As was foretold, we've added advertisements to the forums! If you have questions, or if you encounter any bugs, please visit this thread: https://forums.penny-arcade.com/discussion/240191/forum-advertisement-faq-and-reports-thread/

Your (kids') schools are run by idiots, facsists, and maybe pedophiles.

DaedalusDaedalus Registered User regular
edited August 2010 in Debate and/or Discourse
A school in Pennsylvania lent out laptops to the students and then used the webcams built into the laptops to spy on the students in their homes.

http://boingboing.net/2010/02/17/school-used-student.html
School used student laptop webcams to spy on them at school and home

By Cory Doctorow at 11:49 PM February 17, 2010

According to the filings in Blake J Robbins v Lower Merion School District (PA) et al, the laptops issued to high-school students in the well-heeled Philly suburb have webcams that can be covertly activated by the schools' administrators, who have used this facility to spy on students and even their families. The issue came to light when the Robbins's child was disciplined for "improper behavior in his home" and the Vice Principal used a photo taken by the webcam as evidence. The suit is a class action, brought on behalf of all students issued with these machines.

If true, these allegations are about as creepy as they come. I don't know about you, but I often have the laptop in the room while I'm getting dressed, having private discussions with my family, and so on. The idea that a school district would not only spy on its students' clickstreams and emails (bad enough), but also use these machines as AV bugs is purely horrifying.

Schools are in an absolute panic about kids divulging too much online, worried about pedos and marketers and embarrassing photos that will haunt you when you run for office or apply for a job in 10 years. They tell kids to treat their personal details as though they were precious.

But when schools take that personal information, indiscriminately invading privacy (and, of course, punishing students who use proxies and other privacy tools to avoid official surveillance), they send a much more powerful message: your privacy is worthless and you shouldn't try to protect it.

Robbins v. Lower Merion School District (PDF)

So, this is various kinds of fucked up. Things that spring immediately to mind:

1) Who the fuck thought this was a good idea? Why? The "pedophile" knee-jerk reaction is there, of course, but other explanations are hard to swallow. I mean, it's a webcam for a laptop you're lending to high-school students; what the hell do you think you'll see, other than a non-stop wanking marathon?
2) When that person went to the IT department/person to set this up, why the hell did he go along with it?
3) Why would you reveal that you have this ability over some minor disciplinary bullshit? If I was crazy enough to do this, I'd think twice about revealing it unless there was a murder or something. Did they just not think anyone would find it wrong?
4) It's a class-action civil lawsuit, which means the parents are going to be paying for their own settlement out of whatever the property taxes get raised to next year. Why aren't people going to jail?

Any other thoughts?

Daedalus on
«13456710

Posts

  • TarranonTarranon Registered User regular
    edited February 2010
    Crazy as this sounds since it's obviously reprehensible, but were any laws broken? Did they sign a waiver without realizing it or something?

    This is basically making me realize that I don't know much about actual privacy laws.

    Tarranon on
    You could be anywhere
    On the black screen
  • EgoEgo Registered User regular
    edited February 2010
    Yeah, I thought this was pretty outrageous. I can understand a lot of the semi-shady stuff that you see on 'company' computers (like NIC firmware that reports IP address and activity, and screen capture /viewing software) but, sincerely, spying literally on the kids themselves? Sheesh.

    edit: I'm sure the parents had to sign something allowing software to run on the laptops. I guess we'll see if the document was legal.

    Ego on
    Erik
  • AdrienAdrien Registered User regular
    edited February 2010
    Tarranon wrote: »
    Crazy as this sounds since it's obviously reprehensible, but were any laws broken? Did they sign a waiver without realizing it or something?

    This is basically making me realize that I don't know much about actual privacy laws.

    There is for damn sure no waiver you can sign without realizing it that would let someone take pictures inside your home.

    Adrien on
    tmkm.jpg
  • DaedalusDaedalus Registered User regular
    edited February 2010
    Man, it doesn't matter what the hell the kids (edit: or more importantly their parents) signed, having a picture of a minor in a sexual situation is a serious criminal offense. You can't sign away that shit.

    Daedalus on
  • mcdermottmcdermott Registered User regular
    edited February 2010
    Daedalus wrote: »
    Man, it doesn't matter what the hell the kids signed, having a picture of a minor in a sexual situation is a serious criminal offense. You can't sign away that shit.

    Yep. So much as clicking "grab picture remotely" at the wrong moment could instantly make any school official who did it a sex offender. Which is why it's a terrible idea.

    Also, while I'm not sure about the precise nature of any waivers signed (and whether they're even legal), but the story I read today cited about a half-dozen different laws that may have been broken by this.

    mcdermott on
  • DevoutlyApatheticDevoutlyApathetic Registered User regular
    edited February 2010
    Daedalus wrote: »
    Man, it doesn't matter what the hell the kids signed, having a picture of a minor in a sexual situation is a serious criminal offense. You can't sign away that shit.

    The vindictive part of me hopes one of these cameras caught even non-sexual nudity of an underage student and such can be proven in court. Criminal court mind you. Just because the actual punishment for this action is going to be nowhere near appropriate.

    DevoutlyApathetic on
    Nod. Get treat. PSN: Quippish
  • DaedalusDaedalus Registered User regular
    edited February 2010
    I mean, most students would set up a personal computer in their bedroom. What the fuck did they think went on in there?

    Daedalus on
  • Look Out it's Sabs!Look Out it's Sabs! Registered User regular
    edited February 2010
    Daedalus wrote: »
    I mean, most students would set up a personal computer in their bedroom. What the fuck did they think went on in there?

    SHENANIGANS

    Look Out it's Sabs! on
    NNID: Sabuiy
    3DS: 2852-6809-9411
  • Sweeney TomSweeney Tom Registered User regular
    edited February 2010
    figures this would happen in the state i live in

    Sweeney Tom on
  • AdrienAdrien Registered User regular
    edited February 2010
    From a link in the comments, the school's side of the story.
    The District is dedicated to protecting and promoting student privacy. The laptops do contain a security feature intended to track lost, stolen and missing laptops. This feature has been deactivated effective today.
    The following questions and answers help explain the background behind the initial decision to install the tracking-security feature, its limited use, and next steps.

    • Why are webcams installed on student laptops?
    The Apple computers that the District provides to students come equipped with webcams and students are free to utilize this feature for educational purposes.

    • Why was the remote tracking-security feature installed?
    Laptops are a frequent target for theft in schools and off school property. The security feature was installed to help locate a laptop in the event it was reported lost, missing or stolen so that the laptop could be returned to the student.

    • How did the security feature work?
    Upon a report of a suspected lost, stolen or missing laptop, the feature was activated by the District's security and technology departments. The tracking-security feature was limited to taking a still image of the operator and the operator's screen. This feature has only been used for the limited purpose of locating a lost, stolen or missing laptop. The District has not used the tracking feature or web cam for any other purpose or in any other manner whatsoever.

    So that kind of changes it. Apparently the "improper behavior" charge was, you know, stealing a laptop?

    Also, Lower Marion School District? That's where my girlfriend went to school. (Except she was in private school, but still.)

    Adrien on
    tmkm.jpg
  • EgoEgo Registered User regular
    edited February 2010
    I'm really curious what they tried to punish the kid for doing.

    Ego on
    Erik
  • PantsBPantsB Fake Thomas Jefferson Registered User regular
    edited February 2010
    Yeah the school district is fucked. They didn't notify anyone by their own admission, and although they above claim they only activate it when the laptop is stolen, they punished a student for a picture taken by their own computer. They will have to settle or they will be fucked

    Hell, they're criminally liable not only if they got a naked picture or something, but because they are legally accessing a computer without legal authority (more commonly known as hacking) which is a federal felony that carries substantial jail time

    PantsB on
    11793-1.png
    day9gosu.png
    QEDMF xbl: PantsB G+
  • SheepSheep Registered User, __BANNED USERS regular
    edited February 2010
    Your (kids') schools are run by idiots, facsists, and maybe pedophiles.

    We've known about this for decades.

    Sheep on
  • mcdermottmcdermott Registered User regular
    edited February 2010
    Adrien wrote: »
    From a link in the comments, the school's side of the story.
    The District is dedicated to protecting and promoting student privacy. The laptops do contain a security feature intended to track lost, stolen and missing laptops. This feature has been deactivated effective today.
    The following questions and answers help explain the background behind the initial decision to install the tracking-security feature, its limited use, and next steps.

    • Why are webcams installed on student laptops?
    The Apple computers that the District provides to students come equipped with webcams and students are free to utilize this feature for educational purposes.

    • Why was the remote tracking-security feature installed?
    Laptops are a frequent target for theft in schools and off school property. The security feature was installed to help locate a laptop in the event it was reported lost, missing or stolen so that the laptop could be returned to the student.

    • How did the security feature work?
    Upon a report of a suspected lost, stolen or missing laptop, the feature was activated by the District's security and technology departments. The tracking-security feature was limited to taking a still image of the operator and the operator's screen. This feature has only been used for the limited purpose of locating a lost, stolen or missing laptop. The District has not used the tracking feature or web cam for any other purpose or in any other manner whatsoever.

    So that kind of changes it. Apparently the "improper behavior" charge was, you know, stealing a laptop?

    Also, Lower Marion School District? That's where my girlfriend went to school. (Except she was in private school, but still.)

    Interesting, but it doesn't explain this tidbit, from another story:
    The suit, filed Tuesday, says unnamed school officials at Harriton High School in Rosemont remotely activated the webcam on a student's computer last year because the district believed he "was engaged in improper behavior in his home."

    An assistant principal at Harriton confronted the student for "improper behavior" on Nov. 11 and cited a photograph taken by the webcam as evidence.

    Now, it's possible that the picture was acquired another way (taken knowingly by the student, accessed against his knowledge on the hard drive by the school). The administrator may have been bluffing, or just lying. Or the student/parents could be lying. That'd a different story. But the school doesn't seem to have addressed this particular point, which makes me think there may be more to this than hey're letting on in their official "CYA" statement.

    Of course, it's possible that you're right and that the "inappropriate behavior" was the theft of a laptop. But neither this statement nor any other story I've read presenting their side seems to suggest this.

    So I'm still confused. And this was still a terrible idea.

    mcdermott on
  • SheepSheep Registered User, __BANNED USERS regular
    edited February 2010
    Hell, they're criminally liable not only if they got a naked picture or something, but because they are legally accessing a computer without legal authority (more commonly known as hacking) which is a federal felony that carries substantial jail time

    It's not really hacking if the computer belongs to the school district.

    The only thing outrageous about this is if the administration routinely turns on the camera to see what's going on. If they don't, and they haven't, then there's little to be outraged about other than wanting that feature turned off.

    Sheep on
  • Jealous DevaJealous Deva Registered User regular
    edited February 2010
    Adrien wrote: »
    From a link in the comments, the school's side of the story.
    The District is dedicated to protecting and promoting student privacy. The laptops do contain a security feature intended to track lost, stolen and missing laptops. This feature has been deactivated effective today.
    The following questions and answers help explain the background behind the initial decision to install the tracking-security feature, its limited use, and next steps.

    • Why are webcams installed on student laptops?
    The Apple computers that the District provides to students come equipped with webcams and students are free to utilize this feature for educational purposes.

    • Why was the remote tracking-security feature installed?
    Laptops are a frequent target for theft in schools and off school property. The security feature was installed to help locate a laptop in the event it was reported lost, missing or stolen so that the laptop could be returned to the student.

    • How did the security feature work?
    Upon a report of a suspected lost, stolen or missing laptop, the feature was activated by the District's security and technology departments. The tracking-security feature was limited to taking a still image of the operator and the operator's screen. This feature has only been used for the limited purpose of locating a lost, stolen or missing laptop. The District has not used the tracking feature or web cam for any other purpose or in any other manner whatsoever.

    So that kind of changes it. Apparently the "improper behavior" charge was, you know, stealing a laptop?

    Also, Lower Marion School District? That's where my girlfriend went to school. (Except she was in private school, but still.)


    If you're going to install a security feature to track stolen laptops, why not use one of the many off the shelf security tracking applications such as LoJack that don't involve pictures of 14 year olds jacking off?

    Edit: I don't really even get how taking a picture of the operator and operator's screen would even be helpful in the case of a stolen laptop. I'd assume anyone who would steal a laptop for sale or personal use would be smart enough to wipe the HD. Maybe if there's concern over data security but I doubt Joe 15 year old is going to have HIPAA sensitive information or critical financial data.

    Jealous Deva on
  • Bionic MonkeyBionic Monkey Registered User, ClubPA regular
    edited February 2010
    Daedalus wrote: »
    Man, it doesn't matter what the hell the kids signed, having a picture of a minor in a sexual situation is a serious criminal offense. You can't sign away that shit.

    The vindictive part of me hopes one of these cameras caught even non-sexual nudity of an underage student and such can be proven in court. Criminal court mind you. Just because the actual punishment for this action is going to be nowhere near appropriate.

    My only concern about that is it may get somebody that was just doing his job under orders from someone else.

    Bionic Monkey on
    sig_megas_armed.jpg
  • ClipseClipse Registered User regular
    edited February 2010
    Daedalus wrote: »
    Man, it doesn't matter what the hell the kids signed, having a picture of a minor in a sexual situation is a serious criminal offense. You can't sign away that shit.

    The vindictive part of me hopes one of these cameras caught even non-sexual nudity of an underage student and such can be proven in court. Criminal court mind you. Just because the actual punishment for this action is going to be nowhere near appropriate.

    My only concern about that is it may get somebody that was just doing his job under orders from someone else.

    If "just doing your job" involves using webcams to surreptitiously monitor teenagers in their own homes, it's probably a good sign that you need to take advantage of whistle-blower protection laws.

    Clipse on
  • Bionic MonkeyBionic Monkey Registered User, ClubPA regular
    edited February 2010
    Clipse wrote: »
    Daedalus wrote: »
    Man, it doesn't matter what the hell the kids signed, having a picture of a minor in a sexual situation is a serious criminal offense. You can't sign away that shit.

    The vindictive part of me hopes one of these cameras caught even non-sexual nudity of an underage student and such can be proven in court. Criminal court mind you. Just because the actual punishment for this action is going to be nowhere near appropriate.

    My only concern about that is it may get somebody that was just doing his job under orders from someone else.

    If "just doing your job" involves using webcams to surreptitiously monitor teenagers in their own homes, it's probably a good sign that you need to take advantage of whistle-blower protection laws.

    Perhaps. And while I don't want to drag this thread too off topic, the job market out there isn't quite good enough that a lot of people are going to take moral stands against their employers.

    Bionic Monkey on
    sig_megas_armed.jpg
  • override367override367 ALL minions Registered User regular
    edited February 2010
    I don't expect anything to come to this after the supreme court said stripping kids naked is fine if you think they have tylenol or whatever the hell it was

    override367 on
  • ShadowfireShadowfire Vermont, in the middle of nowhereRegistered User regular
    edited February 2010
    Ars Technica has an "out there" possibility for what else could have happened.
    It's possible that things may have played out differently than the complaint alleges, though. If it was a MacBook, for example, Blake may have used the built-in Photo Booth software to take a picture of himself doing something questionable while at home, which may or may not be against the school's policy. If that photo got posted online or even synced back with the school's admins the next day, it's possible that Matsko was given access to the photo for disciplinary purposes. This, of course, doesn't account for the claim that Matsko confirmed with Michael Robbins that the school could (and had) spied on Blake remotely, but we haven't heard the school's side of the story yet.

    We don't know how exactly it happened since we don't have both sides of the story. I'm personally leaning more toward "silly goose administrator does a silly thing," but the other way is a (remote) possibility.

    Shadowfire on
    WiiU: Windrunner ; Guild Wars 2: Shadowfire.3940 ; PSN: Bradcopter
  • Captain CarrotCaptain Carrot Alexandria, VARegistered User regular
    edited February 2010
    Clipse wrote: »
    Daedalus wrote: »
    Man, it doesn't matter what the hell the kids signed, having a picture of a minor in a sexual situation is a serious criminal offense. You can't sign away that shit.

    The vindictive part of me hopes one of these cameras caught even non-sexual nudity of an underage student and such can be proven in court. Criminal court mind you. Just because the actual punishment for this action is going to be nowhere near appropriate.

    My only concern about that is it may get somebody that was just doing his job under orders from someone else.

    If "just doing your job" involves using webcams to surreptitiously monitor teenagers in their own homes, it's probably a good sign that you need to take advantage of whistle-blower protection laws.

    Unfortunately, those tend to be pretty toothless.

    Captain Carrot on
  • enc0reenc0re Registered User regular
    edited February 2010
    On a related note, this should be a powerful reminder that you should keep any cameras connected to your computers physically obscured when not in use. It's unwise to have a functioning camera, which is connected to the Internet, pointed at you.

    enc0re on
  • Bionic MonkeyBionic Monkey Registered User, ClubPA regular
    edited February 2010
    A lot of cameras on laptops now have lights to indicate when they're in use. No need to get overly paranoid as long as you have those.

    Bionic Monkey on
    sig_megas_armed.jpg
  • AstrocookieAstrocookie __BANNED USERS regular
    edited February 2010
    A lot of cameras on laptops now have lights to indicate when they're in use. No need to get overly paranoid as long as you have those.

    Exactly,

    but even worse anyway are microphones.

    A webcam can only uncover so many secrets, but a microphone can eavesdrop any conversation and pick up specific details that may put your corporation or military you work for at risk.

    Astrocookie on
    .
  • MKRMKR Registered User regular
    edited February 2010
    That light is probably not tied into the camera directly. If the light is software-driven, all it takes is a custom driver not cutting the light on when the security application accesses it.

    MKR on
  • override367override367 ALL minions Registered User regular
    edited February 2010
    plus do you guys realize how easy it is to put a tiny camera in someone's shower head? The perp just needs a few hours to do his work while you aren't home except that one time I left my tools at home.

    override367 on
  • ZythonZython Registered User regular
    edited February 2010
    I don't expect anything to come to this after the supreme court said stripping kids naked is fine if you think they have tylenol or whatever the hell it was

    The case was ruled in favor of the student. The only one who dissented was Thomas (surprise surprise).

    But thanks for bringing that up. This is not an isolated incident. Take this incident for example.
    Two sophomore girls have sued their school district after they were punished for posting sexually suggestive photos on MySpace during their summer vacation.

    Or this one, which I believe was also discussed on these forums.
    Queens girl Alexa Gonzalez hauled out of school in handcuffs after getting caught doodling on desk

    Alot of people believe that stuff like this are holdovers from the reactionary policies instated in the wake of Columbine, but I think it goes deeper than that. This is simply the logical conclusion of a culture that believe that children should "be seen and not heard", and assumes that children are innately stupid and should have their intelligence insulted. We really need to reevaluate how children are seen in this country.

    Zython on
    Switch: SW-3245-5421-8042 | 3DS Friend Code: 4854-6465-0299 | PSN: Zaithon
    Steam: pazython
  • QuidQuid Definitely not a banana Registered User regular
    edited February 2010
    mcdermott wrote: »
    Now, it's possible that the picture was acquired another way (taken knowingly by the student...)

    Of course, that means the kid has to be charged with child pornography.

    Quid on
  • RT800RT800 Registered User regular
    edited February 2010
    Even assuming that secret laptop spy cameras was perfectly legal, where the hell does a vice principal get off trying to dicipline a kid for their behavior at home?

    RT800 on
  • mcdermottmcdermott Registered User regular
    edited February 2010
    RT800 wrote: »
    Even assuming that secret laptop spy cameras was perfectly legal, where the hell does a vice principal get off trying to dicipline a kid for their behavior at home?

    Oh, you haven't heard? That's the new thing. The school can punish you for anything you do, 24/7.

    It's becoming a big deal now because of things like Facebook. But it's always been an issue...IIRC my old high school claimed the privilege of punishing students for off-campus behavior if said behavior had significant on-campus disciplinary effects (an example would be getting into a fight off-campus with another student from the same school).

    mcdermott on
  • Jealous DevaJealous Deva Registered User regular
    edited February 2010
    RT800 wrote: »
    Even assuming that secret laptop spy cameras was perfectly legal, where the hell does a vice principal get off trying to dicipline a kid for their behavior at home?

    That bridge was crossed long ago.

    Your employer/school/college/book club can discipline you for non work or school related activities, and there are very little restrictions on how they can obtain the information they use to do so, from facebook stalking to looking at data on your work computer to forcing you to surrender your blackbury to avoid termination/suspension to outright hiring a PI to conduct surveillance of you directly.

    This is well established by decades of case law.

    Jealous Deva on
  • SheepSheep Registered User, __BANNED USERS regular
    edited February 2010
    Remember Bong Hits 4 Jesus? Kid skips school, holds up sign saying Bong Hits 4 Jesus as the Olympic Torch passes through is town and gets suspended. The excuse was that the carrying of the torch was a school sponsered event. That's right. That one high school sponsered the carrying of the torch.

    Sheep on
  • mcdermottmcdermott Registered User regular
    edited February 2010
    RT800 wrote: »
    Even assuming that secret laptop spy cameras was perfectly legal, where the hell does a vice principal get off trying to dicipline a kid for their behavior at home?

    That bridge was crossed long ago.

    Your employer/school/college/book club can discipline you for non work or school related activities, and there are very little restrictions on how they can obtain the information they use to do so, from facebook stalking to looking at data on your work computer to forcing you to surrender your blackbury to avoid termination/suspension to outright hiring a PI to conduct surveillance of you directly.

    This is well established by decades of case law.

    Not as well established as you might think. A recent case seems like it might have a shot at successfully challenging this.

    Employers may still be able to do things like this, but schools occupy a unique position in that they are also an arm of the government and the students aren't there entirely of their own free will.

    mcdermott on
  • override367override367 ALL minions Registered User regular
    edited February 2010
    The more I read shit like this the more I think maybe the libertarians are right and we should abolish public schools and the police department

    I mean the statistics are against that, as a whole we're still immensely better off, but its so crushing to read how wrong they're doing it

    override367 on
  • Jealous DevaJealous Deva Registered User regular
    edited February 2010
    Sheep wrote: »
    Remember Bong Hits 4 Jesus? Kid skips school, holds up sign saying Bong Hits 4 Jesus as the Olympic Torch passes through is town and gets suspended. The excuse was that the carrying of the torch was a school sponsered event. That's right. That one high school sponsered the carrying of the torch.

    I remember there was an incident involving a group of students at a restaurant nearby my high school. Short story is, the restaurant took an inordinate amount of time to serve the group (probably consisting of a party of 10 or 15 students), on the order of an hour and a half, so the group left 20 bucks on the table to pay for drinks and left. It was a Friday night, the place was busy and understaffed and couldn't handle a large party at that particular moment, yada yada.

    Well the manager got pissed because he had about 100 bucks worth of pizza in the oven, so knowing who the students were he called the principal and complained that the students had walked out on their check. The principal basically asked the guy if he looked like a fucking policeman and told him it wasn't his problem. It would be nice if more school administrators would follow his example.

    Jealous Deva on
  • ZythonZython Registered User regular
    edited February 2010
    Sheep wrote: »
    Remember Bong Hits 4 Jesus? Kid skips school, holds up sign saying Bong Hits 4 Jesus as the Olympic Torch passes through is town and gets suspended. The excuse was that the carrying of the torch was a school sponsered event. That's right. That one high school sponsered the carrying of the torch.

    I remember there was an incident involving a group of students at a restaurant nearby my high school. Short story is, the restaurant took an inordinate amount of time to serve the group (probably consisting of a party of 10 or 15 students), on the order of an hour and a half, so the group left 20 bucks on the table to pay for drinks and left. It was a Friday night, the place was busy and understaffed and couldn't handle a large party at that particular moment, yada yada.

    Well the manager got pissed because he had about 100 bucks worth of pizza in the oven, so knowing who the students were he called the principal and complained that the students had walked out on their check. The principal basically asked the guy if he looked like a fucking policeman and told him it wasn't his problem. It would be nice if more school administrators would follow his example.

    I'm pretty sure dine and dashing is illegal, he could've gotten the actual police.

    Zython on
    Switch: SW-3245-5421-8042 | 3DS Friend Code: 4854-6465-0299 | PSN: Zaithon
    Steam: pazython
  • mcdermottmcdermott Registered User regular
    edited February 2010
    Zython wrote: »
    Sheep wrote: »
    Remember Bong Hits 4 Jesus? Kid skips school, holds up sign saying Bong Hits 4 Jesus as the Olympic Torch passes through is town and gets suspended. The excuse was that the carrying of the torch was a school sponsered event. That's right. That one high school sponsered the carrying of the torch.

    I remember there was an incident involving a group of students at a restaurant nearby my high school. Short story is, the restaurant took an inordinate amount of time to serve the group (probably consisting of a party of 10 or 15 students), on the order of an hour and a half, so the group left 20 bucks on the table to pay for drinks and left. It was a Friday night, the place was busy and understaffed and couldn't handle a large party at that particular moment, yada yada.

    Well the manager got pissed because he had about 100 bucks worth of pizza in the oven, so knowing who the students were he called the principal and complained that the students had walked out on their check. The principal basically asked the guy if he looked like a fucking policeman and told him it wasn't his problem. It would be nice if more school administrators would follow his example.

    I'm pretty sure dine and dashing is illegal, he could've gotten the actual police.

    If the food hasn't been served yet it's not quite that cut and dry. It's possible for the owner to press charges for Theft of Services, but the fact that he hadn't delivered the food yet would make it possible for the students to defend against the charges.

    After all, they paid for the items they had received...how long can the pizza shop owner keep them there waiting for their food before they're entitled to leave without paying for undelivered services?

    mcdermott on
  • Jealous DevaJealous Deva Registered User regular
    edited February 2010
    mcdermott wrote: »
    Zython wrote: »
    Sheep wrote: »
    Remember Bong Hits 4 Jesus? Kid skips school, holds up sign saying Bong Hits 4 Jesus as the Olympic Torch passes through is town and gets suspended. The excuse was that the carrying of the torch was a school sponsered event. That's right. That one high school sponsered the carrying of the torch.

    I remember there was an incident involving a group of students at a restaurant nearby my high school. Short story is, the restaurant took an inordinate amount of time to serve the group (probably consisting of a party of 10 or 15 students), on the order of an hour and a half, so the group left 20 bucks on the table to pay for drinks and left. It was a Friday night, the place was busy and understaffed and couldn't handle a large party at that particular moment, yada yada.

    Well the manager got pissed because he had about 100 bucks worth of pizza in the oven, so knowing who the students were he called the principal and complained that the students had walked out on their check. The principal basically asked the guy if he looked like a fucking policeman and told him it wasn't his problem. It would be nice if more school administrators would follow his example.

    I'm pretty sure dine and dashing is illegal, he could've gotten the actual police.

    If the food hasn't been served yet it's not quite that cut and dry. It's possible for the owner to press charges for Theft of Services, but the fact that he hadn't delivered the food yet would make it possible for the students to defend against the charges.

    After all, they paid for the items they had received...how long can the pizza shop owner keep them there waiting for their food before they're entitled to leave without paying for undelivered services?

    I'd love to see someone actually call the police over that, just to see the reaction of the policeman.

    Edit: Also if no food has actually been delivered it's not a dine and dash. It's simply a breach of an implied contract, which is a civil manner, unless malicious intent can be proven.

    Jealous Deva on
  • ClipseClipse Registered User regular
    edited February 2010
    Fun fact:
    The same school district as the one in this story is also in federal court because it's suspected that some redistricting they did last year was based in part on racial discrimination.

    Sounds like a wonderful place.

    Clipse on
Sign In or Register to comment.