Beta
×

Welcome to the Slashdot Beta site -- learn more here. Use the link in the footer or click here to return to the Classic version of Slashdot.

Thank you!

Before you choose to head back to the Classic look of the site, we'd appreciate it if you share your thoughts on the Beta; your feedback is what drives our ongoing development.

Beta is different and we value you taking the time to try it out. Please take a look at the changes we've made in Beta and  learn more about it. Thanks for reading, and for making the site better!

School Spying Scandal Gets Even More Bizarre

ScuttleMonkey posted more than 4 years ago | from the lesson-learned-junkfood-is-bad dept.

Privacy 699

Several sources following the recent school webcam spying debacle are reporting that an even stranger twist has surfaced. The student in question that was disciplined for an "improper act" was apparently accused of either drug use or drug selling. Turns out he was eating Mike & Ike candy, not popping pills. While there is probably more to this story than has made it to the general public, the officials involved have done a particularly bad job of actually managing the events.

cancel ×

699 comments

Sorry! There are no comments related to the filter you selected.

Ugh. (5, Insightful)

Pojut (1027544) | more than 4 years ago | (#31233186)

Yeah...because Mike & Ikes look just like illicit drugs. Completely ignoring the privacy aspect of this story, a school official mistaking freakin' Mike & Ikes for drugs is beyond comprehension.

http://www.illinoisnut.com/products/mainLarge_1028200752854pm.jpg [illinoisnut.com]

That looks quite unlike any drug I've ever heard of or seen.

Re:Ugh. (1)

zoomshorts (137587) | more than 4 years ago | (#31233218)

Good thing he was not eating Good and Plenty, which looks more like drugs than Mike and Ike
http://tinyurl.com/y9482p4

Burned (5, Funny)

MillionthMonkey (240664) | more than 4 years ago | (#31233734)

Some guy sold me a bag of Mike & Ike for $50 and when it didn't do anything we realized it was Good & Plenty.

My girlfriend gave me grief about it and I was like, "why don't you score it next time, it's not like any of you bitches have red-green color blindness!"

Re:Ugh. (1)

Theoboley (1226542) | more than 4 years ago | (#31233220)

mike & ikes are the size of friggin horse pills. I know for a fact i wouldnt want to swallow one of those whole.

Re:Ugh. (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 4 years ago | (#31233254)

Those you saw are the suppository size.

Re:Ugh. (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 4 years ago | (#31233466)

Really? Because the actual horse pills I have seen are the size of a roll of nickles. I don't remember Mike & Ikes being that big.

Re:Ugh. (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 4 years ago | (#31233702)

Really? Because the actual horse pills I have seen are the size of a roll of nickles. I don't remember Mike & Ikes being that big.

You haven't seen the Mike & Ike suppositories, I take it?

Re:Ugh. (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 4 years ago | (#31233498)

I chew all of my illicit substances.

Re:Ugh. (4, Funny)

binarylarry (1338699) | more than 4 years ago | (#31233232)

Dude these drugs look awesome, where can I get some and how much are you asking?

Re:Ugh. (5, Funny)

daremonai (859175) | more than 4 years ago | (#31233338)

Hey, Mike and Ikes are criminally delicious - this makes perfect sense.

Re:Ugh. (5, Funny)

truthsearch (249536) | more than 4 years ago | (#31233632)

Correct. We would have also accepted "snacktacular".

The School is in Pensylvania (5, Funny)

number6x (626555) | more than 4 years ago | (#31233402)

The School is in Pensylvania and Mike & Ike's are made in Illinois. This is obviously a case of corporate funding in public schools gone awry! Hershey's will not allow the children of Pennsylvania to be poisened by the corn syrup generated candies of Illinois!

They are just acting to protect our youth!

Think of the children.

Re:The School is in Pensylvania (4, Informative)

kaizendojo (956951) | more than 4 years ago | (#31233848)

For the record, Mike and Ike candies are manufactured in BETHLEHEM, PENNSYLVANIA by the Just Born company - who also makes Peeps, (I know becuase I live about 5 miles from the factory) which makes it even stranger that they wouldn't be able to identify them. The real question that remains unanswered is why officials were viewing through the web cams in the first place - what gave them 'probable cause' to believe that such steps were necessary. Remember, the software was installed to enable them to take a picture of the current user if they believed the laptop was stolen. At no point have they even hinted that they thought the laptop in question was stolen.

Re:Ugh. (1)

skine (1524819) | more than 4 years ago | (#31233500)

The drugs don't necessarily have to be illicit. For example, Dayquil/Nyquil tabs viewed over a cheap webcam would appear similar to Mike & Ikes.

http://media.nowpublic.net/images//f1/b/f1b6b896b9c916f2b630080151d3d422.jpg [nowpublic.net]

While they aren't illegal, it's possible that they have older pills/generic pills that still allow them to Robotrip.

(This is, of course, all besides the fact that the school obviously did something illegal, and it doesn't really matter either way)

Re:Ugh. (2, Informative)

Pojut (1027544) | more than 4 years ago | (#31233550)

Nasty, never heard of using Day/Nyquil to robotrip. I see no way that could end well, what with all the other crap in there.

I have no problems with kids experimenting with drugs (illegal or otherwise)...but they should at least educate themselves on how to stay safe.

Re:Ugh. (-1, Flamebait)

Known Nutter (988758) | more than 4 years ago | (#31233716)

I have no problems with kids experimenting with drugs (illegal or otherwise)...but they should at least educate themselves on how to stay safe.

Most folks tend to "stay safe" by not experimenting with drugs, illegal or otherwise. Just saying... not all kids are automatically predisposed to drug experimentation and for those that are, well, safety and drugs seem mutually exclusive anyhow.

KNOWING is half the battel! (1)

Thud457 (234763) | more than 4 years ago | (#31233874)

Yeah, much better to keep people ignorant so they're incapable of making informed choices!

Re:Ugh. (5, Insightful)

Anonymous Coward | more than 4 years ago | (#31233910)

Most people experiment with ways to alter consciousness from a young age, including spinning around. If they're going to do it, they ought to have the information they need to be safe, not a brick wall of silence. Same goes for sex, another popular way to alter consciousness, among other things.

Re:Ugh. (3, Insightful)

Pojut (1027544) | more than 4 years ago | (#31233912)

I experimented with a rather wide range through my late teens. Never got arrested, never freaked out, never had a bad trip, never lost a job, and aside from the good memories I have from the experiences, no long term side effects.

I made sure to research ANY substance before taking it...what I shouldn't mix it with (i.e. will drinking orange juice and taking this pill kill me), what kind of environment I should be in, potential side effects, how to deal with them, etc. erowid.org was responsable for me having safe and very enjoyable late teen years.

Remember, drug use and drug abuse are two different things.

Re:Ugh. (1)

snowraver1 (1052510) | more than 4 years ago | (#31233980)

I'm confused... Are you saying that Asprin is not a drug, or that it is dangerous? Drugs are not necessarily dangerous... No question, there are dangerous drugs, just like there are harmless ones. The problem is that the gov't/schools tells you that ALL drugs are bad and will kill you if you even touch them. Then when kids try pot, the see that the gov't was lying, and think that maybe the gov't was lying about the cocaine too, so they try it.

Re:Ugh. (4, Insightful)

interkin3tic (1469267) | more than 4 years ago | (#31233536)

Yeah...because Mike & Ikes look just like illicit drugs.

Additionally I'd argue it's none of the school's fucking business what candy OR illegal drugs the student was taking when he was not at school. If the student were taking poison, committing suicide, then the school officials have a duty to report it and they'd be thanked for that after their jail sentences for being peeping toms.

Re:Ugh. (5, Insightful)

fahrbot-bot (874524) | more than 4 years ago | (#31233858)

Additionally I'd argue it's none of the school's fucking business what candy OR illegal drugs the student was taking when he was not at school.

Or legal drug. Checking my most recent Prescription reference book, drugs come in all shapes, sizes and colors. Is the school admin a pharmacist? I think not, so what the f*ck does he know? Unless, of course, they look like something the admin is using... :-)

To be fair (5, Insightful)

jeff4747 (256583) | more than 4 years ago | (#31233210)

To be fair, the "Mike & Ike" claim was made by the kid. And he might be lying.

But the entire "what exactly was the kid doing" tangent is really just an attempt to justify the school's bad behavior.

Re:To be fair (5, Insightful)

0racle (667029) | more than 4 years ago | (#31233314)

Whether he was doing drugs or not is entirely irrelevant. If he was, there is no legal or moral way for the school to have found out unless he was caught doing it at the school.

Re:To be fair (1)

Moheeheeko (1682914) | more than 4 years ago | (#31233316)

He was also being watched on a school issue laptop, which is probably a lowest bidder laptop, which cant have the geatest webcam in the world.

Re:To be fair (2, Informative)

Anonymous Coward | more than 4 years ago | (#31233362)

the one-to-one program is supported by apple and mac books....

Re:To be fair (1, Funny)

Anonymous Coward | more than 4 years ago | (#31233538)

so it's definitely a shite system then, gotcha.

Re:To be fair (4, Insightful)

MartinSchou (1360093) | more than 4 years ago | (#31233384)

They could have caught him cutting open his little sister for all I care.

The school claims the system was only used to locate stolen laptops. If the kid's laptop had indeed been reported as stolen to the school, all 'bad things' that it caught (like him masturbating) isn't the school's fault.

If it HADN'T been reported stolen, then they have no 'get out of jail free card' on seeing him cutting open his little sister. They're still guilty of illegal wire tapping and if they've done it once, it really should be up to them to prove, no-one has been using the system to spy on people.

Re:To be fair (0, Troll)

jimbolauski (882977) | more than 4 years ago | (#31233432)

The kid needs to shut his mouth they have a slam dunk case anything he says can only hurt his case.

Re:To be fair (-1, Flamebait)

Sancho (17056) | more than 4 years ago | (#31233514)

Not really. There are people out there--probably a lot of them--who think that the ends justify the means. That's the entire premise of contemporary evangelical Christianity and other extremist religions.

And if the ends justify the means, then they'll likely overlook the privacy aspect in order to punish this kid for doing drugs. If that's what the disciplinary action was about, he absolutely must rebut that.

Re:To be fair (2, Insightful)

characterZer0 (138196) | more than 4 years ago | (#31233654)

That's the entire premise of contemporary evangelical Christianity

What exactly are the evangelical Christians doing do make you think that their premise is that the ends justify the means?

Re:To be fair (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 4 years ago | (#31233730)

I generally don't feed the trolls, but I'll make an exception in your case.

Everything since the f'ing Crusades...

Re:To be fair (1)

HungryHobo (1314109) | more than 4 years ago | (#31233804)

The bible belt.

Re:To be fair (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 4 years ago | (#31233892)

What exactly are the evangelical Christians doing do make you think that their premise is that the ends justify the means?
"The bible belt" is a non-sequitur answer to that question.

Re:To be fair (1)

Knara (9377) | more than 4 years ago | (#31233812)

The entire premise of a religion where you have to slog through 70 years of life in order to get an eternal reward is a prime example of what the poster was talking about. Particularly with the "I am Saved" variety of Christianity.

Re:To be fair (2, Informative)

Culture20 (968837) | more than 4 years ago | (#31233990)

The entire premise of a religion where you have to slog through 70 years of life in order to get an eternal reward is a prime example of what the poster was talking about. Particularly with the "I am Saved" variety of Christianity.

That sounds a lot like the means justify the end. "The ends justify the means" is a phrase that means the end result is more important than how the result was achieved.
If the eternal reward justifies the means, then why slog through 70 years? Suicide now! That's the new-age alien cult method.
Christianity, while being *about* the ends, says that the means are very important, and that using the wrong means is proof of an attempt to reach the wrong end.

Re:To be fair (1)

Remus Shepherd (32833) | more than 4 years ago | (#31233816)

Um...evangelizing?

Re:To be fair (1)

Reapman (740286) | more than 4 years ago | (#31233932)

Extremist? I'd love to hear your definition of that word. I know several that would probably consider themselves that, and I don't live in fear of my life. You and I must have very different definitions of said word.

Also, I think we need a term to designate when a /. discussion goes from topic A to topic Religion.

Re:To be fair (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 4 years ago | (#31233992)

Don't most religions specifically exclude a lot of means - making them unjustified?

Re:To be fair (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 4 years ago | (#31233578)

But the entire "what exactly was the kid doing" tangent is really just an attempt to justify the school's bad behavior.

You made the fallacy of the following form: If X and Y did something wrong and X is using Y's behavior to justify its own actions then Y did not do anything wrong. What the school allegedly did with the webcam should not absolve the kid of his crimes.

Re:To be fair (5, Insightful)

Angst Badger (8636) | more than 4 years ago | (#31233588)

But the entire "what exactly was the kid doing" tangent is really just an attempt to justify the school's bad behavior.

And that's the crux of the issue. The kid could have been running a meth lab for all that it matters. Public schools are not empowered to engage in warrantless video surveillance of private citizens in their own homes. A school can't even get a warrant. For that, they have to call the police, and the police have to go to a judge. And if there is anyone in the audience who wonders why schools aren't empowered to do this sort of thing, this case should answer that question.

Re:To be fair (5, Insightful)

sjames (1099) | more than 4 years ago | (#31233600)

Sure, he might be, but so far we KNOW the other side has a history of lying on record (The school board's public statements would make the picture and the disciplinary action impossible, yet both exist).

For that matter, the school would still be in the wrong even if they had him doing lines in a video. It's just that then they would have the ability to deflect the public's attention away from the issue.

Really, the Mike and Ike thing is just icing on the cake. It just says that in addition to being creepy, voyeuristic, stupid, and on a power trip, the school system is also suspicious, given to unwarranted leaps of illogic, and blind as a bat.

Re:To be fair (1)

BitZtream (692029) | more than 4 years ago | (#31233788)

Yep, I took advantage of such devices anytime I had an issue at school I was trying to get out of.

If you can divert the problem to something else, preferably relating to someone else doing something wrong, you can sometimes get off without anyone really doing anything to you in the end.

Re:To be fair (5, Insightful)

billius (1188143) | more than 4 years ago | (#31233828)

To be fair, the "Mike & Ike" claim was made by the kid. And he might be lying.

But the entire "what exactly was the kid doing" tangent is really just an attempt to justify the school's bad behavior.

Exactly. Even if he was taking pills, there's no way of ascertaining what was in said pills by just looking at a photo, but seeing as how they strip search 13 year-old girls [aclu.org] nowadays for having advil, I'm afraid that this is seeming more and more like par for the course. Even if the pills were illegal, the school had no business monitoring him like that.

excellent (4, Insightful)

Sir_Lewk (967686) | more than 4 years ago | (#31233240)

The news just keeps on getting better and better. The more absurd this story gets, the more it will stand out as an example of why this sort of behaviour is unacceptable.

Re:excellent (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 4 years ago | (#31233404)

True. The only way this could get more absurd is if they had accused one of the students of masturbating in front of his computer.

Re:excellent (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 4 years ago | (#31233574)

I wish they did.

Then the school district would be up on CP charges.

Still can't, (4, Insightful)

SirBigSpur (1677306) | more than 4 years ago | (#31233242)

I still can't believe anybody but the IT department had access to this, and better yet no one in the IT department thought this might be a bad idea...

Re:Still can't, (1)

jimbolauski (882977) | more than 4 years ago | (#31233386)

Because the computer was the school's computer they probably had a remote desktop program on it, which is useful to patch, update, and troubleshoot the computer. Having those tools on the computer is not a problem it's how they were used that is the problem.

Re:Still can't, (1)

Knara (9377) | more than 4 years ago | (#31233840)

You don't need a "remote desktop" program to do that. Having a "remote desktop" program basically means that you're doing it all by hand, which is the dumbest way to do it.

Re:Still can't, (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 4 years ago | (#31233534)

Have you ever met the admins in a public school system. I have and they aren't either payed enough to care or are somewhat incompetent.

Re:Still can't, (1)

guruevi (827432) | more than 4 years ago | (#31233752)

Most schools don't have a decent IT admin. They either cannot afford it or they are not competent enough to seek out and hire the competent. In the first case this usually results in a almost-retired technology teacher becoming the sys/network admin for a multi-campus site using CAT5 held together with wire nuts, in the former case you get an ego-tripping idiot that once attended a Microsoft Valueless Professional sales seminar.

Re:Still can't, (1)

HungryHobo (1314109) | more than 4 years ago | (#31233880)

Back when I was in highschool we had a teacher like that and "CAT5 held together with wire nuts" sounds about right.
He was good.

Later they outsourced it to a private company who came in with flashy but utterly useless systems and a "professional" admin who was both lazy and shared between 3 other schools.
From that point on it sucked. Badly.

Doesn't make much difference either way (3, Insightful)

Anonymous Coward | more than 4 years ago | (#31233246)

Really doesn't make much difference. The school shouldn't be punishing kids for taking drugs at home even if they really were doing that. If they came by the information legitimately then their choices are bringing the matter to the attention of the parents, the police, social services or some combination of those. If the information was acquired illegitimately then the choice gets a little harder but I can still see an argument for "we shouldn't know this but we really should let the parents know anyway and fire whoever got us into this mess". \deciding to discipline the student for a non-school related incident though is just completely the wrong move to make.

Nothing changes but stupidity in public schools... (4, Informative)

gestalt_n_pepper (991155) | more than 4 years ago | (#31233268)

Apparently the school administration has lost all memory of being teenagers in the 60s and 70s.

Hint: Drugs do not come in big candy colored shapes. Think powders, small tiny pills, pieces of paper, crude plant material, or crudely rolled cigarettes. FYI, Sweet Tarts and M&Ms are still legal in most states.

Re:Nothing changes but stupidity in public schools (0, Offtopic)

Zocalo (252965) | more than 4 years ago | (#31233444)

Yeah, but if you actually remember the Sixties then you weren't there, man! Plus, you've got to figure that the double whammy of Alzheimer's and Senile Dementia is starting to creep up on Gen-X as well by now. All in all, I think it's quite understandable that they might have forgotten whether or not they even inhaled, let alone what the shit actually looked like, besides wasn't everything in trippy colours back then, I can't quite remember...

Re:Nothing changes but stupidity in public schools (1)

spun (1352) | more than 4 years ago | (#31233786)

Yeah, but if you actually remember the Sixties then you weren't there, man! Plus, you've got to figure that the double whammy of Alzheimer's and Senile Dementia is starting to creep up on Gen-X as well by now. All in all, I think it's quite understandable that they might have forgotten whether or not they even inhaled, let alone what the shit actually looked like, besides wasn't everything in trippy colours back then, I can't quite remember...

In fact, America's Finest News Source is reporting on this very story. [theonion.com]

Re:Nothing changes but stupidity in public schools (4, Insightful)

commodoresloat (172735) | more than 4 years ago | (#31233448)

Hint: Drugs do not come in big candy colored shapes.

I'm guessing you didn't attend a lot of Grateful Dead shows....

Re:Nothing changes but stupidity in public schools (4, Insightful)

BitZtream (692029) | more than 4 years ago | (#31233450)

Apparently you don't know what it was like being a kid in the 80s and 90s. Prescription pills are the drugs of choice by most these days, easier to get by with in plain sight, generally easy to come up with an excuse for having on you or taking, only illegal if you don't have a prescription ... which you don't typically carry around with you.

and ...

Even less noticeable when you carry them around in a candy box and act completely normal with them.

You clearly were not part of the crowd who 'did drugs in school', thats probably a good thing, just stop pretending to know what goes on with the kids who do. If you have kids, I suggest you ask them about the drugs in their school rather than telling them about drugs, they'll probably already know more.

Re:Nothing changes but stupidity in public schools (0, Troll)

gestalt_n_pepper (991155) | more than 4 years ago | (#31233616)

True. I wasn't a kid in the 80s or 90s. Prescriptions were considered too tame when I was a kid.

Re:Nothing changes but stupidity in public schools (2, Insightful)

Knara (9377) | more than 4 years ago | (#31233896)

Except in this case if Rx drug abuse was the claim, the school wouldn't have any idea if the pills were legit or not.

Re:Nothing changes but stupidity in public schools (0, Flamebait)

SnarfQuest (469614) | more than 4 years ago | (#31233664)

Still legal, for a short time.

However, the Obama we-hate-fat-kids panel will soon fix that loophole.

Re:Nothing changes but stupidity in public schools (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 4 years ago | (#31233952)

Not true. A lot of them do. They just happen to be legal with a valid prescription.

eh (0)

nomadic (141991) | more than 4 years ago | (#31233278)

School officials are notorious for being completely clueless about the law; it's amazing what you find in some of the case law.

Re:eh (4, Interesting)

kannibal_klown (531544) | more than 4 years ago | (#31233592)

School officials are notorious for being completely clueless about the law; it's amazing what you find in some of the case law.

You don't even have to look that far. A year ago there was a big story about a school that strip-searched a female student because another student claimed he got Advil from her . She was even suspended, even though no pills were found.

I understand the whole zero-tolerance policy of not bringing in any medication, but a flippin' strip search is uncalled for. They didn't even have law enforcement do it, one of the school admins had to do it.

WTF

What's scary is it had to go to the Supreme Court for them to say "ummm, that's illegal." They ruled on the matter in June 2009.

Re:eh (5, Insightful)

nomadic (141991) | more than 4 years ago | (#31233618)

Yep went to the Supreme Court. The scary thing is a few of the justices sided with the school

Wait.. (4, Insightful)

rotide (1015173) | more than 4 years ago | (#31233280)

Wait, I thought the school made a statement saying they never ever used the laptop "security feature" for anything besides recovering lost and/or stolen equipment.

How is snapping a picture of a student, with _no_ stolen laptop, following in line with their stated security policy?

Ya, we didn't use it for its intended purpose. Ya, we did snoop around to satisfy our curiosity, but.. but.. BUT.. LOOK AT THE DRUGS!

*Facts presented so far in this case are less than facts until a court rules. I don't claim to know what happened, I'm just a sheep parroting the hearsay I come across.

Re:Wait.. (2, Interesting)

Rary (566291) | more than 4 years ago | (#31233580)

How is snapping a picture of a student, with _no_ stolen laptop, following in line with their stated security policy?

The school has claimed that the laptop had been reported stolen, and that they therefore enabled the security feature in accordance with their policy.

How it is possible that the laptop could have been reported stolen when it clearly wasn't has never been explained.

Re:Wait.. (4, Informative)

Attila Dimedici (1036002) | more than 4 years ago | (#31233724)

Actually, the school has not addressed the issue ofthis picture at all. They say that the security feature that allows them to remotely activate the webcam has only been used on laptops that have been reported stolen. They never admit to using that feature on this particular laptop. The school never addresses the disciplinary issue that led to this law suit. The school doesn't even make a statement saying that they can't address the issues raised about this disciplinary issue. They completely ignore it in their statements.

Re:Wait.. (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 4 years ago | (#31233770)

The kid may have reported it stolen in an effort to steal it, and then was caught doing drugs when the webcam was turned on to ID the thief, and now he's taking advantage of the privacy violation and embellishing with lies about eating candy.

Or not. Perhaps the school is actually insane enough to turn the camera off and peek at kids and see if they are doing drugs, and when they see candy, assume the kid is gobbling up 20 huge pills of LDS (joke).

I think the kid's a liar and that there's nothing wrong with turning on a camera when a laptop is stolen (which if the student reported it stolen, it was stolen), but I obviously should wait for the facts to come in. I laugh when thieves get busted by tech they stole.

If the school really is snooping on kids, people belong in jail. If the kid is making up his story, he belongs in jail (he's really fucking up people's lives if this is the case).

It's really hard to believe that someone who works with kids would see a bunch of neon candies (that we all recognize) and think they were drugs.

Re:Wait.. (1)

kannibal_klown (531544) | more than 4 years ago | (#31233792)

How is snapping a picture of a student, with _no_ stolen laptop, following in line with their stated security policy?

The school has claimed that the laptop had been reported stolen, and that they therefore enabled the security feature in accordance with their policy.

How it is possible that the laptop could have been reported stolen when it clearly wasn't has never been explained.

Don't get me wrong, there are a million and one reasons why this school's administration is completely messed up. And even so it doesn't really excuse anything, but...

To play devil's advocate, it's possible that either someone reported the laptop as a prank or the wrong laptop got entered into the "missing" form by mistake.

Maybe something as innocent as the digits on a serial number got reversed somewhere along the lines, or maybe the kid's friend/enemy though it would get him called into the principal's office for not reporting it himself.

That does NOT excuse everything, but if true then it can at least explain why it happened at all.

There's some quote along the lines of "don't immediately blame on conspiracy tgat which can be easily explained by stupidity." However I think this school messed up on a multitude of levels.

Underwear check (5, Interesting)

Ethanol-fueled (1125189) | more than 4 years ago | (#31233294)

I've mentioned this before, but from this [wikipedia.org] :

In April 2002, Rancho Bernardo received media attention when one of the school's assistant principals forced female students at a school dance to lift their clothing and expose their underwear, in search of G-strings and thongs. The district said the reason for the check was to "ensure appropriate school dress."[2] Rita Wilson, the assistant principal involved in this incident, was later demoted to a teaching position.[3]

And it was later discovered that none of the students broke any rules. The rule was that underwear could not be showing. The problem is people making up the rules as they go along, often in secret. Our government for example...

Re:Underwear check (4, Insightful)

rotide (1015173) | more than 4 years ago | (#31233346)

While off topic, your quote makes me weep for that school system. Take a Assistant Principle who can't follow the rules of the school, let alone the law, and put her in a position to _teach_ the kids.

Not only was that disgusting, the "punishment" is frikkin' SCARY.

missing part of the story (4, Funny)

commodoresloat (172735) | more than 4 years ago | (#31233496)

What they left out is she was required to teach in a g-string.

Re:Underwear check (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 4 years ago | (#31233926)

While off topic, your quote makes me weep for that school system. Take a Assistant Principle who can't follow the rules of the school, let alone the law, and put her in a position to _teach_ the kids.

Not only was that disgusting, the "punishment" is frikkin' SCARY.

Sorry, but this post makes me weep for the school system also. "Take AN assistant principal..."

OK, you owe me some candy, or drugs that look like candy. Or both. All I have is this coffee. Sniff.

Re:Underwear, check; broomstick, check; noose, che (2, Insightful)

Thud457 (234763) | more than 4 years ago | (#31233456)

holey crap, for a school that's only been around for 20 years, they've got a remarkable number of fucked up incidents

Re:Underwear check (2, Insightful)

Rich0 (548339) | more than 4 years ago | (#31233826)

Glad to see that they know how to hand out punishment!

If I pulled a stunt like that at a business (inspecting female employee undergarments to ensure compliance with corporate dress code) you can bet that I wouldn't be facing a demotion to a job that pays a professional wage. I'd be lucky not to end up in prison, or with $30M in lawsuits, and I'd almost certainly never get a corporate job anytime in the next three lifetimes.

The Shamen (2, Funny)

Anonymous Coward | more than 4 years ago | (#31233296)

Ikes are good! Ikes are good! Ikes are good!

Mike and Ikes are good!

Whose candy was it? (5, Funny)

ZipK (1051658) | more than 4 years ago | (#31233298)

Do we know for a fact that it was factory-branded Mike & Ike's and not illegally copied or Chinese-bootlegged Mike & Ike-like candy? There's still ample opportunity to tie this story into several other perpetual Slashdot themes.

Re:Whose candy was it? (4, Funny)

Farmer Tim (530755) | more than 4 years ago | (#31233544)

Considering what ends up in Chinese foodstuffs [wikipedia.org] , drugs would be the safer option.

Actually... (1, Funny)

Anonymous Coward | more than 4 years ago | (#31233312)

They were drugs, just prescribed by Dr. Mario!

Yo man (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 4 years ago | (#31233320)

So, how did that play out for the student trying to score?

Yo man, you want to score some real ass shit? I got Mike and Ikes. I got motherfucking Candy Corn straight out of Mexico. I'm talking about the premium cane sugar shit. What are you? You tweek? I got pixie-sticks. I got warheads. I got pure, uncut rock candy. I got what you need, bro! No, I got your ticket. You're a peep head. Look at these, man. Check out the pink frosting. primo. That'll be four Washingtons, bro. Cash, man!

Kids today...

Cardinal Richlieu 2010 (2, Insightful)

StreetStealth (980200) | more than 4 years ago | (#31233344)

“If you give me a 640x480 JPEG of the most honest of men, I will find something in it which will hang him”

Original quote (1)

odin84gk (1162545) | more than 4 years ago | (#31233360)

The original clip that specified Mike and Ikes.:

http://www.nbcphiladelphia.com/news/tech/WebcamGate_Family_s_Attorney___Who_Has_Access__Philadelphia.html

Haha, 'ol Mike & Ikes (4, Interesting)

Hellasboy (120979) | more than 4 years ago | (#31233394)

LOL!
Oh man... Back in high school, I routinely grabbed a box of mike & ike (pink and white flavor/version) from a vending machine and kept it in my backpack to snack on. One day in class, a kid that sat next to me in the row over saw that I kept putting my hand in my backpack and eating something. So he asked what I was eating.
Being a jackass, I replied secretly ... "I'm popping steroids"
Big white and pink pills... huge effin steroids!
He started yelling in class "Steroids! Steroids! He's popping steroids!!!!" Everyone looks over and I didn't expect that kind of reaction from something pretty comical. Luckily nothing came of it, I just replied really quickly that they're just Mike and Ikes... a few laughs later - everything was fine.

I would expect a high school student to do something like this. However, a principle of a high school should know better and this mess reeks of incompetence on his part.

Re:Haha, 'ol Mike & Ikes (2, Insightful)

WilyCoder (736280) | more than 4 years ago | (#31233584)

I hope the ending of your story is something like "And then I beat that snitch's ass after class that day"...

Re:Haha, 'ol Mike & Ikes (3, Insightful)

elrous0 (869638) | more than 4 years ago | (#31233894)

These days, some "school resource officer" (yes, schools today have actual full-time cops on duty) would probably have you in handcuffs and standing before a judge for that. The other day I read about an 11-year-old girl who got arrested by her SRO for writing on her desk with a marker. Hire a cop and he has to justify his job, after all.

Bizzarre doesn't begin to cover it (4, Interesting)

Anonymous Coward | more than 4 years ago | (#31233396)

I go to Villanova University, which is 5 minutes by train from Lower Merion. One of my profs has a daughter that goes there (when I showed him the brief on Thursday, he was floored.)

The Mike & Ike thing is pretty damn bizarre, but it makes sense.

I expect the school already deleted the logs. Then again, given the tech competence of my own high school (all software and VLKs were on public shares, all documents were accessible [all users] if logged in via RDP, including passwords to the externally hosted attendance/transcript web app, etc.), it would not be terribly surprising if they just saved it all.

And I was disciplined for taking prescription medication for which the school had a proper release (i.e. I signed the right form and gave a doctor's note saying I needed to have the medication on my person). Nosy administrators "thinking of the children" and overreacting to non-issues (as well as egregious violations of privacy) would be nothing new in my book.

More info on Network Adminsistrator. (5, Interesting)

pavon (30274) | more than 4 years ago | (#31233452)

It turns out that one of the the network administrators at the school district has a fairly large online presence, and has posted quite a bit relating to this program on his blog over the years. Some folks have started looking over [blogspot.com] the blogs and the software being used, and it is pretty interesting.

Re:More info on Network Adminsistrator. (3, Insightful)

hackus (159037) | more than 4 years ago | (#31233694)

Some comments:

1) I wouldn't do any of these things to anyone, who bought a computer from me.

2) If the state offered me a trillon dollars to build laptops with software like this I would not do it.
(Even if they sent me to prison.)

There are plenty of ways to retrieve a stolen laptop without pictures or this kind of control, which is entirely not required.

3) It is a sad day when nobody even bothers remembering what tyranny was, and so how unsurprising it begins with scum bags like this to spy on our children just to start with.

I am getting the names of these guys in the area because they won't ever be working for my company.

I will also object to working with these scum bags on any technology project or new business I get. If the customer doesn't know what they are doing or why I object I will make sure to educate them.

People like this are a danger to our constitution, and should be pitied, and black balled.

-Hack

Re:More info on Network Adminsistrator. (1)

c0d3g33k (102699) | more than 4 years ago | (#31233860)

Thanks for this. Very interesting Indeed. I'll be very curious to see how the courts handle all this, because on the face of it, this seems pretty damning.

That's how we roll in Philly (1)

BlueBoxSW.com (745855) | more than 4 years ago | (#31233556)

"particularly bad job of actually managing the events" is how we do it.

IE, see last summer's racial incident at the hunnington valley swim club when black kids were invited, then banned from the pool.

Dinner and a show (2, Insightful)

magusxxx (751600) | more than 4 years ago | (#31233590)

What are the chances Mr. Schooladministrator will be asked, "Why did you watch Billy Beatnick supposedly taking drugs for 30 seconds and then watch Chelsea Cheerleader for the next 3 hours?"

And now I'll be suing for injuries (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 4 years ago | (#31233614)

I just facepalmed so hard that I think I broke something. The school will be hearing from my lawyers.

Only in america... (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 4 years ago | (#31233736)

Hahahahha.. this is my first post ever on Slashdot.

Just had to say, some of you americans are totally insane, and this case really proves it. I just shock my head in disbelief.

Anon coward from Norway

More BS from the school (3, Insightful)

192939495969798999 (58312) | more than 4 years ago | (#31233768)

What are the odds that they took one picture and it just happened to be of a kid doing drugs? Zero. The big question: how many pictures would you have to take in order to guarantee a picture of a kid doing drugs? Hundreds? Thousands? That's the crime here, all the pics they took where someone was NOT doing drugs.

The Crazy loop. (0, Offtopic)

jellomizer (103300) | more than 4 years ago | (#31233888)

Schools are overpopulated with kids from poor/undereducated families.
These kids cause trouble.
Schools find ways to kick out these students to bring their "Numbers" Up.
Kicked out students are deemed as failures grow up in a few years stuck in the same area.
Live in poverity have kids.
Kids go to school...

Schools need to find reasons to keep them in schools not find reasons to kick them out. It doesn't matter if they are not model students or model human being. They should have a chance to succeed inspite of themselfs.

How long did they spy (1)

Murdoch5 (1563847) | more than 4 years ago | (#31233898)

So they used web cams to spy in the school and students got accused of taking drugs when eating Mikes and Ike's? Don't people know you should turn off your web cam unless you using it, well it's not expected that someone would spy on you at the same time it's simply good practice to turn it off.

The Real Issue (3, Insightful)

MuChild (656741) | more than 4 years ago | (#31233906)

As someone pointed out on another site, there are two big problems with the school's position:

1.) Just because they told the kids that they might activate the web cam to find it doesn't give them the right to do so. If the activity is illegal, telling someone you are going to do it beforehand doesn't make it legal. IANAL, but this one sounds pretty shaky.

2.)Even if they had the legitimate authority to use the web cam, once they realized that the laptop was in the hands of the right person, they would have been legally obliged to stop spying. Any information they gleaned from that spying would have been inadmissible in court.

From the posting at that link it looks like the school is on a serious freakout powertrip. Requiring the students to have one of these computers, requiring them to use them to the exclusion of all others and then spying on them periodically even if there was no report of the laptop being stolen.

The school board and school administration of that town should be burned to the ground with metaphorical salt sown in their professional fields.

Mike And Ikes == Bad Behavior (3, Interesting)

Black Gold Alchemist (1747136) | more than 4 years ago | (#31233930)

Why? because most school administrators love overstepping their authority, and being jerks. One the things they have been trying to do is prevent students from eating "junk-food", so given their nature, they would like to try to prevent this at home. At some local schools, they ripped out all the good food and replaced it with "organic" crud. No one ate it, and all just rotted - so they were forced to go back to the "junk-food". School administrators have no checks and balances on their authority, and behave as one would expect. It's a window into what would happen if there were no checks and balances on the president (no supreme court, senate, house, etc.). It should also be noted that some students are actually sick, or were actually sick (me), and needed to pop prescription drugs, including commonly abused ones. I don't want to know what that's like in normal school.

Glad I'm a homeschooler.
Load More Comments
Slashdot Login

Need an Account?

Forgot your password?

Submission Text Formatting Tips

We support a small subset of HTML, namely these tags:

  • b
  • i
  • p
  • br
  • a
  • ol
  • ul
  • li
  • dl
  • dt
  • dd
  • em
  • strong
  • tt
  • blockquote
  • div
  • quote
  • ecode

"ecode" can be used for code snippets, for example:

<ecode>    while(1) { do_something(); } </ecode>