A few questions

[thenatureboy420]

What is the name of your state? Michigan

1. A student at a high school was caught with a small amount of marijuana after smoking it in the parking lot. After intense questioning, he admitted to buying it from a student who is known to deal by the schools administration, but has never been caught or punished. The administration knows more just by word of mouth. The student that was caught told the teachers that he bought the marijuana a few days before. In addition to the student who sold the weed, the kid also told the administration of a second guy who assisted the main dealer. Both these kids were called down, a police officer dispatched to the school, and then everything was searched. After searching the cars, lockers, bags, and pockets of the kids, their siblings, and even closest friends, not a single bud, rolling paper, bag, or pipe was found. The administration decided the kid caught with the marijuana would be given a 5 day suspension, and drug counseling. And the two kids who sold it to him 10 day suspensions.

Even though everyone knows these two kids sold the weed, there was never any actual proof besides the one who was caught with the weeds testimony. That is the only thing they have, and they used it to justify a huge suspension, well over possession of alcohol or marijuana on campus, and nearing the level of bringing an unloaded gun or a knife to school (15 days suspension). Is there anything that can be done? This doesnt seem legal at all. There is nothing in the student handbook that would justify, and the administration hasnt used it to justify it. Although these kids didnt do very well in school before, missing 10 days has pushed them to nearly failing, meaning many hours of summer school etc.

2. The school has a policy of breathalizing (some random, some with small suspcion) students before school dances. They are done by a plain clothes cop, and students are given MIPs and suspensions if caught, and are told they will be expelled if they refuse, or try to leave. I thought they are justified to do this, but my friend talked to some lawyers, and was told there is a legal standing for them. Is this true?

3. How far does the administrations reach extend when it comes to speech? A friend recently said something on AOL instant messenger to another student, who printed the conversation and brought it into school. After suspecting me, i denied it, and my friend who actually did it was called down and suspended. There was no proof, as it was a random screen name with no traceable proof to my friend. Can they suspend kids for doing things outside of school, with no proof, except a small suspicion?

4. The administration of the school has warned my friend that he is not allowed to talk about another student to anyone, even his friends, inside or outside school, or else he will be suspended. Is this legal at all? If my friend happened to post something on his myspace (a personal website type thing), could this be printed and brought to the administration?

5. Whose job is it to deal with vandalisms etc. outside of school. Lets say my friend toilet papered/egged etc. another students car, outside of school. Is it only up to the police, or can the school impose its own punishments?

6. My friend got an MIP over the summer, and she did all the requirements to wipe it from the record, including community service, counseling, and probation. 5 months later, she joined the swim team, and became captain and had a very successful season. States were coming up, and she took the place of another student on the states team. The parent of this student printed pictures found on the internet of the girl holding a bottle of alcohol, showed them to the adminstration. The mom pressured the school into kicking the girl off the team since the team has a zero tolerance policy of no alcohol or drugs. The policy is generally interpreted as no charges, like MIPs can be received while being on the team. Is there anything the girl who got kicked off the team can do?

 

[stealth2]

I'd suggest that you find some new friends.

 

[thenatureboy420]

Oh come on, this is the same problem ive had on other forums. You dont know my friends, only these small examples. Sure they can be immature, but they are overall good people. I asked for legal advice, this is of course a legal advice forum. If i wanted friendship help, id ask for it! Im not asking your opinion on my friends or their actions, i dont care what you think about them. I came here looking purely for legal advice.

Can anyone help me out with the LEGAL IMPLICATIONS of the scenarios that i wrote about?

 

[majano]

To: tnb420

Maybe you can find help through wrightslaw.com?
It might only be for sp ed and learning disabilities**************..but it would get you an intelligent response and/or resource. There's a lot of hate generated here.
I met a lot of nasty people along the way too, but have become better at weeding them out. schwablearning.com could also get you to what you need (hastle free.)

 

[notsmartmark]

Question 1 - the school is not required to follow the same standard as a court in determining guilt. There is a process of appeal that the students could follow. I doubt it would be worth their efforts. I am more surprised about the suspensions that you identify, 15 days for a weapon. I cannot think of a time a student wasn’t expelled for an extended period of time when a weapon was involved, loaded, unloaded, or no ability to be loaded. Five days for possession is a very light response. I understand the 10 days given the lack of hard evidence. You acknowledged, “… Everyone knows these two kids sold the weed….” If they are possessing and selling drugs on a school site, summer school is the least of their concerns.

2. I cannot speak to the legality, but I do know there are numerous schools that are using this strategy. It is a voluntary participation has to come into play. Does the school say that that they will do random Breathalyzer testing, or are they saying that the was reason each time they test?

Most of the concerns (questions 3-6) that you raise are about off campus behavior. Schools can respond to off campus behavior, and families and students can fight their responses.
Here's a site worth looking at:
http://www.splc.org/legalresearch.asp?id=74

The following is taken from the website listed above.
Material That Disrupts School
Probably the case most relied upon so far in the seven existing student Internet speech cases is Tinker v. Des Moines Independent Community School District. While the application of the case to off-campus, private student speech is subject to debate, Tinker's "material disruption" standard has nonetheless turned into something of a First Amendment workhorse for off-campus student speech. Some lower courts have been anxious to find on-campus excuses to extend school authorities' reach to speech posted on students' private Internet accounts. But "material disruption" is still a difficult burden for school officials to meet. In the Internet context, "material disruption" has been found not to include harsh criticisms of school, teachers, and administrators or the posting of mock obituaries as a joke between a group of friends. Nevertheless, there are some categories of speech underground journalists should avoid.

First, underground Web sites should not cause or incite illegal conduct. Actually leading readers through a detailed how-to lesson on such topics as violence, computer hacking or illicit drug use may cross the line between advocacy and incitement and makes it easier for school officials to argue that students are disrupting school. Such was the case in Virginia when students published in their underground paper a recipe -- which they said was intended as a joke -- for a marijuana dessert called "Apple Pot." Likewise, in 1995, a New York high school student was actually arrested for inciting a riot after asking students to throw trash on the ground, urinate on the floor and wear certain types of T-shirts to school.

Even incitement to violate school rules not involving criminal conduct could cause problems for student Web sites. Such was the case in Georgia when a student was suspended for 18 weeks after posting on his Web site a list of 11 ways to disrupt class. The student gave examples and encouraged other students to take part in such activities as "booing if we hear something we don't agree with," and "leaving the room without permission." The site also named an administrator as a "person we try to avoid the most" and included a link to the school's official Web site with the suggestion that visitors "go there and heckle." While the legality of such administrative action was not tested -- and is certainly in question -- the problems faced by some of these students probably could have been avoided.

Calls to stage walkouts or protests also can lead to problems when school officials can point to recent events making it likely that students will respond to the plea. For example, a federal court upheld an Indiana high school's decision to suspend students for handing out leaflets calling for a walkout. The court said that a walkout by 54 students the day before, the noisy and rowdy atmosphere in the halls, an increase in tardiness and predictions by administrators of an even bigger walkout the next day combined to make the leaflet distribution disruptive. While a distribution of printed material calling for a walkout on campus is quite different from posting a similar plea on a personal Web site, the courts' recent willingness to apply Tinker to off-campus speech makes this decision significant to students who are considering placing such a plea on their personal site. False announcements of class cancellations could also fall into the category of substantial disruptions.

Pointed ridicule or statements aimed at humiliating particular groups of students or individuals can play into the hands of school officials as well, who may argue that such insults may lead to disruptions at school. Case-in-point is again J.S. v. Bethlehem Area School District, where the court found that the student's depiction of his teacher's head dripping with blood and morphing into Hitler along with an invitation for readers to contribute to the hiring of a hit man caused her to be too afraid to return to school. The court found that the site was disruptive enough to make necessary the hiring of a substitute for the remaining of the school year.

In addition to these general warnings, editors of online underground newspapers should always keep their audience in mind. Disruptions are often much more likely to occur at a high school level than in college. Another thing to remember is that underground journalists wrongly accused of causing a disruption can always point to the fact that no real disruption occurred after the article was distributed or posted -- a defense that has helped students in a number of cases. And finally, school officials would have a difficult time arguing that a substantial disruption occurred in cases where the only disruption was a result of the punishment -- such as a subsequent student rally to protest the expulsion of a Web site's creator -- or other reaction of school officials -- and not the Web site itself.