Text message leads to lawsuit

Text message leads to lawsuit

Link to Story

The Saskatchewan Rivers school division is facing a lawsuit after a vice-principal read a text message on a confiscated cellphone about a car theft, which led to the police allegedly using the student as an informant to locate the stolen car.

The student has had to move away from Prince Albert due to fears of violent retaliation, say his grandparents in a statement of claim filed in Queen's Bench court in P.A.

(visit the link for the full news article)

Wow, they pretty much drove the kid out of town because of a text message, but I am surprised about how seriously they took this when it was really so minor.

We know cell phones are banned in school for use due to teachers here in Canada thinking they can be linked to drug paraphanalia but I am surprised at the action the V.P. took.

Link
(visit the link for the full news article)

I wonder if they will investigate to see where the message originated? That investigation could lead to an embarrassing conclusion for the authorities.

reply to post by hypr2011

Wow, they pretty much drove the kid out of town because of a text message, but I am surprised about how seriously they took this when it was really so minor.

Someone's car got stolen, friend...

Would you consider it so minor a case or care about this kid if it were your car, since he's apparently running with the wrong crowd if his friends are stealing cars and texting him to chat about it?

Just curious, eh.

PS -
This link should work to get to the Yahoo! article.

Yea true, I also wish the link to the news source would work as well, but I am surprised how much Canada is starting to get mentioned on news stories, like it isn't fair to the kid that he is forced to skip town.

Schools are not prisons, he had no right to go into the phones contents in the first place. A school is a public building, confiscate maybe but to take it a step further is unlawful as regarded by the Constitution.

reply to post by hypr2011
Granted, definitely sucks to be him.

As far as the privacy issue, fair point, but as long as the principal is not an agent of the state, it'll be an interesting fight. Various government agencies have been working with private contractors (cable installers, etc.) for a long time now trying to use them as a way around privacy restrictions and inadmissable evidence in investigations, since constitutional limitations don't extend to private sector workers.

Mixed feelings on this one, personally.

Since when was it legal for school to read private messages??

It really isn't, the kid didn't consent to the messages being read, I think the family will win the case but something tells me the school district may possibly have a history of violence, either that or the principal didn't know what to do.

reply to post by juleol


They used to read notes being passed around, this is not much different.


When did it become legal to steal a car?



Raist

Confiscating the kids cell and reading the texts would be like confiscating his laptop and going through all his emails, bank accounts, facebook, basically every personal item you have on the device. No one should be able to go through the device unless they have a warrant to do so.

reply to post by hypr2011


Your link is not copied correctly....(please redo it)...thanks.

Also.....I just hope the person that had to go into hiding is safe...and I also hope the people this person is afraid of don't know where his or her relatives live...because if they do.... they may go after one of them..to find him or her.

Originally posted by Raist
reply to post by juleol

 

They used to read notes being passed around, this is not much different.


When did it become legal to steal a car?



Raist

This is very different. A cell phone often can contain messages that can be very private. This is like having someone else opening a letter that has been addressed to you and cannot be compared to a note being passed around in class.

And since when did I defend him stealing a car??

reply to post by juleol


You think notes passed in class did not often have a very private message in them?


I never said you did defend him. I was just reminding you that he helped steal a car. Since we are looking at crimes I would say the car theft outweighs his cell phone text being read. If it were my kid he would have more to worry about than other people being mad at him because he would not leave the house until he was 18.


Raist

Why was he looking at the private messages? Maybe just nosy? Maybe thought that he had the right? Maybe doesn't give a crap about other's right to privacy? Maybe looking for some underage photos?

I don't condone this no matter what the reason was.

Peace

Originally posted by juleol
Since when was it legal for school to read private messages??

edit on 12-8-2011 by juleol because: (no reason given)

It is not illegal and that is what matters here. Actions are not intrinsically legal, they are simply not illegal. and that is where this case falls. Agree or not, the school employee looking into the phone is no different than yu or I looking into the phone I could take your phone when you are not looking and go through every inch of it...not illegal.

Is it right? Probably not. Is it against school policy? Could be, but it is probably not either.

Originally posted by Helious
Schools are not prisons, he had no right to go into the phones contents in the first place. A school is a public building, confiscate maybe but to take it a step further is unlawful as regarded by the Constitution.

The term is called Loco Parentis (Latin) -

Latin for "in the place of a parent" or "instead of a parent,"[1] refers to the legal responsibility of a person or organization to take on some of the functions and responsibilities of a parent. Originally derived from English common law, it is applied in two separate areas of the law.

First, it allows institutions such as colleges and schools to act in the best interests of the students as they see fit, although not allowing what would be considered violations of the students' civil liberties.[1]

Second, this doctrine can provide a non-biological parent to be given the legal rights and responsibilities of a biological parent if they have held themselves out as the parent.[2]

The in loco parentis doctrine is distinct from the doctrine of parens patriae, the psychological parent doctrine, and adoption.[3] In the United States, the parental liberty doctrine imposes constraints upon the operation of the in loco parentis doctrine.

Granted this took place in Canada, however the term is from English common law and is still used in the US, so I am going to assume (correct me if im wrong) that the same term / concept is present in Canadian law as well.

reply to post by Helious


HA, You haven't been in a school in a long time have you now? These schools have their own police department inside them. They have their own rules, their own laws and they just about can do whatever they want and get away with it.

Yea its kinda crazy how bad the schools here in North America have gotten, I heard the principal at the high school by my house brings in officers with drug sniffing dogs, even though the school has no history of drugs, the principal was from a school by Toronto and the officers busted like 30 or 40 people that school year.

They couldn't keep the kid anonymous? Why did they have to out him as the source of the information if he wasn't involved in the theft? I say sue them to hell.