Inappropriate teacher interaction

[NotActuallyALonghorn 5005]

She needs to preemptively start a rumor that he was banging some other student.

[Nice Guy Eddie 13739]

On 4/26/2023 at 4:00 PM, slorch said:

So...age 12 is not old enough?

Seems pretty damned reasonable to me.

Could just move to a log cabin and never talk to anyone.  That'd be normal and safe.

My understanding is that many of the top social media apps require you to be 13 or 14, so you should question it when you have to lie to get a 12 year old using it. I would also doubt that many teenagers especially girls are using social media in a healthy manner. 

[Gene Parmesan 4064]

Social media in healthy doses is the equivalent of alcohol in healthy doses i.e. your kidding yourself.

[Gene Parmesan 4064]

5 minutes ago, Gene Parmesan said:

Social media in healthy doses is the equivalent of alcohol in healthy doses i.e. your kidding yourself.

*you're you dumb piece of shit

[Bevo 13900]

43 minutes ago, Gene Parmesan said:

*you're you dumb piece of shit

[NeverMarryAStripper 22311]

57 minutes ago, Gene Parmesan said:

Social media in healthy doses is the equivalent of alcohol in healthy doses i.e. your kidding yourself.

There's nothing healthy about posting here, yet here we all are

[Guest]

2 hours ago, Gene Parmesan said:

Social media in healthy doses is the equivalent of alcohol in healthy doses i.e. your kidding yourself.

Mack Brown has entered the chat…

[Incredulity 11879]

On 4/25/2023 at 12:36 PM, Bevo said:

Thank you. I've been waiting for this moment my entire life.

we've got three on this post.  Lets do it again people.

[Bodhi 1134]

I'm glad this individual isn't going to be in your school district ever again.  That said, he might end up in someone else's.  These people are sick and will absolutely act again.  There is zero doubt what his intentions were.  I don't think he got a fright and will now stop that kind of behavior.  He likely simply learned what not to do next time.  I understand you are navigating a lot at the moment but I would encourage you to reconsider involving the police.  I have two female family members that were sexually abused, the damage it did to them is immense and they will carry it for life.  

[Sam Lin 3602]

^this.

It isn't just about protecting your own kid, though that's certainly your priority. The fact that the other kids and families are kept in the dark about the real reason prevents anyone else from being able to look for their evidence of similar grooming. This is exactly how people like this can continue to do it after being caught. For others' sake is why you go to everyone possible, to get this on record(s).

[Mullet Free 39]

so quick update

Wife was on group text with a couple friends. Subject of coach dismissal came up. One mom said she heard essentially that coach would be able to share more when the school year was over. Two problems with that.

1-I doubt that he's discussing this situation directly with parents, so he must be in contact still with student(s).

2-I'm not sure how he could paint the situation in a less terrible light, but it has to involve slandering my daughter in some way.

We contacted the district office to see if he had a NDA or something or otherwise see what we could do. Learned some interesting stuff.

He resigned, was not fired.

The investigation didn't yield anything worthy of police involvement.

Everything in his file was turned over to some state educator's board so it will be very difficult for him to work again as a teacher.

Fortunately his resignation is effective tomorrow so the district will be contacting him today to let him know they're aware of him still contacting students. Also, I asked that they relate to him explicitly that we are aware of his actions and are personally monitoring him and what he puts out there. We'll see if he finally vanishes.

[High Plains Drifter 11192]

43 minutes ago, Mullet Free said:

He resigned, was not fired.

.

 

Teachers and coaches work on contracts, probably one year contract if he is new to the profession. Either side breaking the contract is a big deal. If the district breaks the contract, they have to prove cause (which it sounds like they have), but that can turn into a legal shitshow if the pedo fights it.

I would bet this is what happened:

As a coach, he has a contract, probably one year. The district said either you go dark and resign and fuck off and we pay you the rest of your contract, or we fire you right now and you get nothing and we will see you in court.

Much easier (and maybe cheaper, I dunno) for the district to do the former, rather than the latter.

If he chooses the payout, the district  has leverage (his remaining pay, which may go through the summer) if he tries to sue or talk shit or whatever.

[MonkeyDoughnut 10807]

1 hour ago, Mullet Free said:

so quick update

Wife was on group text with a couple friends. Subject of coach dismissal came up. One mom said she heard essentially that coach would be able to share more when the school year was over. Two problems with that.

1-I doubt that he's discussing this situation directly with parents, so he must be in contact still with student(s).

2-I'm not sure how he could paint the situation in a less terrible light, but it has to involve slandering my daughter in some way.

We contacted the district office to see if he had a NDA or something or otherwise see what we could do. Learned some interesting stuff.

He resigned, was not fired.

The investigation didn't yield anything worthy of police involvement.

Everything in his file was turned over to some state educator's board so it will be very difficult for him to work again as a teacher.

Fortunately his resignation is effective tomorrow so the district will be contacting him today to let him know they're aware of him still contacting students. Also, I asked that they relate to him explicitly that we are aware of his actions and are personally monitoring him and what he puts out there. We'll see if he finally vanishes.

I hate to say it, but based on this I'd assume the following for his employment file (from the district/coach side):  teacher resigned, investigation became he said/she said, wasn't me,  both sides agreed it was best to part ways, employee will not be approved for hire in our district. 

He will be able to get employment in any other district, certainly in another state as I'm not even sure they share anything except criminal type offenses.

Basically his state file "might" have a note of this district had issue but likely won't have anything that other districts can see.

[Sandman 3435]

On 4/26/2023 at 9:11 AM, harpercollins said:

I just want to know when people are going to wake up and stop giving little kids smartphones and social media.

Sometimes it isn't up to you. My ex-wife asked me about getting our kids phones, I said they didn't need them. That was all she needed to hear, so she went out and bought them phones immediately. I refused to pay for any of it, but I had to admit that it was nice to be able to text them directly and not have to wonder what they were doing or where they were. Fast forward a few years and the kids were talking about phones in class and I said they shouldn't have them out in the classroom. They looked at me like I was regarded and said that the phones were REQUIRED. They had to be able to look up shit and use the calculator. I couldn't believe it. 

[harpercollins 394]

Fast forward a few years and the kids were talking about phones in class and I said they shouldn't have them out in the classroom. They looked at me like I was regarded and said that the phones were REQUIRED. They had to be able to look up shit and use the calculator. I couldn't believe it. 

What grade is this? This is educational malpractice.

[Nice Guy Eddie 13739]

18 hours ago, Mullet Free said:

so quick update

Wife was on group text with a couple friends. Subject of coach dismissal came up. One mom said she heard essentially that coach would be able to share more when the school year was over. Two problems with that.

1-I doubt that he's discussing this situation directly with parents, so he must be in contact still with student(s).

2-I'm not sure how he could paint the situation in a less terrible light, but it has to involve slandering my daughter in some way.

We contacted the district office to see if he had a NDA or something or otherwise see what we could do. Learned some interesting stuff.

He resigned, was not fired.

The investigation didn't yield anything worthy of police involvement.

Everything in his file was turned over to some state educator's board so it will be very difficult for him to work again as a teacher.

Fortunately his resignation is effective tomorrow so the district will be contacting him today to let him know they're aware of him still contacting students. Also, I asked that they relate to him explicitly that we are aware of his actions and are personally monitoring him and what he puts out there. We'll see if he finally vanishes.

He can paint it in the light that the parents of a student made up a lie because he wouldn’t give their daughter a good grade when she was failing to complete the appropriate schoolwork. And that the school was afraid of a lawsuit so he resigned to avoid any problems. People believe stories like that.

you are free to publicly state your side of the story.  What you know and what you told the principal. The problem for you would be that if that teacher was popular with some students or parents, those same people could turn against your daughter and be ugly to her. She could receive some abuse and you don’t want that.

I would take my story to the police or DA. Don’t embellish anything and only state what you know. You have no idea what the school did or didn’t do, or what they said to the teacher. Your knowledge of the case ends when you told the principal. After that I would only take to the police about it, if they reach out,

[Texzilla58 4793]

I would go to the police. Sounds like the district security office and legal folks decided there was nothing to take to the police. Or that they are covering their ass because there were some red flags ignored or missed in due diligence when he was hired.

This coach is a predator. Maybe he just gets his jollies having young girls fall over themselves for him, maybe he’s grooming them for something worse. Our issues in human trafficking and child predation come from these monsters finding careers in fields they can thrive and survive in, and often be protected. CHis continued conversations with parents or other children needs to be taken to the principal; it’s obvious this creep is laying the frame for his victimhood story. He’ll be working in some other district this fall.((;

[Your Mom 4981]

Well, I for one am shocked that the principal told the parents what they wanted to hear, and then essentially swept it under the rug.  
Allowing the district to decide whether or not law-enforcement should be involved is just crazy.  They should’ve been involved immediately and prior to alerting the principal.  Even if they don’t have enough evidence to arrest him, let the cops decide that, not the district. 

[High Plains Drifter 11192]

17 hours ago, harpercollins said:

 

What grade is this? This is educational malpractice.

 

 

That doesn't happen in my daugther's middle school, but my friend's son who graduated two years ago told me it was common in high school.

Its just easier than having the kids carry around calculators and laptops/chrombooks/ipads/whatever.

[GoPokes83 2248]

I’m not one for doxxing someone, at least without some form of due process but I think you should at least post his name and info here, if not go nuclear on every social media platform available. Pretty sure the Surly community would love to make a point of keeping an eye on this creep. If it were me I’d go full scorched earth, even if it means my kid changes schools. No way this guy gets to just skate on this and is teaching somewhere next fall having learned a lesson in being more careful, because guys like this don’t stop, they just adapt.

[Texzilla58 4793]

So far what has he learned? He got paid. He got to resign without exposure. He basically learned that next time he needs to be more secretive and more compulsive in his grooming. It’s too bad his head can’t be put on a stick at the courthouse.

[Dahobbs 18335]

2 hours ago, Your Mom said:

Well, I for one am shocked that the principal told the parents what they wanted to hear, and then essentially swept it under the rug.  
Allowing the district to decide whether or not law-enforcement should be involved is just crazy.  They should’ve been involved immediately and prior to alerting the principal.  Even if they don’t have enough evidence to arrest him, let the cops decide that, not the district. 

Can I quote myself? I got some grief for it, but pretty sure this experience is more proof that I was correct:

On 4/25/2023 at 12:57 PM, Dahobbs said:

Again, power trip? I have no idea what you're talking about. Reporting something to the police doesn't have anything to do with a power trip. This is just such an odd take, and I have no idea why you're being a dick to me about it. But maybe it has something to do with bootstraps.

As to your last sentence, given that we have had plenty of instances of schools and other institutions hiding bad conduct, I absolutely believe reporting this up as many levels as possible is reasonable thing to do. If you have a relationship with your principal and trust them to do the right thing, great. But I don't think there is anything disrespectful about approaching the problem from multiple levels. Also, I think your take on the initial response isn't always correct. Often times the initial person in charge of investigating something like this isn't the direct supervisor, but rather an independent party. This is the same reason cops have internal affairs and the government as an independent accountability office. Finally, think of how many parents felt they were doing the respectful thing by reporting abuse to the supervisor of a priest or boy scouts troop only for everything to be covered up. Reporting bad conduct as many times, in as many ways, and to as many people as possible is the surest way to make sure it is handled correctly.  

 

[Guest]

My experience didn't happen though, in your estimation.  The teacher in our situation lost his certification and military retirement benefits.  No arrest was involved. 

My point was never that you shouldn't pursue it to your satisfaction, but rather that the administrators in charge of the school be the first point of contact.

I will add that our situation had a metric shit-ton more evidence and conversations, as well as multiple students willing to corroborate the stor(ies.)

Edited May 13, 2023 by slorch

[fattyflattie 4640]

On 5/11/2023 at 5:06 PM, harpercollins said:

 

What grade is this? This is educational malpractice.

 

6th on for us.  Have to have some type of tablet or phone.  Don’t know what we will be doing, but I know it’s going to be very limited whatever it is. 

[fattyflattie 4640]

I’d also like to commend OP for his ability to keep mostly calm in this situation. I’d like to think I’m there, but let’s not kid ourselves.   There are established lines, and this asshole cruised well past it.  

[NWBuck 8630]

On 5/11/2023 at 2:45 PM, Sandman said:

Sometimes it isn't up to you. My ex-wife asked me about getting our kids phones, I said they didn't need them. That was all she needed to hear, so she went out and bought them phones immediately. I refused to pay for any of it, but I had to admit that it was nice to be able to text them directly and not have to wonder what they were doing or where they were. Fast forward a few years and the kids were talking about phones in class and I said they shouldn't have them out in the classroom. They looked at me like I was regarded and said that the phones were REQUIRED. They had to be able to look up shit and use the calculator. I couldn't believe it. 

Off topic, but:

Washington Post: Schools are banning cellphones as students are more distracted than ever

 

[troph 25238]

Providing information to the police is probably a good idea but it will likely end in nothing happening unless he took it farther. Behavior starts as ok, then questionable, then a violation of employment policies, then criminal. Morally reprehensible falls before criminal and most of us want criminal punishment for morally reprehensible but that’s not how the law works. As for my position? Fuck that guy he needs to be on a predator list now and never work or volunteer around kids ever again. 

[Doc Daneeka 6793]

9 minutes ago, troph said:

Providing information to the police is probably a good idea but it will likely end in nothing happening unless he took it farther. Behavior starts as ok, then questionable, then a violation of employment policies, then criminal. Morally reprehensible falls before criminal and most of us want criminal punishment for morally reprehensible but that’s not how the law works. As for my position? Fuck that guy he needs to be on a predator list now and never work or volunteer around kids ever again. 

If must of us really want criminal punishment for what’s morally reprehensible, we’re more fucked than I thought, and I already thought we’re pretty fucked. What’s the fascination with putting people in cages? 

This isn’t to defend this clown’s behavior. If we want the power of the state to roll over people’s lives, though, let’s set the level a little higher than outrage or pre-crime. 

[Pato del Muerto 53546]

27 minutes ago, Doc Daneeka said:

If must of us really want criminal punishment for what’s morally reprehensible, we’re more fucked than I thought, and I already thought we’re pretty fucked. What’s the fascination with putting people in cages? 

This isn’t to defend this clown’s behavior. If we want the power of the state to roll over people’s lives, though, let’s set the level a little higher than outrage or pre-crime. 

The idea that he has to be proven to have abused a child before anyone can know that he’s tried to abuse a child is not great. 

the idea that a person could be put on a list of potential abusers/accused abusers from just an accusation is also problematic. 

this instance has some level of evidence behind it but not to the point of criminality, so it falls in between.  
 

vigilante justice won’t change his behavior unless you kill him, and you’d probably get caught because suddenly the cops will know about the chat and use it to establish motive against you, and that also ruins your daughter’s life. 
 

main job as a parent, protect your kid, accomplished. Secondary job of protecting others, not so much. 
 

if you go to the cops with what you have, are they so intrigued that they set up an elaborate sting to bust him attempting something criminal so they can put him away, or do they brush it off?  Too late now as the ISD has chased the rat away. 

[horn4life 3838]

On 5/11/2023 at 4:45 PM, Sandman said:

Sometimes it isn't up to you. My ex-wife asked me about getting our kids phones, I said they didn't need them. That was all she needed to hear, so she went out and bought them phones immediately. I refused to pay for any of it, but I had to admit that it was nice to be able to text them directly and not have to wonder what they were doing or where they were. Fast forward a few years and the kids were talking about phones in class and I said they shouldn't have them out in the classroom. They looked at me like I was regarded and said that the phones were REQUIRED. They had to be able to look up shit and use the calculator. I couldn't believe it. 

Uhh... they are looking up answers to the shit they did not read, and finding calculations for the shit they do not know.  In other words cheating like crazy, because they can and.... wait for it... "everyone does it Dad!"

The one thing I understand is that kids "need" phones the older and more active they get.  That phone is also the gateway to the worst exposure to shit you would like them to avoid.  One truly double edged sword.  But fight it was long as you can, and track the fuck out of their activity, and for heaven's sake keep it out of their bedroom at night. They can be great tools, but they are not being used as calculators on any fucking test.  I honestly think the phones should all have to be locked up in lockers, but I would also allow some "communication breaks" to let kids communicate with their parents.  For a single parent a phone is a necessity early IMHO.

But back to scumbag coach.  First off 12 years old is the edge of sexual awakening, and the last thing any daughter is gonna discuss with Dad is anything regarding sex.  I coached multiple girls soccer teams for about a decade, and if the coach is not actively avoiding individual contact with any of the players outside of practice something is wrong.  If only the incredibly poor judgement of the coach.

What's going to happen here is that your pressing to have the coach's name included in the banned educators is a the ONLY way you are not reporting this to the police.  The district does not want to litigate the matter, and the "resignation" leaves the door open to the reasons for the departure.  District would rather simply appease you and put this behind them.  Sort of like the Catholic church... Unfortunately.  To avoid litigation.  I would likely point out that unless you see the teaches name on the banned list you are also inclined to sue the school district while also getting the police involved.  Now the problem for you is the "small town" aspects of this shit, in that connections and tribal nature are usually horrifically ingrained in the community, and said scumbag coach does have some folks firmly in his court.   So there is plenty of opportunity still for this thing to blow back on your daughter, do not disregard this possibility!  Especially if things seem ambiguous in the firing and the scumbag and his allies try to mount a campaign to rehabilitate his name.  Only way to do that is likely to fuck over your daughter somehow to hurt her credibility.  So your situation is different perhaps because of the small town nature. So my having no ambiguity from where my daughter could potentially be attacked might be my goal now.

I think my line of questioning to the administration (beyond the principal) is can you insure he will not be teaching again?  If the answer is not yes, then you need to go to the police.  Tell them as much, and say it's concerning that the actions of the administration is simply to remove him from one school (parish) and allow him to move on to another school (parish).  District is going to go the path of least resistance legally, you have to be the resistance to steer the outcome, IMHO.

 

[Doc Daneeka 6793]

12 minutes ago, Pato del Muerto said:

The idea that he has to be proven to have abused a child before anyone can know that he’s tried to abuse a child is not great. 

the idea that a person could be put on a list of potential abusers/accused abusers from just an accusation is also problematic. 

this instance has some level of evidence behind it but not to the point of criminality, so it falls in between.  
 

vigilante justice won’t change his behavior unless you kill him, and you’d probably get caught because suddenly the cops will know about the chat and use it to establish motive against you, and that also ruins your daughter’s life. 
 

main job as a parent, protect your kid, accomplished. Secondary job of protecting others, not so much. 
 

if you go to the cops with what you have, are they so intrigued that they set up an elaborate sting to bust him attempting something criminal so they can put him away, or do they brush it off?  Too late now as the ISD has chased the rat away. 

“Try” is doing a lot of work there, though. If someone has taken action in furtherance of purported abuse — arranged a meeting and showed up, perhaps — then we’re getting somewhere. Until then, it seems to me we’re looking at speech. Odious speech, sure. Speech that should cause employment problems? Yeah, I think so.

When something inchoate becomes actual isn’t necessarily an easy decision to reach. I’d prefer to err on the side of keeping the state restrained as long as possible but coming down like a two-ton heavy thing when the line is crossed. 

I’d probably have been tempted to respond to the guy to see what he did but, even so, protecting my daughters would’ve been Job One. 

[troph 25238]

1 hour ago, Doc Daneeka said:

If must of us really want criminal punishment for what’s morally reprehensible, we’re more fucked than I thought, and I already thought we’re pretty fucked. What’s the fascination with putting people in cages? 

This isn’t to defend this clown’s behavior. If we want the power of the state to roll over people’s lives, though, let’s set the level a little higher than outrage or pre-crime. 

 

I 100% agree, and though I find the guy to be a major problem and I may want certain things for this creep I also understand that's not how the law works, nor is it how it should work.  But the first step to fashioning proper laws is to understand that what we want is ok to want but may not be ok to implement. btw I think the moral reprehensibility of what this guy has done is crystal clear, hence acknowledging what everyone would like to see happen (not taking into consideration the law).

 

43 minutes ago, Pato del Muerto said:

The idea that he has to be proven to have abused a child before anyone can know that he’s tried to abuse a child is not great. 

the idea that a person could be put on a list of potential abusers/accused abusers from just an accusation is also problematic. 

this instance has some level of evidence behind it but not to the point of criminality, so it falls in between.  
 

vigilante justice won’t change his behavior unless you kill him, and you’d probably get caught because suddenly the cops will know about the chat and use it to establish motive against you, and that also ruins your daughter’s life. 
 

main job as a parent, protect your kid, accomplished. Secondary job of protecting others, not so much. 
 

if you go to the cops with what you have, are they so intrigued that they set up an elaborate sting to bust him attempting something criminal so they can put him away, or do they brush it off?  Too late now as the ISD has chased the rat away. 

I agre 100%.  It's the point I'm making - we may want certain things but that's not what's going to happen.  I'm not so much in favor of sting operations but I am in favor of the police scaring the shit out of him, and investigating to see if the moral reprehensible behavior included undiscovered criminal behavior.

22 minutes ago, Doc Daneeka said:

“Try” is doing a lot of work there, though. If someone has taken action in furtherance of purported abuse — arranged a meeting and showed up, perhaps — then we’re getting somewhere. Until then, it seems to me we’re looking at speech. Odious speech, sure. Speech that should cause employment problems? Yeah, I think so.

When something inchoate becomes actual isn’t necessarily an easy decision to reach. I’d prefer to err on the side of keeping the state restrained as long as possible but coming down like a two-ton heavy thing when the line is crossed. 

I’d probably have been tempted to respond to the guy to see what he did but, even so, protecting my daughters would’ve been Job One. 

I would agree with you, except in cases of potential child abuse, in that case I think alerting the police so they can consider investigating is good.

[Doc Daneeka 6793]

Alerting the police so they can consider investigating is how a lot of people end up face down in the street for no reason, but I understand the sentiment of wanting to protect children. 

It’s also how CPS gets involved when parents believe their children are capable of some self-sufficiency and being out on their own for large parts of the day. I get that the situations aren’t the same but “for the children” is one of the paving stones on the well-intentioned road to hell. 

“What might happen” is icy ground. In this particular scenario, some coherent way of tracking across school districts might be desirable. It’s a hard question. 

[troph 25238]

3 hours ago, Doc Daneeka said:

Alerting the police so they can consider investigating is how a lot of people end up face down in the street for no reason, but I understand the sentiment of wanting to protect children. 

It’s also how CPS gets involved when parents believe their children are capable of some self-sufficiency and being out on their own for large parts of the day. I get that the situations aren’t the same but “for the children” is one of the paving stones on the well-intentioned road to hell. 

“What might happen” is icy ground. In this particular scenario, some coherent way of tracking across school districts might be desirable. It’s a hard question. 

 latch key kid status is not universally accepted as bad parenting where a teacher saying to a teenage student "you're hot" is universally accepted as completely inappropriate and grooming behavior. and there is no assurance that he's never done it except this one time or that there aren't others where he moved beyond grooming.  the only assurance is that it didn't happen with this child.  while innocent until proven guilty does still apply to convictions, there is ample precedent that the line for what is lawful is moved aggressively in favor of children in the child abuse and child pornography areas (i.e. even anime child porn is illegal). so I think the same argument can be made for what constitutes an act worthy of at least a preliminary inquiry. The school district does not have subpoena power absent an actual lawsuit and certainly doesn't have warrant power, so nothing is truly known except he engaged in grooming behavior this one time.  there are checks and balances though with probable cause and a jury trial so it's not like asking the questions means he's going to jail. so sorry (not sorry), an investigation by police is 100% warranted imo. 

all of that said, the police will likely do very little as the singular online statement of "you're hot" is not criminal.

 

Edited May 15, 2023 by troph

[Viper 12221]

3 hours ago, Doc Daneeka said:

Alerting the police so they can consider investigating is how a lot of people end up face down in the street for no reason, but I understand the sentiment of wanting to protect children. 

It’s also how CPS gets involved when parents believe their children are capable of some self-sufficiency and being out on their own for large parts of the day. I get that the situations aren’t the same but “for the children” is one of the paving stones on the well-intentioned road to hell. 

“What might happen” is icy ground. In this particular scenario, some coherent way of tracking across school districts might be desirable. It’s a hard question. 

None of this wrong but I don't see how any of it applies here. 

[Doc Daneeka 6793]

Just now, Viper said:

None of this wrong but I don't see how any of it applies here. 

“For the children” is an appeal to emotion, not reality. Having the police “investigate” should be based on something based in the law. The guy did nothing illegal as far as anyone has shown. What’s the reasonable, articulable suspicion for the cops to investigate?

[Doc Daneeka 6793]

15 minutes ago, troph said:

 latch key kid status is not universally accepted as bad parenting where a teacher saying to a teenage student "you're hot" is universally accepted as completely inappropriate and grooming behavior. and there is no assurance that he's never done it except this one time or that there aren't others where he moved beyond grooming.  the only assurance is that it didn't happen with this child.  while innocent until proven guilty does still apply to convictions, there is ample precedent that the line for what is lawful is moved aggressively in favor of children in the child abuse and child pornography areas (i.e. even anime child porn is illegal). so I think the same argument can be made for what constitutes an act worthy of at least a preliminary inquiry. The school district does not have subpoena power absent an actual lawsuit and certainly doesn't have warrant power, so nothing is truly known except he engaged in grooming behavior this one time.  there are checks and balances though with probable cause and a jury trial so it's not like asking the questions means he's going to jail. so sorry (not sorry), an investigation by police is 100% warranted imo. 

all of that said, the police will likely do very little as the singular online statement of "you're hot" is not criminal.

 

Something doesn’t have to be universally accepted as bad parenting for the cops to get involved. It’s easy to find as many cases as you’d want of the cops and CPS interfering in such cases. 

“No assurance that he’s not done it before” isn’t much justification when it’s hard to find anything illegal about what he’s known to have done. 

Anime child porn being illegal shows how idiotic “for the children” can be. They are drawings. 

[troph 25238]

10 minutes ago, Doc Daneeka said:

Something doesn’t have to be universally accepted as bad parenting for the cops to get involved. It’s easy to find as many cases as you’d want of the cops and CPS interfering in such cases. 

“No assurance that he’s not done it before” isn’t much justification when it’s hard to find anything illegal about what he’s known to have done. 

Anime child porn being illegal shows how idiotic “for the children” can be. They are drawings. 

it's well established jurisprudence (the Supreme Court heard first amendment cases on anime child porn) and confirmed that "just drawings" is a problem and prohibition is fully justified.  The fact that you think anime child porn should be ok is, fuck man, I don't know what to say.

the fact you keep comparing this to questionable parenting and the cops being called on me for leaving my 12 year old home while I go on a hot date with my wife is entirely irrelevant. the man was grooming a child.  fuck that nonsense, that's enough to investigate.  there are plenty of checks and balances to ensure his liberty isn't arbitrarily taken away.

Edited May 15, 2023 by troph

[Doc Daneeka 6793]

5 minutes ago, troph said:

it's well established jurisprudence (the Supreme Court heard first amendment cases on anime child porn) and confirmed that "just drawings" is a problem and prohibition is fully justified.  The fact that you think anime child porn should be ok is, fuck man, I don't know what to say.

the fact you keep comparing this to questionable parenting and the cops being called on me for leaving my 12 year old home while I go on a hot date with my wife is entirely irrelevant. the man was grooming a child.  fuck that nonsense, that's enough to investigate.  there are plenty of checks and balances to ensure his liberty isn't arbitrarily taken away.

Separate but equal was also well-established jurisprudence. That the SCOTUS wrote it doesn’t preclude it from being idiotic. Wickard v. Filburn is also a good example of SCOTUS “jurisprudence.”

The fact that you think a drawing, which harms no actual children, should be illegal is, fuck, man, I don’t know what to say. 

You’re begging the question. The police are law enforcement. What law would they be enforcing here?

There are too many fraudulent convictions of much more serious crimes for me to believe there are plenty of checks and balances on state power. 

Edited May 15, 2023 by Doc Daneeka

[Doc Daneeka 6793]

13 minutes ago, troph said:

it's well established jurisprudence (the Supreme Court heard first amendment cases on anime child porn) and confirmed that "just drawings" is a problem and prohibition is fully justified.  The fact that you think anime child porn should be ok is, fuck man, I don't know what to say.

Do you think it would be constitutionally protected expression to draw a man killing a baby?

[Viper 12221]

32 minutes ago, Doc Daneeka said:

“For the children” is an appeal to emotion, not reality. Having the police “investigate” should be based on something based in the law. The guy did nothing illegal as far as anyone has shown. What’s the reasonable, articulable suspicion for the cops to investigate?

That it's possible or even likely that he's done more than just tell one 12 year old that she's hot. You know there's nothing illegal about owning a bloody knife but maybe we should do a little investigation into the guy caught with it. 

[Doc Daneeka 6793]

Just now, Viper said:

That it's possible or even likely that he's done more than just tell one 12 year old that she's hot. You know there's nothing illegal about owning a bloody knife but maybe we should do a little investigation into the guy caught with it. 

You’re willing to grant more freedom to the state to investigate in the absence of evidence of an underlying crime than I am. We’re unlikely to agree on this. 

[troph 25238]

24 minutes ago, Doc Daneeka said:

Do you think it would be constitutionally protected expression to draw a man killing a baby?

I’m not a first amendment lawyer, but I have no problem at all with anime child porn being illegal.  Edit - not protected first amendment speech. 

Edited May 15, 2023 by troph

[Doc Daneeka 6793]

1 minute ago, troph said:

I’m not a first amendment lawyer, but I have no problem at all with anime child porn being illegal. 

Do you think the First protects the drawing of a man killing a baby, though?

if not, why not? If so, how’s child anime porn worse?

A lot of people have no problem making hate speech, or whatever, illegal. We don’t need the First to protect popular things. 

Edited May 15, 2023 by Doc Daneeka

[troph 25238]

Just now, Doc Daneeka said:

Do you think the First protects the drawing of a man killing a baby, though?

if not, why not? If so, how’s child anime porn worse?

I’m not really here to answer that, I’m not here for intended gotcha games. Nor am I qualified to address first amendment law nor do I know if there is a case on your hypo.

[Viper 12221]

14 minutes ago, Doc Daneeka said:

You’re willing to grant more freedom to the state to investigate in the absence of evidence of an underlying crime than I am. We’re unlikely to agree on this. 

I didn't say anything about more freedom, there are plenty of constitutional ways to investigate, not the least of which is interviewing other girls he may have been in contact with. 

[troph 25238]

Yeah I just don’t see any problem with the police asking him a few questions. That’s not to be conflated with conviction and sentencing without proof beyond a reasonable doubt.

[Doc Daneeka 6793]

Just now, troph said:

I’m not really here to answer that, I’m not here for intended gotcha games. Nor am I qualified to address first amendment law nor do I know if there is a case on your hypo.

It’s not a “gotcha game.” It’s a question of what principles underly your opinion on what you have no problem making illegal. You’re qualified to have an opinion when you want to, or not when you don’t. 

1 minute ago, troph said:

Yeah I just don’t see any problem with the police asking him a few questions. That’s not to be conflated with conviction and sentencing without proof beyond a reasonable doubt.

“I’d rather not answer any questions.” He has no obligation to answer. Then what?

[Doc Daneeka 6793]

4 minutes ago, Viper said:

I didn't say anything about more freedom, there are plenty of constitutional ways to investigate, not the least of which is interviewing other girls he may have been in contact with. 

That’s completely different from, say, investigating the guy with the knife but, sure, asking around to see if anyone else has gotten messages, or has been stabbed, seems fine. And if there’s a possible underlying crime reported by one of them, go after the guy. 

[troph 25238]

29 minutes ago, Doc Daneeka said:

It’s not a “gotcha game.” It’s a question of what principles underly your opinion on what you have no problem making illegal. You’re qualified to have an opinion when you want to, or not when you don’t. 

“I’d rather not answer any questions.” He has no obligation to answer. Then what?

First question - I told you what the law is on cartoon child porn. you disagree with it. That’s really the end of it as far as I’m concerned.
 

Second question - I don’t know - depends on what the police found without his cooperation, but like I said probably nothing.

you ask a lot of questions, you appear to believe that entitles you to answers. I disagree. I’m really not interested any further.