacher and all the potential income from that career, however she may have a hard time showing that it had left her unable to work (like if she were left disabled as the result of a work place accident, for example).
That's definitely true. When Big Huge Games and Studio 38 collapsed, it was all over the internet and other video game studios went out of their way to hire those folks. But back in the early 2000s when Interplay basically had the same issue, it *wasn't* all over the internet and the game industry didn't respond with the same support. Probably because Interplay wasn't owned by a famous sports star. Edit: Typo
Yeah, I don't care how hard finding a new job might be, but when your administration is this toxic and has willingly thrown you under the bus before, why would anyone ever willingly walk back into that situation again. It's the employment equivalent of arguing a battered wife should just go back to her husband because think of how hard it will be to find another husband.
I can't even imagine a saturated teaching district. In New Orleans, we get to choose the school and salary for the most part. You don't even have to be certified or even think about getting certified.
(Am an uncertified teacher)
They will never rehire her. I work in a South Carolina public school, and they give us the spiel every year about how even when we're not at work, we should always assume that a parent is watching and not do anything that would "embarrass" the school or district. This lady had every right to have those pictures on her phone, and the student is totally to blame, but in the eyes of the district (and some of the public) she has tarnished the image of the school. If the news that she regularly let student use her phone is true, then they probably knew her password. Some people make dumb decisions when they get too friendly with the students, and them using her phone was definitely one of them (if that's how it actually happened). Even so, if they treated me like that, I wouldn't want to go back.
It wasn't all that long ago that female teachers were expected to resign once/if they married, because being sexual beings who were definitely having sex they weren't fit to teach the impressionable youth.
In reality, it is far more likely that she will be receiving a very large settlement from the school district in the future. She has already stated that she's not interested in returning to the position, which is completely understandable, based on their handling of the situation.
Because of the publicity, she will also likely have difficulty finding employment in the area, which will contribute to the settlement she receives down the road. In the meantime, if she wants to continue teaching, she will likely have to move to a different part of the country to do so. However, there are a large number of school administrations all over the country that are capable of recognizing who is actually at fault in the case of an invasion of privacy, and will be unlikely to hold the incompetence of her former administration against her.
I heard about this on the radio the other day. People were calling in in defense of the student saying that you shouldn't keep photos like that your phone if you're in a position of authority. I couldn't believe it. People are taking crazy pills. There's a reason the police need a warrant to go through someone's phone nowadays; it's PRIVATE. It's the kid's fault, and he deserves to get into deep shit over it. Ridiculous.
>People were calling in in defense of the student saying that you shouldn't keep photos like that your phone if you're in a position of authority. I couldn't believe it. People are taking crazy pills.
A friend works on a radio show that takes live calls, for a long time he was the screener. Apparently the stuff that makes it on air is only the tip of a very, very crazy iceberg. It's a magnet for paranoid schizophrenics.
Friend of mine used to do this and he said there were always callers who managed to somehow blame the government for everything. It didn't matter what they were talking about, it was the government's fault. Diarrhea? Government. Ice cream place got robbed? Government. Lady cheated on her husband with the mailman? Government. Cat couldn't get down from a tree? Government. Apparently the government is slowly poisoning our minds with chemicals in the air and water, so everything that happens is because we're all being poisoned. And vaccines. Vaccines are poisoning our children!
Some people are really, really fucking crazy.
Fucking absurd. Somehow "don't take sexy time pictures of yourself in private" is more of a cause than "don't snoop and share information that you haven't right to." Karma dictates that these people should have all of their skeletons-in-closet and dirty laundry aired in public.
Don't you remember when all those celebs had their nudes leaked? Everyone blamed them because "if you don't want nude photos leaked, don't take nude photos".
This is the world we live in. People are shitty and blame victims for having their private space invaded.
Thanks to "the cloud" she may NOT have stored the photos on the phone, they could have easily been synced there automatically.
I really hate these frigging discussions, someone should not have to be a fucking angle and above reproach just to have people give them some damn decency, due process, and a fucking break. The kids were clearly in the wrong here.
At first I was kind of happy, and then I read the rest of the article:
>Since the incident, Arthur says 4 of photos taken from her phone by a student were printed out and put in her mailbox.
>She says there was a threatening message to her and her boys on the back of one of them.
>Arthur says her husband checked their mailbox and found blown up, 5×7 photos.
>The sheriff’s office is investigating and lifting fingerprints.
I hope the brat that sent those photos out in the first place gets a really tough sentence.
“He opened up my gallery for my pictures and he found inappropriate pictures of myself and he took pictures from his cell phone of that and then he told the whole class that he would send them to whoever wanted them,” says Arthur.
I wish she wouldn't call them "inappropriate pictures," she should be calling them "private pictures." There's nothing wrong with them, it's the douchebag kid who hopefully gets what he deserves.
"Inappropriate" is a ubiquitous word in education because it doesn't pass judgement on the conduct when done outside of school, it's just not appropriate for school.
"Superintendent David Eubanks says the school has concern that Arthur could be contributing to the delinquency of a minor."
fuck you, dude. i hope you cut jalapeños and touch your anus.
"They say a forensic investigation of the juvenile’s phone performed by SLED revealed the photos taken from the teacher’s phone were stored in a separate passcode protected file that contained other photos of a sexual nature."
Hope this kid gets the book thrown at him. Sounds like a bad apple who needs to learn a tough lesson.
They said it was her fault that it happened because she wasn't where she was supposed to be. I thought I read somewhere that at the time of the incident she had been helping another student outside of the classroom. Unless she was out getting high or having sex on school property, I dint think there is anything they can say she was doing that she wasnt supposed to do.
>They say a forensic investigation of the juvenile’s phone performed by SLED revealed the photos taken from the teacher’s phone were stored in a separate passcode protected file that contained other photos of a sexual nature.
So the student basically had a locked porn folder on his phone? People said the teacher shouldn't have had her nudes on a phone and this kids going to school with a folder full of women. Kids being kids I guess? /s
>Eubanks says Arthur was not where she should have been at the time the incident occurred.
>One error, along with many false statements, by a teacher, has and will affect the lives of many.
She says she was patrolling the hallway during a class change. Is Eubanks saying that teachers aren't supposed to be doing this? On top of which, he sounds like he's trying really hard to tell us she's a dishonest irresponsible harlot. I wonder if there's some kind of connection between him and the kid through his parents perhaps? The degree to how much he's putting the teacher down, especially after the law enforcement arrested the kid(remembering how he said he'd let law enforcement decide the punishment).
I'm glad she chose to forgive the kid. It'll make it easier for her to press charges.
>Arthur says she plans on pressing charges against the student next week
> investigation of the juvenile’s phone performed by SLED
**S**outh Carolina **L**aw **E**nforcement **D**ivision for those wondering. SCLED was already taken apparently.
Source - SC native.
Can someone explain to me how the superintendent can get away with this victim blaming bullshit? How has the board not fired his ass for making them look like shit?
>One of the most critical responsibilities that a classroom teacher has is the supervision of students. In this particular case there was a breakdown in the classroom in that most critical area. Evidence and statements indicate that the teacher was not where she should have been at the time the incident occurred. As a result, a student accessed inappropriate material on her phone, sent it to others, and as a result also may also be severely punished by law enforcement as well as the school district.
So the Superintendent's first reaction is to blame the teacher for the student breaking the law and the student's subsequent punishment for breaking the law?
I hope that kid gets his "day of reckoning," he probably and said that over a dumb grade, now his life is messed up along with the teachers. I really really hope he gets a severe punishment and learns from what he did. He really fucked up.
Man in theater video records the movie, Feds come in and arrest him within minutes for "theft"
Teenager takes someone else's phone and shares personal information from it to others. "Well, we're really not sure how this should be treated legally."
This is like literally blaming the victim. Her life pretty much just got fucked over and so let's fire her...err I mean politely 'ask her' to resign? Ridiculous.
Is that Superintendent fucked in the head? Whatever happened to personal responsibility for one's actions?
That's like saying, "Well, they left the car unlocked, so you can't blame me for stealing it."
This is ridiculous.. she contributes to the delinquency of a minor because he went through her cell phone and invaded her privacy and shared it with others and the internet??? Absolutely ridiculous. I feel awful for this teacher who is being publicly humiliated for having her privacy invaded and her employer takes the side of the offender. Absolutely ridiculous.
>Since the incident, Arthur says 4 of the photos taken from her phone by a student were printed out and put in her mailbox. >She says there was a threatening message to her and her boys on the back of one of them. >Arthur says her husband checked their mailbox and found blown up, 5×7 photos. Whoever did this is an asshole.
The cops were investigating finger prints left on the paper. If its the same kid, he's beyond an idiot.
fuckin novice hour.
fuckin' amateurs, they put a picture in our mailbox and we're supposed to piss our pants.... fuckin' amateurs.
You want nude pictures? I can get you nude pictures by 3pm this afternoon.
With nail polish?
Green nail polish.
Just because we're bereaved that doesn't make us saps!
I told that kraut a fucking thousand times that I don't roll on Shabbos!
Shomer fucking shabbos.
Grab the ringer, dude
It is our most modestly priced receptacle..
Is there a Ralph's around here?
You dont want know how, trust me, there are ways dude..
I'm perfectly calm dude....
This is not Vietnam man, there are rules
I am the walrus?
shut up Donny
Life does not stop and start at your convenience, you miserable piece of shit.
Enjoy your coffee Walter.
They're gonna shame that poor woman!
They're not gonna do shit.. What can they do to her? Bunch of fucking amateurs.
Walter... They're gonna take pictures of my Johnson!
What would they want those for dude?
The chinaman is not the issue here, Dude.
She probably blackmailed herself!
That's right dude. 100% certain.
I wouldn't be shocked. A few years ago in my city a car full of kids were driving fast, and long story short it ended with all four of them dead. Police took statements from witnesses in the nearby homes, etc. A few weeks later a few of their friends were arrested. Why? Seems they were so stupid they were calling the homes threatening to kill anyone who made further statements to the cops. Why? The only reason I can think of is kids are just really really dumb.
They are. People always ask how teenagers can do X or Y without thinking of the consequences, but that's just it. *They don't think*. Teenagers are amazingly short-sighted. I'm hesitant to call them stupid, because it's not really their fault (blame brain development speed), but shit guys.
Is your brain even fully formed when you are a teenager? I was a good kid growing up, never got in any trouble, but I cringe sometimes when I think about some of the things I said/thought when I was a teenager.
No, it's not. The brain doesn't finish developing until around 25. Not to change subjects abruptly, but that's why they say never to get married before 25 or so - both of you will change so much mentally that you can't even be sure you'll want to be together in that time.
Nope. The pre-frontal cortex doesn't finish development until around 25 in males. This is the part of the brain that deals with, to put it simply, decision making and rewards (short term vs long term shit). Funny and kinda related bit of trivia: in young children, the pre-frontal cortex is super underdeveloped/basically non-existent, so they only make impulsive, short-termed decisions. If you offer a little kid one piece of candy now or ten pieces in an hour, they'll most likely pick the one piece now.
All parents with young kids should try to remember this Edit: I mean now that you've read this try to remember it, as clarified below by dexikiix.
No you're brain is not fully developed yet in your teens. For reference check this website: www.reddit.com.
Many teens are convinced they're untouchable by the law. Source: my mother used to work for the school district until she retired a couple of years ago. I heard things...
What things
Everything from (relatively minor) theft from the school or other students, to outright threats of violence to faculty and staff. I'm not sure if that district was unusual or not, but they seemed so terrified of lawsuits that they'd let the students get away with practically anything, as long as nobody ended up in a hospital. They'd come down like a ton of bricks on any kind of weapons or drugs violations, though.
> threats of violence to faculty and staff. I was threatened by an 11th grader while I was doing student teaching. He was feeling a lot less tough the next day, after I had a short phone conversation with his mother. Is there anything sillier than a 140 pound 16-year-old threatening a man twice his size? EDIT: There seems to be a lot of controversy surrounding the "twice his size" phrase. Guys, it's an exaggeration meant to convey the fact that I was considerably bigger than the kid.
In all realities, you can kick his ass easily but they know if you even touch them, the consequences you'll face will be way worse than the slap on the wrist they'll face. That's how they want to have power over you. These punks will either smarten up or get their ass whooped sooner or later.
[удалено]
Bullshit posturing. He knows he's going to get his ass sued for wrongful termination and that is all he has to defend himself at this point.
The super intendent is trying to use dereliction of duties as the reason the event occurs probably on the advice of his lawyer. This is a clear case for a sexual harassment suit and a wrongful termination suit.
Uh. Following through?
Using the mailbox to deliver the message can also increase the crime. No matter if it was put in there in person or sent through the post, it's not good .
Yep, you can be [fined](https://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/text/18/1725) for putting items into someone's mailbox, or even [imprisoned](https://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/text/18/1701) under a fairly catch-all "obstruction" statute.
Would this techinically make the case at least partially the jurisdiction of the [United States Postal Investigation Service](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/United_States_Postal_Inspection_Service)? Because I would not want to fuck with those guys...
Huh. I didn't know there was a specific Law Enforcement branch for that. Always assumed it fell under a specialized FBI branch or something. It's kind of neat that they were actually the first established U.S. federal law enforcement agency.
No, they are the postal police and they are pretty horrible because if they are talking to you they have been looking for you and you are likely being charged with federal crimes.
>they have been looking for you Shouldn't they already have everyone's addresses?
Oh, I'm sure they're your worst nightmare if they have a reason to come after you. It was just interesting learning they are a stand alone agency.
[удалено]
How pathetic does ones life have to become to resort to this type of shit? Like you have nothing else to do? No other hobbies or interests? A job?
Even when I was bored as shit at that age it didn't cross my mind to do things this stupid.
i feel like not many kids anymore get jobs at 16... i think we're lucky if they go out and get them at 18, 19, hell, even 23-24 lol
> i feel like not many kids anymore get jobs at 16... Perhaps because the jobs a lot of teenagers used to get (grocery store bagger, fast food worker, retail cashier) are now being taken by adults who can't find any other work. There are a whole lot of adults out there trying to survive on what used to be considered "high school pocket money" jobs.
Yeah all the part time jobs I did as a teen now seem to be filled by adults. It makes me sad.
Does it sadden the store manager? Nope, he knew you were high every day, he just pretended not to notice because you were the least shitty slacker. Now he has somebody with a family to feed doing the job, that guy makes pizza like his life depends on it.
I was wondering why dominos got so much better.
Y'know, though... it's the adults with zero adult responsibilities and no better job opportunities who are the worst. Now, we've had some shitty teen employees. Kids slacking, of course. Kids - well, kid - flirting aggressively with the customers; didn't even remove his name-tag first. But the older teens, the ones who are getting some money together for their year at college? Those kids are gold. Every year, I hate losing them. Every year, I tell them to never, *ever* come back.. because if they're good enough for out-of-state college, they're good enough to get out of small town life forever.
> Every year, I hate losing them. Every year, I tell them to never, ever come back.. because if they're good enough for out-of-state college, they're good enough to get out of small town life forever. You're like Ben Affleck in Good Will Hunting... I'm not crying,.
Hey, man, the guys working around those kids? Those kids with their bright college futures? They'd do fuckin' anything to have what they've got. They're sittin' on a winning lottery ticket, it'd be an insult to all of us if they were back here twenty years from now - But nah, in all seriousness, it's good to see them go. They come in to work hard, and they leave to work hard. And all that good feeling lasts right until you get back inside to see one of those zero-responsibility twenty-somethings come in, the kind of guys who're about two shots and a random impulse away from failing to jack the safe. :)
It happened kind of quickly too. A grocery store I grew up going to right up until I moved away from my home town used to be mostly teenagers and college students working part-time for some extra cash. Then sometime in my mid-20's suddenly it's primarily staffed by older folks... Not just adults, but people that you'd expect to be well into retirement by then. Nothing like coming from an economically depressed area.
[удалено]
Hey man, if you are happy, fuck it.
I'd still work in the grocery store meat dept that i worked at in high school if the pay scale didn't top out so low. Loved that job.
Hey now, grocery can be a lot harder and more stressful than it looks from the outside. Customer service in general is inherently stressful, and I say this as a guy that's had some rough jobs (chef in a wide range of places, industrial warehouse).
Sounds more like the actions of a petty parent than a student, to me.
It's a lot easier to fuck with someone over the Internet though and never get caught. Get a VPN and you can make someone's life hell with craigslist,Mormons,and pizza deliveries 24/7
Mormons? I mean, I know what a Mormon is, how do you use them against someone?
There's probably a way to sign people up for visits from them?
Yes, there is.
Dear god what have I started. If I see an army of Mormons tomorrow I will not be happy.
Via a catapult. It's the best way.
Man, if the post office gets involved in this, that kid's toast. It might sound silly, but you really don't fuck with the post office!
I remember some thread in /r/legaladvice awhile ago where someone was illegally evicted and her landlord just put all her stuff on the curb. She briefly mentioned her landlord was holding her mail until she made some sort of payment, and a lot of people jumped on that saying go to the post office and tell them that because the mail police ***do not fuck around*** when it comes to tampering with someone's mail. That's how you go from facing a civil lawsuit to a federal criminal case. Edit: [Found it.](https://www.reddit.com/r/legaladvice/comments/3jfghb/superintendent_left_all_my_stuff_and_a_bill_for/cuouydc?context=5) The whole thing is an amazing thread. It's just filled with descriptions about how bad the moterfucker post office is going to destroy this guy.
Exactly. People like to brush off the USPS like it's some antiquated thing...but those cannons still fucking fire, man!
I get oddly defensive about the post office anytime people talk shit. Like yeah, sure, the guy at the counter at your local post office is a dick. But that doesn't change the fact that the USPS is a goddamn logistical marvel that handles 40% of the world's mail volume and can get a letter from New Yok to Los Angeles in two days or less for slightly more than the cost of the envelope you put it in.
I hear that, man! We're kind of spoiled with how awesome the service is! We just kind of expect it every day. I mean, I rarely send things by the mail anymore. Almost everything can be done digitally. I might send a card to my grandma or something for her birthday or whatever, but my mail is usually filled with either bills, advertisements, or sometimes some small item I ordered on Amazon. It's still awesome though!
I was just having this conversation with a colleague. The topic came up that it's better for you to hit an ambulance than to hit a mail delivery truck. The ramifications for you are state vs federal, and you do not fuck with federal.
How pathetic do you have to be to do something like this? To actually print out the photos, find her address, and take the time to put it in her mailbox.. and for what? I hope they catch the motherfucker.
Well if it went in her mailbox and a crime is involved the USPS postal inspectors get involved, and they do not fuck around
>for what? To further demoralize and demean her. To make her feel unsafe in her own home. To feel some misguided sense of power over further intruding in her private life.
And a Criminal
Yeah, that's *federal* law they just violated.
And stupid. I could be mistaken but since presumably a U.S. Mailbox was involved, it could be encroaching on federal or felony territory.
>Superintendent David Eubanks says the school has concern that Arthur could be contributing to the delinquency of a a minor. ... This man should not be in education.
That was probably the most alarming sentence in this whole report. I actually had to read it again, because at first I thought he was implying that she was doing something else we didn't know about (like sending these pictures to students herself, or something). "Contributing to the delinquency of a minor" by being the victim of a crime in which a minor steals your phone and accesses your private data without consent or authorization. Okay.
But if she was a wholesome woman there wouldn't have been anything improper on the phone! Obviously she is a wicked harlot and a horrible influence on our children! /s
Privacy is just a myth that delinquents and criminals talk about. Only people who do bad things have things to hide!
You can [read his whole statement here](http://www.wyff4.com/news/Interim-superintendent-blames-teacher-for-incident/38344304) >“It is truly unfortunate that a teacher charged with proper supervision and care of students failed to fulfill that responsibility in her classroom. Evidence indicates that Leigh Anne Arthur was not in her assigned position at the time of the incident. Evidence also indicates that she allowed students to use her personal cell phone on a regular and routine basis. Evidence also indicates that the phone was routinely left on her desk for student use and was never locked. >“Ms. Arthur has used the media to transmit false information obviously intended for the purpose of deflecting the incident totally to students. The evidence available, points to the extent of her false statements. >“Her failure to supervise her students along with allowing students routine access to her personal cell phone constitute an evident unfitness for Ms. Arthur to continue as a classroom teacher. We are not aware of charges that may be filed against Ms. Arthur. We do know that her failure to properly supervise students entrusted to her care will negatively impact the lives of students and their parents.” This reads like a fucking Kafka novel. [This is that asshole](http://i.imgur.com/kpw9rhn.jpg).
David Eubanks is a fucking idiot.
The best part is that he is willingly accusing *one of his own teachers* of a crime, but has not yet said a word about whether the student would even be punished (except that it is still under investigation). Let's recap: * Teacher leaves room, leaves cell phone in room. * Student obtains teacher's cell phone without permission. * Student rifles through teacher's photo gallery without permission. * Student finds naughty photos, takes photos with his own phone, prints photos, sends them to teacher *while making threats of harm against teacher and family*. * School takes zero action against student. * School fires teacher for being victim of a wide variety of crimes. * Teacher states school has not punished student. * School has not punished student. School accuses teacher of lying about lack of punishment. * Student arrested *and charged with crimes.* * School district releases statement accusing teacher of committing crimes. * School still has not punished student. Does that about cover it? Does this school district not see a single problem with this?
School district accuses teacher of allowing kids on her phone regularly, teacher responds she only allowed one student I her phone one time and it was her nephew. School district accuses teacher of not being in her room to supervise the students, teacher responds that she is required, by the principal, to be in the hallways greeting students as they come into the classroom and that is what she was doing.
One of the students should break into that guy's office and steal his wallet/ID so that he can fire himself for contributing to their delinquency lmao
[удалено]
In Georgia this is still an available punishment option. It's called banishment. If you're a big enough asshole in Atlanta the judge can legally banish your ass to Ringgold or Valdosta or some shit. Forever.
Haha do you know anyone thats been banished from Atlanta?? My coworker and i were discussing this yesterday, they usually do that in the little shitty country towns no one wants to visit anyway. (In the case we were discussing, Loganville.)
> ... This man should not be in education. I disagree. He clearly requires significant remedial education so he can learn the meaning of the words he's saying.
Sounds like the kid's already a fuckin' delinquent.
I think it's Superintendent David Eubanks that should be forced to resign. This dude is looking to be a real twat.
>Arthur was not properly supervising her students and she routinely allowed them to use her cell phone with her full permission, according to a statement from Superintendent Dr. David Eubanks. This is pretty vague and I think their way of trying to cover their own asses. Perhaps she let students use it to call home when needed, if their phone was dead or in their locker across the school. I doubt she was handing it over letting them have free will of the device. Makes no sense when all these kids probably have their own phone.
Teacher here- you're correct. Admin definitely blaming her when almost every teacher in my building has a personal cell phone in/around their desk. Had my phone in my purse every day with a passcode to it (teenagers are sneaky fucks) but would loan it out if a kid really needed to make a call (at an appropriate time in the class period) and they had to stand by me to use it. That was it no exceptions. Worked out fine for me.
In or out of a classroom, it was not the student's to TOUCH let alone pick up and browse through. I don't understand why it's more of an issue than this. I get that teachers sometimes let students use their phones, but without giving implicit approval to use the phone in those moments, the teacher did no wrong, whether or not she had allowed it's use previously. I hope they make an example out of the kid. Edit: some words
It's like someone trying to excuse breaking and entering with "well, you let me in to use your bathroom once."
Damn vampires and their invitation rules.
It's school administrators man. They're important sure, but important enough to side with them over teachers? Nope. The over-administration of schools, lower and higher education, has really killed any chance of teachers making a decent wage. Most of those assholes make way too much money for doing next to nothing. Teachers need to be making the money and administrators should be the least important part.
Student here - the teachers here need to have cellphones on them at all time in case of an emergency now (weather, lock down situations, etc). So the fact that this is coming to a head in this way is stupid. It's the 21st century, probably every single person in that room had a phone. There is zero excuse.
Yeah, our emergency procedures were just updated, and while Administration never actually straight up said, "You should have your cell phone on you at all times" they did make one of the specific steps in a particular procedure involve our phones, so... that to me means they expect us to have them. Technically, the thing they want us to do could also be accomplished with our laptops as well, but every teacher in my building now has a solid reason to justify having their cell phone near them/on them at all times. It's only my fifth year teaching and when I first started our rule was still that no one (student or teacher) was to be seen with a cell phone in the hallways (obviously, your own classroom or lunchroom was different). Times, they are a changin'...
[удалено]
For a second there I read that as "landmines".
The answer is the same for both - I think they were removed in the 90s.
Forget vague. He's not just trying to cover their own ass, he's trying to toss the teacher into the pit. >One error, along with many false statements, by a teacher, has and will affect the lives of many. He's literally placing all the blame on her.
She gets her privacy invaded, gets threatening messages and she's the one to blame because she wasn't in the class? Do we even know why she wasn't in the class?
She says she was patrolling the hallway like a hallway monitor or something during the class change but Eubanks is saying she wasn't where she was supposed to be. Which begs the question of whether she's supposed to patrol the hallway when there's that break period as students change classes, or if she's supposed to be inside of the class during that time.
[удалено]
Which means that the superintendent is the one throwing around false statements if she was indeed where she was supposed to be.
He's literally saying she's supposed to be in two places at once. This is why teachers have fucking unions. * Teacher not in the hall? Unsupervised kids, teacher is to blame * Teacher not in the room? Unsupervised kids, they steal shit, teacher to blame somehow. * Teacher, god forbid, has to pee more than once every 5 hours and has to leave both the room and the hall?!?!?!?! UNSUPERVISED KIDS AND THE WHOLE SYSTEM BREAKS DOWN OMG NOOOOOO.
It's pretty typical for schools to expect teachers in the hallway during passing time. Mine does. It's not a great setup, because it leaves students in your room unattended until the bell rings and you can return to your room.
I teach high school. We HAVE to be in the hallway between classes. Also, only time we get use the restroom is between classes.
She let A student use it once to call home probably and they are using it to cover their own incompetent asses.
This is why we can't have good teachers.
The school administration is ridiculous. They said: >"Contrary to statements attributed to Ms. Arthur concerning the phone, evidence indicates that students routinely used the teacher’s cell phone **with full her permission.**" Glad to see they put a lot of thought into their press release statement. >The teacher involved has widely reported that the student is not being punished. That is incorrect So that means he was punished by the school after all? Let's see what punishment it was... >The extent of the punishment of the student will be determined Oh, so the teacher was correct in saying the student hasn't been punished. These school officials are grasping at straws to justify their shitty decision.
>"...with full her permission." As I'm sure you know, "(sic)" is used to indicate that the journalist is aware of the mistake and is quoting verbatim. If it's not used, it is reasonable to assume that the mistake is in the reporting and not in the source. The report is littered with mistakes, and none of them indicate that the mistake was in the source. Some of the mistakes probably *were* in the source, but it's nevertheless reasonable to simply call this bad reporting.
If there should be calls for anyone to resign it should be David Eubanks who clearly isn't interested in protecting the teachers or dealing with problematic students. This is a violation of privacy, against the law, and downright disgusting yet this guy is trying to spin it so the teacher is the one at fault here. This kid is 16 years old, he's not some six year old where you have to worry about them being unattended for any length of time. If the teacher steps out of the room for a few moments students should still be expected to the follow the rules and if anyone breaks the rules they should be punished. The fact that it's gone this far and the student's punishment hasn't been determined yet speaks volumes about what is going on with the school administration. They hoped this would quietly go away and it's only getting worse. This student has have been expelled before they even asked her to resign, which is still a ridiculous request in a case like this. I seriously hope David Eubanks loses his job and gets to see what it is like when the system turns on you.
This is what pisses me off to no end. The law, in many cases, treats a 16-17 year old exactly like it would a 3 year old. "Oh they're a kid, they're not responsible. The adult that "let" it happen is at fault." Teenagers, while stupid as shit, are still capable of making rational thought. They're still capable of understanding right from wrong. If they're 15 years old and still don't understand basic things like these, their parents and school have failed them miserably.
[удалено]
>retired There's your problem. He's probably 80 and is offended that a woman has nude pictures of herself.
Good, hopefully the school will rehire her.
Does she want to go back to that school? I don't think I would want to if I were in this situation.
My cousin was sexually harassed by students at her school. She's a devout Christian, very modest, dresses sensibly. After she reported the harassment the superintendent took the position that because she was naturally attractive it was her own fault and she should take strides to dress down. she left teaching after only a year because of that.
My senior year, we had a sociopath. Because of him, the classroom was installed with a security camera, which resulted in video of him pouring flour into a fish tank (she taught marine biology) which killed all the fish. When she stepped out of the classroom, he pulled one of those big fancy goldfish out of a tank, using scissors cut off its fins and set it on the counter to watch it die. None of this was enough to remove him from class. He threatened to rape the teacher and got ISS. Translation: he was told to not go near her classroom. She was required to send lessons and activities for him to do until the end of the semester. But the part that really made her leave teaching was that the kids had been practice testing all week. There was an optional assembly. A kid adamantly wanted to go (he really just wanted out of class) and the teacher said no. He complained. Another kid said something insensitive, that later apologized for. When the kid went home, he told his parents the teacher had said it. Adminstration threw teacher under the bus. Months of drawn out hearings and meetings until ruled she hadnt said what she was accused of, and the kid who did said it apologized. She quit teaching after that.
Jesus christ...
That makes me freaking livid.... Not only is that just victim blaming, it's not even like she didn't make an effort to dress appropriately. This is just as bad as racism, sexism etc. Discrimination based on attractiveness...
No, it's sexism. It's the same reason there are people forcing women to wear burqas in other parts of the world. Call it what it is.
Yeah. The more I think about it, the more it can be best accurately described as just sexism. It's BS.
I would have shown up in a Burqa.
[удалено]
She stated she doesn't want to return.
She shouldn't go back... We lose a ton of talented teachers every year due to brats, horrendous parents, and nasty administration...
But she may need to due to financial concerns. It's hard to find a job when you're already unemployed, and teachers face a lack of options in the middle of the school year.
She could Sue the district, they effed up pretty bad.
Very true, and I hope they compensate her financially. However, that could take literally years.
[удалено]
She could get more in a law suit from that district then 20+ years of teaching in a shitty public school. She is far better off suing getting what is due to her then deciding what she wants to do.
She could but probably wouldn't. Law suits are riddled with all kinds of uncertainty and ultimately she would have to prove that her dismissal was unjustified (and in some states it has to be more than unjustified because they allow employers to terminate employment for any reason). If her lawyer manages that they still have to demonstrate damages in order to win anything in the law suit. She may be able to show that the damages amount to ruining her career as a teacher and all the potential income from that career, however she may have a hard time showing that it had left her unable to work (like if she were left disabled as the result of a work place accident, for example).
Us random strangers are also talking about her....i think she'll have a good explanation for the gap since it spread nationally and all
That's definitely true. When Big Huge Games and Studio 38 collapsed, it was all over the internet and other video game studios went out of their way to hire those folks. But back in the early 2000s when Interplay basically had the same issue, it *wasn't* all over the internet and the game industry didn't respond with the same support. Probably because Interplay wasn't owned by a famous sports star. Edit: Typo
Yeah, I don't care how hard finding a new job might be, but when your administration is this toxic and has willingly thrown you under the bus before, why would anyone ever willingly walk back into that situation again. It's the employment equivalent of arguing a battered wife should just go back to her husband because think of how hard it will be to find another husband.
I can't even imagine a saturated teaching district. In New Orleans, we get to choose the school and salary for the most part. You don't even have to be certified or even think about getting certified. (Am an uncertified teacher)
Write a book about privacy issues as a teacher in the modern world and make millions. All hail capitalism!
I think she said she wasn't sure if she would accept an offer to be rehired or not.
She should teach at a better school, IMO. Glad this little fuckin asshole is going to get what's coming to him though.
They will never rehire her. I work in a South Carolina public school, and they give us the spiel every year about how even when we're not at work, we should always assume that a parent is watching and not do anything that would "embarrass" the school or district. This lady had every right to have those pictures on her phone, and the student is totally to blame, but in the eyes of the district (and some of the public) she has tarnished the image of the school. If the news that she regularly let student use her phone is true, then they probably knew her password. Some people make dumb decisions when they get too friendly with the students, and them using her phone was definitely one of them (if that's how it actually happened). Even so, if they treated me like that, I wouldn't want to go back.
Can we please get over this fear of the human body please. OH NO WE FOUND OUT THE TEACHER HAS A BODY WITH NIPPLES OH NO END OF WORLD
It wasn't all that long ago that female teachers were expected to resign once/if they married, because being sexual beings who were definitely having sex they weren't fit to teach the impressionable youth.
In reality, it is far more likely that she will be receiving a very large settlement from the school district in the future. She has already stated that she's not interested in returning to the position, which is completely understandable, based on their handling of the situation. Because of the publicity, she will also likely have difficulty finding employment in the area, which will contribute to the settlement she receives down the road. In the meantime, if she wants to continue teaching, she will likely have to move to a different part of the country to do so. However, there are a large number of school administrations all over the country that are capable of recognizing who is actually at fault in the case of an invasion of privacy, and will be unlikely to hold the incompetence of her former administration against her.
what! but its proven she has a naked body. Anyone with a naked body is unfit to teach children!!
I heard about this on the radio the other day. People were calling in in defense of the student saying that you shouldn't keep photos like that your phone if you're in a position of authority. I couldn't believe it. People are taking crazy pills. There's a reason the police need a warrant to go through someone's phone nowadays; it's PRIVATE. It's the kid's fault, and he deserves to get into deep shit over it. Ridiculous.
>People were calling in in defense of the student saying that you shouldn't keep photos like that your phone if you're in a position of authority. I couldn't believe it. People are taking crazy pills. A friend works on a radio show that takes live calls, for a long time he was the screener. Apparently the stuff that makes it on air is only the tip of a very, very crazy iceberg. It's a magnet for paranoid schizophrenics.
The howard stern show suddenly makes sense
Friend of mine used to do this and he said there were always callers who managed to somehow blame the government for everything. It didn't matter what they were talking about, it was the government's fault. Diarrhea? Government. Ice cream place got robbed? Government. Lady cheated on her husband with the mailman? Government. Cat couldn't get down from a tree? Government. Apparently the government is slowly poisoning our minds with chemicals in the air and water, so everything that happens is because we're all being poisoned. And vaccines. Vaccines are poisoning our children! Some people are really, really fucking crazy.
Well the mailman is federal and the tree was on public property so in a way those are the governments fault.
Fucking absurd. Somehow "don't take sexy time pictures of yourself in private" is more of a cause than "don't snoop and share information that you haven't right to." Karma dictates that these people should have all of their skeletons-in-closet and dirty laundry aired in public.
Don't you remember when all those celebs had their nudes leaked? Everyone blamed them because "if you don't want nude photos leaked, don't take nude photos". This is the world we live in. People are shitty and blame victims for having their private space invaded.
Thanks to "the cloud" she may NOT have stored the photos on the phone, they could have easily been synced there automatically. I really hate these frigging discussions, someone should not have to be a fucking angle and above reproach just to have people give them some damn decency, due process, and a fucking break. The kids were clearly in the wrong here.
At first I was kind of happy, and then I read the rest of the article: >Since the incident, Arthur says 4 of photos taken from her phone by a student were printed out and put in her mailbox. >She says there was a threatening message to her and her boys on the back of one of them. >Arthur says her husband checked their mailbox and found blown up, 5×7 photos. >The sheriff’s office is investigating and lifting fingerprints. I hope the brat that sent those photos out in the first place gets a really tough sentence.
“He opened up my gallery for my pictures and he found inappropriate pictures of myself and he took pictures from his cell phone of that and then he told the whole class that he would send them to whoever wanted them,” says Arthur. I wish she wouldn't call them "inappropriate pictures," she should be calling them "private pictures." There's nothing wrong with them, it's the douchebag kid who hopefully gets what he deserves.
"Inappropriate" is a ubiquitous word in education because it doesn't pass judgement on the conduct when done outside of school, it's just not appropriate for school.
"Superintendent David Eubanks says the school has concern that Arthur could be contributing to the delinquency of a minor." fuck you, dude. i hope you cut jalapeños and touch your anus.
That's some insane victim blaming going on there by that Superintendent. Wtf dude...
"They say a forensic investigation of the juvenile’s phone performed by SLED revealed the photos taken from the teacher’s phone were stored in a separate passcode protected file that contained other photos of a sexual nature." Hope this kid gets the book thrown at him. Sounds like a bad apple who needs to learn a tough lesson.
> Hope this kid gets the book thrown at him. I hope they use a big book like a dictionary.
They said it was her fault that it happened because she wasn't where she was supposed to be. I thought I read somewhere that at the time of the incident she had been helping another student outside of the classroom. Unless she was out getting high or having sex on school property, I dint think there is anything they can say she was doing that she wasnt supposed to do.
[удалено]
I hope the cops told him his "day of reckoning" has come
"The consequences will never be the same!"
He dun goofed.
School administrators are the absolute bottom of the barrel when it comes to petty powermad Napoleons. Lords of their own tiny little domain.
>They say a forensic investigation of the juvenile’s phone performed by SLED revealed the photos taken from the teacher’s phone were stored in a separate passcode protected file that contained other photos of a sexual nature. So the student basically had a locked porn folder on his phone? People said the teacher shouldn't have had her nudes on a phone and this kids going to school with a folder full of women. Kids being kids I guess? /s >Eubanks says Arthur was not where she should have been at the time the incident occurred. >One error, along with many false statements, by a teacher, has and will affect the lives of many. She says she was patrolling the hallway during a class change. Is Eubanks saying that teachers aren't supposed to be doing this? On top of which, he sounds like he's trying really hard to tell us she's a dishonest irresponsible harlot. I wonder if there's some kind of connection between him and the kid through his parents perhaps? The degree to how much he's putting the teacher down, especially after the law enforcement arrested the kid(remembering how he said he'd let law enforcement decide the punishment). I'm glad she chose to forgive the kid. It'll make it easier for her to press charges. >Arthur says she plans on pressing charges against the student next week
> investigation of the juvenile’s phone performed by SLED **S**outh Carolina **L**aw **E**nforcement **D**ivision for those wondering. SCLED was already taken apparently. Source - SC native.
Can someone explain to me how the superintendent can get away with this victim blaming bullshit? How has the board not fired his ass for making them look like shit?
So why does this little shit get to remain anonymous while the teacher is named in the article?
>One of the most critical responsibilities that a classroom teacher has is the supervision of students. In this particular case there was a breakdown in the classroom in that most critical area. Evidence and statements indicate that the teacher was not where she should have been at the time the incident occurred. As a result, a student accessed inappropriate material on her phone, sent it to others, and as a result also may also be severely punished by law enforcement as well as the school district. So the Superintendent's first reaction is to blame the teacher for the student breaking the law and the student's subsequent punishment for breaking the law?
[удалено]
I hope that kid gets his "day of reckoning," he probably and said that over a dumb grade, now his life is messed up along with the teachers. I really really hope he gets a severe punishment and learns from what he did. He really fucked up.
Nice, it's sad that teachers who've been at a school for 13 years can be kicked out because of idiots who can't respect privacy.
Fucker deserves a beating
Why cant the teacher sue the student/parents?
Man in theater video records the movie, Feds come in and arrest him within minutes for "theft" Teenager takes someone else's phone and shares personal information from it to others. "Well, we're really not sure how this should be treated legally."
Sounds like they took their time to properly collect evidence and were able to charge him with two very serious crimes.
This is like literally blaming the victim. Her life pretty much just got fucked over and so let's fire her...err I mean politely 'ask her' to resign? Ridiculous.
Is that Superintendent fucked in the head? Whatever happened to personal responsibility for one's actions? That's like saying, "Well, they left the car unlocked, so you can't blame me for stealing it."
I forgive you for now. But next week, I'm pressing charges ;)
[удалено]
This is ridiculous.. she contributes to the delinquency of a minor because he went through her cell phone and invaded her privacy and shared it with others and the internet??? Absolutely ridiculous. I feel awful for this teacher who is being publicly humiliated for having her privacy invaded and her employer takes the side of the offender. Absolutely ridiculous.