Pixies Place Forums - Parental responsibility?

Pixies Place Forums (http://www.pixies-place.com/forums/index.php)

- General Chat (http://www.pixies-place.com/forums/forumdisplay.php?f=3)

- - Parental responsibility? (http://www.pixies-place.com/forums/showthread.php?t=32557)

Parental responsibility?

I can't believe these parents. If I had done this when I was 13, being expelled would have been the least of my worries. I would have seriously considered running away from home rather than face my parents.

From The Smoking Gun website:

Quote:

The parents of an Ohio boy who was expelled this month for creating a phony MySpace profile that described his middle school's principal as a child molester have filed a federal lawsuit claiming that the 13-year-old's free speech rights have been violated by education officials. Toader and Marianna Osan claim that their son (who is identified only by his initials in U.S. District Court filings) was improperly booted from the eighth grade at Hillside Middle School in Parma after educators learned of the boy's creation of a MySpace page for principal Jeff Cook. The MySpace profile, which was headlined "Your Princeypal," did not carry Cook's name, but it included his photo and identified him as the Hillside Middle School principal. The since-removed profile, an excerpt of which you'll find below, listed Cook's general interests as "giving students anal" and "jacking off in my office," and named his heroes as Michael Jackson, Adolph Hitler, and Saddam Hussein. For his vulgar online handiwork, "M.O." was first suspended, and then, on February 7, was informed that he was being expelled (for "malicious harassment") until June 10, effectively the end of the school year, according to a February 20 court filing. His parents argue that students "disrespecting teachers outside of school is an age-old tradition, and one from which teachers neither need nor deserve protection...It would be naive to think that even the most popular principal is not the subject of student ridicule and parody." The Osans are seeking their son's immediate return to school and a judicial order protecting his off-campus speech, which previously included the observation that Cook had an affinity for the Purple Penetrator, a sex toy.

Does anyone think this is covered under free speech?

Perhaps the Osans operate this clothing store?

I :heart: all parents like these... fucking job security.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Aqua

Does anyone think this is covered under free speech?

naw. it's slander without a doubt

Holy crap, if I had pulled something like that I think it would still hurt to this day when I tried to sit down.

That is quite the job of parenting those folks are doing. Certainly wouldn't want your kids to grow up with any sort of respect for an authority figure or anything.

This piece of fun has ramifications at work for the Principal and goes far beyond the ability to get together with other little shits (oops sorry) gentlemen of tomorrow and cast slurs on all and sundry.

This little charmer probably thought he was suitably untouchable behind the computer's anonymous screen, and anyway as a minor he has special protection from the courts.

I say let him back, on the provision that his parents take out a national full page advertisement naming the boy with a full and open retraction of the scurrilous matter and an unreserved apology to the Principal.

After that, in the quiet of a school study period, he can be sacrificed to Chalkius, the God of Education.

Maybe a multi-million dollar countersuit for libel would bring the parents up to speed on what exactly is covered under the First Amendment?

Nah, fuckwits like that never "get it"...

:banghead:

I say he can come back, but he gets to be in my class :D :spank: :D

And has to walk back to Ohio every afternoon?

That'll do it.

Please inform me when has it been ruled that slander is subject to the protection of the First Amendment to the Constitution of the United states?

Quote:

Originally Posted by gekkogecko

Please inform me when has it been ruled that slander is subject to the protection of the First Amendment to the Constitution of the United states?

The short answer I've always heard is that freedon of speech does not give one the right to yell "Fire!" in a crowded theatre...not sure if that's the right analogy here, but it comes pretty close for my tastes, i.e., false statements with malicious intent are *NOT* covered by the First Amendment...

There are two issues here. The first is that as other have said slander isn't protected speech. The second is that the Supreme Court ruled in the late 80s that students were not afforded First Amendment rights. School newspapers, and annuals aren't covered under the First Amendment since they are sponsored by the schools and therefore the principal or school board have the final say as to what gets published and can dole out punishments if something is printed that they don't like.

It's also one thing to disrespect your teacher it's quite another to spread lies about them that could ruin their career and reputation. I think the principal should file a counter suit claiming irrepairable harm to his career and reputation and sue the parents for every dime they will ever think of making.

Jude 30,

Students writing in a school paper are a different case to malicious words in an external medium.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Oldfart

Jude 30,

Students writing in a school paper are a different case to malicious words in an external medium.

I considered that but thought it bared mentioning that because of all the screaming people do about students freedom of speech these days.

It still doesn't change the fact that slander isn't protected speech.

Nor is sedition or treason.

Freedom is not anarchy.