Girl Wins $33,000 Settlement from Her School (Naked Pics In Her Phone)

2010-09-21 23:56:41

#26

11 Bravo: Banned; +965|5476|Cleveland, Ohio

Bevo wrote:
11 Bravo wrote:
Bevo wrote:
good thing they're not set in stone eh, you know, reviewed and all

clearly it's against the law. doesn't make it any less stupid
same with some little slut suing for money.

i would charge her with possession and settle for 33k.
this is one of the rare cases where a lawsuit actually makes some sense, violation of privacy and all. i'd rather the teacher fired

privacy and kids is a whole different issue. its a fine line

Last edited by 11 Bravo (2010-09-21 23:57:14)

2010-09-21 23:57:06

#27

Ultrafunkula: Hector: Ding, ding, ding, ding...; +1,975|6712|6 6 4 oh, I forget

Bevo wrote:
this is one of the rare cases where a lawsuit actually makes some sense, violation of privacy and all. i'd rather the teacher fired

2010-09-21 23:57:53

#28

Ultrafunkula: Hector: Ding, ding, ding, ding...; +1,975|6712|6 6 4 oh, I forget

11 Bravo wrote:
Bevo wrote:
11 Bravo wrote:

same with some little slut suing for money.

i would charge her with possession and settle for 33k.
this is one of the rare cases where a lawsuit actually makes some sense, violation of privacy and all. i'd rather the teacher fired
privacy and kids is a whole different issue. its a fine line

So you think it's ok for a teacher to go through someones personal belongings?

2010-09-21 23:58:49

#29

11 Bravo: Banned; +965|5476|Cleveland, Ohio

Ultrafunkula wrote:
11 Bravo wrote:
Bevo wrote:

this is one of the rare cases where a lawsuit actually makes some sense, violation of privacy and all. i'd rather the teacher fired
privacy and kids is a whole different issue. its a fine line
So you think it's ok for a teacher to go through someones personal belongings?

well schools can go thru lockers and such with probable cause. like i said a fine line.

2010-09-21 23:59:41

#30

Bevo: Nah; +718|6759|Austin, Texas

11 Bravo wrote:
Bevo wrote:
11 Bravo wrote:
same with some little slut suing for money.

i would charge her with possession and settle for 33k.
this is one of the rare cases where a lawsuit actually makes some sense, violation of privacy and all. i'd rather the teacher fired
privacy and kids is a whole different issue. its a fine line

legal guardians maybe, public school teachers fuck no

ed: probable cause for what, nudie pictures? there was nothing to suspect

Last edited by Bevo (2010-09-22 00:00:10)

2010-09-22 00:02:10

#31

Ultrafunkula: Hector: Ding, ding, ding, ding...; +1,975|6712|6 6 4 oh, I forget

11 Bravo wrote:
Ultrafunkula wrote:
11 Bravo wrote:

privacy and kids is a whole different issue. its a fine line
So you think it's ok for a teacher to go through someones personal belongings?
well schools can go thru lockers and such with probable cause. like i said a fine line.

Yeah, well the teacher probably thought she was al qaida and went through the phone just to be on the safe side that she doesn't have any bombing and/or school shooting plans there

2010-09-22 00:04:27

#32

11 Bravo: Banned; +965|5476|Cleveland, Ohio

fuck sake you two i dunno all the facts nor do you all i am saying is they can go thru kids stuff in some cases

Last edited by 11 Bravo (2010-09-22 00:04:49)

2010-09-22 00:07:28

#33

Ultrafunkula: Hector: Ding, ding, ding, ding...; +1,975|6712|6 6 4 oh, I forget

11 Bravo wrote:
fuck sake you two i dunno all the facts nor do you all i am saying is they can go thru kids stuff in some cases

Which I actually agree to for the most part (drugs, weapons and so on). But going through some girl's phone is like going through her diary. Big no-no. Ergo, bad teacher! *shakes finger*

2010-09-22 00:44:28

#34

Varegg: Support fanatic :-); +2,206|7048|Nårvei

Ban phones in class already ...

Wait behind the line ..............................................................

2010-09-22 01:35:30

#35

Little BaBy JESUS: m8; +394|6387|'straya

Varegg wrote:
Ban phones in class already ...

My school did, was good.

I never understood why people had to text friends in the same class as them, or people who they would see in no more than 45 minutes

2010-09-22 01:46:38

#36

JahManRed: wank; +646|6866|IRELAND

Nakes photos or GTFO.

2010-09-22 01:52:31

#37

PrivateVendetta: I DEMAND XMAS THEME; +704|6430|Roma

11 Bravo wrote:
Ultrafunkula wrote:
11 Bravo wrote:

privacy and kids is a whole different issue. its a fine line
So you think it's ok for a teacher to go through someones personal belongings?
well schools can go thru lockers and such with probable cause. like i said a fine line.

lockers are part of the school property..

OT: Pics or gtfo

https://static.bf2s.com/files/user/29388/stopped%20scrolling%21.png

2010-09-22 02:41:03

#38

unnamednewbie13: Moderator; +2,053|7010|PNW

The way I see it, both are at fault.

1) The girl should have put her cell phone away and connect with reality for the duration of class.
2) Who the fuck carries naked pictures of themselves around in public?
3) The guy should have just thrown the thing in a desk and given it back to her at the end of class. I can see searching lockers because those are school property, but cell phones are not.

2010-09-22 03:00:06

#39

PrivateVendetta: I DEMAND XMAS THEME; +704|6430|Roma

She's perfectly entitled to take photo's of herself. She can store them wherever she wants, as long as they aren't publicly on display IMO. Dunno what the law is over there, but that''s what makes sense to me.
So it's probably illegal in America

2010-09-22 04:25:59

#40

ghettoperson: Member; +1,943|6888

I fully support her right to take naked pictures of herself. Assuming she's hot. But I've no idea why you would, imagine if you lost your phone.

2010-09-22 04:40:39

#41

jsnipy: ...; +3,277|6761|...

11 Bravo wrote:
is it not child porn by definition?

... In the United States. But honestly at 17 you can be married. You don't think charging her with child porn is a bit overkill? I think law needs to the evolve. Calling 'First' on a legal precedent should not mean we stop thinking and evolving.

Honestly she should not settle out of court, actually get a verdict ffs.

2010-09-22 04:50:19

#42

Vilham: Say wat!?; +580|7005|UK

how could you possible even charge her with child porn? They are pictures of herself.

2010-09-22 04:53:31

#43

ghettoperson: Member; +1,943|6888

Does that mean if I jack off under the age of 16 I'm a child molester?

2010-09-22 04:58:03

#44

Ultrafunkula: Hector: Ding, ding, ding, ding...; +1,975|6712|6 6 4 oh, I forget

ghettoperson wrote:
Does that mean if I jack off under the age of 16 I'm a child molester?

Probably. What about a 13yo taking an innocent shower then? We must take this further. Children must not know what lies beneath their heads!

2010-09-22 05:03:25

#45

ghettoperson: Member; +1,943|6888

WHAT THE FUCK IS GOING ON WITH HER LEGS?!

2010-09-22 05:05:48

#46

13urnzz: Banned; +5,830|6736

i remember when phones were phones.

https://img213.imageshack.us/img213/776/rotaryiphone.jpg

2010-09-22 05:11:07

#47

jord: Member; +2,382|6917|The North, beyond the wall.

11 Bravo wrote:
my point is it is against the law. whether you like the law or not is a seperate issue.

Some legislative technicality has no bearings on discussions here. People generally debate with logic and reason unless of course it is a legal debate.

Logic and common sense say taking pictures of yourself is not child porn. Ever. Never ever.

2010-09-22 05:14:24

#48

Winston_Churchill: Bazinga!; +521|6977|Toronto | Canada

11 Bravo wrote:
Ultrafunkula wrote:
11 Bravo wrote:

privacy and kids is a whole different issue. its a fine line
So you think it's ok for a teacher to go through someones personal belongings?
well schools can go thru lockers and such with probable cause. like i said a fine line.

they can go through lockers because its their property, their just renting it out to you.

also, you mean principal fired, not teacher right? the teacher just confiscated it which is fine by me, it was the principal that went through the pictures and texts

2010-09-22 05:17:16

#49

Varegg: Support fanatic :-); +2,206|7048|Nårvei

ghettoperson wrote:
WHAT THE FUCK IS GOING ON WITH HER LEGS?!

That would be the lack-of-kneecaps-syndrome I believe ...

Wait behind the line ..............................................................

2010-09-22 05:21:22

#50

Lucien: Fantasma Parastasie; +1,451|6891

ghettoperson wrote:
WHAT THE FUCK IS GOING ON WITH HER LEGS?!

Bendy.

BF2S Forums Girl Wins $33,000 Settlement from Her School (Naked Pics In Her Phone)

Bevo wrote:

11 Bravo wrote:

Bevo wrote:

Bevo wrote:

11 Bravo wrote:

Bevo wrote:

11 Bravo wrote:

Ultrafunkula wrote:

11 Bravo wrote:

Bevo wrote:

11 Bravo wrote:

Bevo wrote:

11 Bravo wrote:

11 Bravo wrote:

Ultrafunkula wrote:

11 Bravo wrote:

11 Bravo wrote:

Varegg wrote:

11 Bravo wrote:

Ultrafunkula wrote:

11 Bravo wrote:

11 Bravo wrote:

ghettoperson wrote:

11 Bravo wrote:

11 Bravo wrote:

Ultrafunkula wrote:

11 Bravo wrote:

ghettoperson wrote:

ghettoperson wrote:

Board footer