• FreeAdvice has a new Terms of Service and Privacy Policy, effective May 25, 2018.
    By continuing to use this site, you are consenting to our Terms of Service and use of cookies.

Schools and facebook stuff

Accident - Bankruptcy - Criminal Law / DUI - Business - Consumer - Employment - Family - Immigration - Real Estate - Tax - Traffic - Wills   Please click a topic or scroll down for more.

dc$

Junior Member
No he said, "That night I said something on facebook about her."

I can imagine it wasn't just an opinion. He likely stated some things, which were repeated at school. He disrupted the learning environment, and should be suspended for that.
I think I said an opinion. And didn't defame her. I said "Mrs teacher = ..." and then said some disrespectful stuff.

And yeah, they were basically like you disrupted school. But it's not like I said "hey everybody should say this about Mrs teacher tomorrow!". I didn't encourage anybody to do anything, it just happened by itself. The people who requoted it made that choice all by themselves. It's not like I was trying to be some kind of leader of a revolution here.
 


Zigner

Senior Member, Non-Attorney
No he said, "That night I said something on facebook about her."
Quote in full please ;)

That night I said something on facebook about her. Lots of my friends liked it (since she is what I said she was).
Now, from that, *I* inferred that the OP called the teacher a bad word. Like "B" or "C". That is an opinion.

You, apparently, have inferred that the OP accused the teacher of being some sort of criminal or deviant.
 

Zigner

Senior Member, Non-Attorney
To be clear: I do NOT condone whatever it was the OP did. It was childish, no question about it. But, the OP is, afterall, a child.
 

stealth2

Under the Radar Member
Ya know... a mature young person would have 'fessed up and aplogized when called to the carpet.
 

dc$

Junior Member
Quote in full please ;)


Now, from that, *I* inferred that the OP called the teacher a bad word. Like "B" or "C". That is an opinion.

You, apparently, have inferred that the OP accused the teacher of being some sort of criminal or deviant.
Yes, it was like Zigner said.

Ya know... a mature young person would have 'fessed up and aplogized when called to the carpet.
What makes you think I didn't? Yeah, I admitted the information they had was correct and apologized. I know it was wrong, I still don't like that teacher but I should probably keep that to myself.

I know that what I did was wrong, in general. But I can't say that I fully understand the school's facebook access request, or how I got in so much trouble at school for what I did in my own time.

Another question I have is - if schools are going to be requesting access to a facebook account, what would stop students from having two accounts? One school friendly one and one to actually share things with friends...
 

tranquility

Senior Member
He disrupted the learning environment, and should be suspended for that.
Have we truly fallen that far? Students are no longer allowed to have a negative opinion about a school or its personnel and express it to others outside of the school setting? Worse still is that some feel it is appropriate to punish the student for that off-campus speech. Let's see what the Chief Justice of the Supreme Court felt was pretty obvious:
We need not resolve this debate to decide this case. For present purposes, it is enough to distill from Fraser two basic principles. First, Fraser’sholding demonstrates that “the constitutional rights of students in public school are not automatically coextensive with the rights of adults in other settings.” Id., at 682. Had Fraser delivered the same speech in a public forum outside the school context, it would have been protected. See Cohen v. California, 403 U. S. 15 (1971) ; Fraser, supra, at 682–683. In school, however, Fraser’s First Amendment rights were circumscribed “in light of the special characteristics of the school environment.” Tinker, supra, at 506. Second, Fraser established that the mode of analysis set forth in Tinker is not absolute. Whatever approach Fraser employed, it certainly did not conduct the “substantial disruption” analysis prescribed by Tinker, supra, at 514. See Kuhlmeier, 484 U. S., at 271, n. 4 (disagreeing with the proposition that there is “no difference between the First Amendment analysis applied in Tinker and that applied in Fraser,” and noting that the holding in Fraser was not based on any showing of substantial disruption).
 

LdiJ

Senior Member
Have we truly fallen that far? Students are no longer allowed to have a negative opinion about a school or its personnel and express it to others outside of the school setting? Worse still is that some feel it is appropriate to punish the student for that off-campus speech. Let's see what the Chief Justice of the Supreme Court felt was pretty obvious:
I agree with you Tranq....

I can see how a private school or private university could ask/demand that sort of thing as a condition of attending the private school or university. I can even see where a public school might be able to pull it off when it comes to extra curriculars. However, in general I believe that a public school has no right to control or punish a child for behavior that happens outside of school, that is not illegal behavior.

OP's behavior was not illegal. Foolish perhaps but not illegal.
 

Humusluvr

Senior Member
I agree with you Tranq....

I can see how a private school or private university could ask/demand that sort of thing as a condition of attending the private school or university. I can even see where a public school might be able to pull it off when it comes to extra curriculars. However, in general I believe that a public school has no right to control or punish a child for behavior that happens outside of school, that is not illegal behavior.

OP's behavior was not illegal. Foolish perhaps but not illegal.
since the school couldn't SEE the posting, and was hearing about it second hand (from all the students and their talking about it, and someone complaining about it - you know, disrupting the learning environment and all), they asked the OP to provide his FB password to further investigate. The OP refused, and therefore, based on all the students who were complaining and talking about what he did (and someone may have screen captured it) they suspended him for three days. Perfectly appropriate for what he did.

If he had provided the password, the school could have seen what he ACTUALLY said, when he said it, and further investigation. Since he hampered their investigation, they punished him. You guys here don't know what his "friends" said. They could have said such horrible things that it wasn't really about the OP at all. But since the school couldn't investigate, everything was pinned on the OP. What did your friends say after you called the teacher a name?

And having two FB accounts isn't even what the point is. He never should have made a comment about the teacher. His comment, which was then liked and expounded upon by other peers, hampered the learning environment. The point is - don't say inflammatory things about teachers on FB. AT ALL.

This isn't a free speech issue. This is a "don't disrupt school by being vulgar and inappropriate with your teachers."

Saying it in the lunch room is different than saying it on FB. EVERYONE in the whole school can view it on FB. It becomes bigger than it is. Writing it down is equally bad. When you created an electronic paper trail back to you that pins the specific remark, and entire conversation about the remark to you, then you have a major problem.
 

Humusluvr

Senior Member
OP's behavior was not illegal. Foolish perhaps but not illegal.
And no one is CLAIMING the behavior was illegal. Or even close to illegal.

Saying stupid things gets you in trouble at school. He got in trouble at school, because he hampered their investigation into what may have been a big deal at the school - a whole nasty, harmful, defamatory conversation about a school employee. They may have wanted to investigate what his "friends' said, and THEY may have said it on school time.

I still say he got off relatively easy.
 

Zigner

Senior Member, Non-Attorney
Humus -

If the OP had rented a billboard with large text proclaiming that Mrs. Jones, his 4th period Algebra teacher is mean to him and is a B, would that be illegal? Would that give the school the right to suspend?

What if the same billboard were rented with the same text, except this one had a large cloth covering it and the OP only let certain people read the billboard. He would not allow the school officials to read it. Would that be illegal? Would that give the school the right to suspend?
 

Humusluvr

Senior Member
Humus -

If the OP had rented a billboard with large text proclaiming that Mrs. Jones, his 4th period Algebra teacher is mean to him and is a B, would that be illegal? Would that give the school the right to suspend?

What if the same billboard were rented with the same text, except this one had a large cloth covering it and the OP only let certain people read the billboard. He would not allow the school officials to read it. Would that be illegal? Would that give the school the right to suspend?
It's not the same situation.

It's the aftermath of the billboard. If the billboard caused fighting and a conversation among students where they couldn't go on with their learning, and the school didn't know whether it happened on school time or not - I would say they have the right to suspend him.

NOT because it's "illegal." Y'all keep going back to illegal. What the OP did was NOT illegal.

What the OP did was disruptive, and yes, they should suspend him for that.
 

Humusluvr

Senior Member
I am appalled.

It appears the bullying problem in schools is not confined to student-student.
and, you appear to have a problem with authority figures keeping the school running so that other students have equal access to their education.

Has NOTHING to do with bullying, and you know it.
 

Find the Right Lawyer for Your Legal Issue!

Fast, Free, and Confidential
data-ad-format="auto">
Top