Pa. teen sues school district over nu...

Pa. teen sues school district over nude phone photos

There are 36 comments on the York Dispatch story from May 20, 2010, titled Pa. teen sues school district over nude phone photos. In it, York Dispatch reports that:

A Pennsylvania school district that was at the center of a highly publicized "sexting" case was sued Thursday by a teenager who claims her principal confiscated her cell phone, found nude images she had taken of herself and turned it over to prosecutors.

Join the discussion below, or Read more at York Dispatch.

First Prev
of 2
Next Last
Pics 4 free

High Point, NC

#1 May 20, 2010
I hope this girl loses her ridiculous lawsuit. She trashed her reputation the moment she chose a cell phone to take nude shots of herself for electronic display.(Oh, yeah -- they were to be privately shared with her boyfriend -- Uh-huh. Got any more manure you want to pile on this stupidity?) Clearly, this silly girl intended for the camera shots to be sent out, or she would not have put them on a cell phone. EVERYBODY knows that the second a picture is displayed on an email, web page or cell phone -- it is no longer a "private" picture. What a joke. Of course, knowing our screwed up law system, they'll probably reward this dolt for being a no class chick without any scruples.
Merv the Perv

Lancaster, PA

#2 May 20, 2010
I need to inspect that phone!
Someone in York

Millersville, PA

#3 May 21, 2010
IF they were on her phone, they're HER private property. End of story. It's not about her intent with the pictures, it's about her property being wrongfully searched and her privacy wrongfully invaded. Regardless of her reputation, she has a right to do whatever she wants with her private property, and that right was violated without cause. The principal can take her phone, but he can't search it without a warrant and without cause.
BOO BOO

York, PA

#4 May 21, 2010
I saw those pictures, nice - juicy !!!
stupid skank

Shenandoah, PA

#5 May 23, 2010
just another skank claiming to be a virgin.

she's 19, so she's probably having sex with a married, middle-aged, college professor right now, while also stripping, to work her way through college.
webe

Wellsville, PA

#6 May 23, 2010
why aren't the phots with this article.
SAD WORLD

York, PA

#7 May 23, 2010
I hope she wins her law suit.
Pa life resident

Wayne, PA

#8 May 23, 2010
since when did a teacher become a cop. Gee wonder what pic's are on his phone. I hope she cleans there clock. Just more reason to do away with the small timers and go to a all county setting . Proper training on what one can and can't do would be real nice DAAAAAAAAAAA
Skeptic

Quincy, MA

#9 May 23, 2010
Too bad she's not underage, she would be sent to jail for pornography!!! LOL!!!!
stupid skank wrote:
just another skank claiming to be a virgin.
she's 19, so she's probably having sex with a married, middle-aged, college professor right now, while also stripping, to work her way through college.
walking tall

Hanover, PA

#10 May 24, 2010
sexting is not a crime in the state of pa. however when adults are viewing nudey pics of minors that is a crime not to mention just a bit sick and twisted.there is no defendable excuse for viewing of such material unless you work in a crime lab. when you abuse your power within the public school system expect to get burned.the "loco parentis" bullshi$ card doesnt give the power to act above the law to view child pornography etc. thre was no life or death decision here to be made for the student. then we have an overpowering ego trip district attorney who has no common sense to push a law where it does not simply apply period.sexting may be risky and stupid but like i said, its not a crime in the state of pa.this is why they fought it and shut the district attorney down.food for thought, its legal for adults 18 and over to sext. stupid but legal, so now the system wants to try to construe something that doesnt apply to teens into a "child pornography" charge? really? maybe the d.a. should of researched the legislative written intent. now for the schools , they are completely aware of what and what not to do. if they are for whatever reason to suspect something of illegal activity that may be contained on a phone such a nude pics, it gets handed over to an investigative authority until it does "nobody" touches the phone !!this keeps the school staff out of postition of being sued etc etc.not to mention criminal charges.plus there is no reason to view nude pics of minors unless you are of a sick mind. like it or not this girl will win. now for all the pefect people on their high horses , what if this was your daughter or neice or friends kid? you may have a different outlook..
4cryingoutloud

York, PA

#11 May 24, 2010
wow
Bro1856

Cockeysville, MD

#12 May 24, 2010
The article needs to address why the phone was confiscated in the first place. Did she sign over rights in the student contract?

What kind of expectations of privacy are there in a school? Were the pictures visible in such a way that the principal did not have to go thru 50 menu steps to find them? Was the principal tipped off that these pics were on the phone prior to confiscation?

What is a 17 year old girl taking nude pics of herself? Bet her parents are proud.
preserve rights

Manheim, PA

#13 May 24, 2010
Just because the photos are on the phone does not mean they were sent out. My kids use their phones to take pics, so do I. If she did not send them out, then there is nothing except invasion of her privacy! Americans need to stop this nonsense and start protecting our freedoms and rights. She did nothing illegal and without her permission, they had no right to search her phone without probable cause of an illegal act. As a parent I sure wouldn't be proud, I'd be appalled, however, I would insist her rights be protected. Parents should be more informed and involved in what their kids are doing then this type of situation is more likely to be prevented. Cell phones and sexual pictures are bad ideas...
Pants on the ground

Lancaster, PA

#15 May 24, 2010
SAD WORLD wrote:
I hope she wins her law suit.
Her birthday suit lawsuit?
Say It Aint So

York, PA

#16 May 25, 2010
walking tall wrote:
sexting is not a crime in the state of pa. however when adults are viewing nudey pics of minors that is a crime not to mention just a bit sick and twisted.there is no defendable excuse for viewing of such material unless you work in a crime lab. when you abuse your power within the public school system expect to get burned.the "loco parentis" bullshi$ card doesnt give the power to act above the law to view child pornography etc. thre was no life or death decision here to be made for the student. then we have an overpowering ego trip district attorney who has no common sense to push a law where it does not simply apply period.sexting may be risky and stupid but like i said, its not a crime in the state of pa.this is why they fought it and shut the district attorney down.food for thought, its legal for adults 18 and over to sext. stupid but legal, so now the system wants to try to construe something that doesnt apply to teens into a "child pornography" charge? really? maybe the d.a. should of researched the legislative written intent. now for the schools , they are completely aware of what and what not to do. if they are for whatever reason to suspect something of illegal activity that may be contained on a phone such a nude pics, it gets handed over to an investigative authority until it does "nobody" touches the phone !!this keeps the school staff out of postition of being sued etc etc.not to mention criminal charges.plus there is no reason to view nude pics of minors unless you are of a sick mind. like it or not this girl will win. now for all the pefect people on their high horses , what if this was your daughter or neice or friends kid? you may have a different outlook..
Dude, take a breath... Your sentence structure stinks.
WHAA BABY

Westminster, MD

#17 May 25, 2010
i saw the pictures she should get sued for taking them with her ugly ass.
Statement

Carlisle, PA

#18 May 25, 2010
Buffy should not win! Buffy is not suppose to have a phone in school during the day.
Patrick

Adairville, KY

#19 May 25, 2010
Bro1856 wrote:
The article needs to address why the phone was confiscated in the first place. Did she sign over rights in the student contract?
What kind of expectations of privacy are there in a school? Were the pictures visible in such a way that the principal did not have to go thru 50 menu steps to find them? Was the principal tipped off that these pics were on the phone prior to confiscation?
What is a 17 year old girl taking nude pics of herself? Bet her parents are proud.
A minor CANT sign over his/her rights.

She is f*ckin 17 just because you magically turn 18 one day doesnt make you any smarter, or more of an adult. Just like being under 18 makes you any dumber or less of an adult. Legal age of consent is 16 in PA she was 17.

The pricipal had NO right to go through the phone. The only right he had was to take the phone, turn it off, and call the parents to come pick it up.

And for all the people on here trashing this poor girl, I just wounder did you grow up in Mayberry? You know where nothing bad EVER happens, teenagers didnt have sex, or do drugs? Just curious.....
Bro1856

Cockeysville, MD

#20 May 26, 2010
Patrick wrote:
<quoted text>
A minor CANT sign over his/her rights.
She is f*ckin 17 just because you magically turn 18 one day doesnt make you any smarter, or more of an adult. Just like being under 18 makes you any dumber or less of an adult. Legal age of consent is 16 in PA she was 17.
The pricipal had NO right to go through the phone. The only right he had was to take the phone, turn it off, and call the parents to come pick it up.
And for all the people on here trashing this poor girl, I just wounder did you grow up in Mayberry? You know where nothing bad EVER happens, teenagers didnt have sex, or do drugs? Just curious.....
Even Mayberry had a town drunk....

True- at the age of 17 she doesn't have the right to sign rights away, but her parents may have. I know that when I went through HS, the parents had to sign a expectations contract (and it was a public school). The principal may have had the right to confiscate and review. What if the pic was already up on the screen and he saw it? At that point- she's a MINOR and technically in violation of CHILD PORN laws- then he has the responsibility to contact the police.

Yes, teens did stupid things when I was one. There was sex, drinking, partying- whatever. Some of us were mature enough to never do that while in HS (ie better parents or more self control). The rest- well- if they got caught- they paid a price- and DIDN'T sue over it. She did something stupid. She got caught. Too me, she should hang her head in shame/embarassment, shut up, and get on with her life.
Patrick

Adairville, KY

#21 May 26, 2010
Bro1856 wrote:
<quoted text>
Even Mayberry had a town drunk....
True- at the age of 17 she doesn't have the right to sign rights away, but her parents may have. I know that when I went through HS, the parents had to sign a expectations contract (and it was a public school). The principal may have had the right to confiscate and review. What if the pic was already up on the screen and he saw it? At that point- she's a MINOR and technically in violation of CHILD PORN laws- then he has the responsibility to contact the police.
Yes, teens did stupid things when I was one. There was sex, drinking, partying- whatever. Some of us were mature enough to never do that while in HS (ie better parents or more self control). The rest- well- if they got caught- they paid a price- and DIDN'T sue over it. She did something stupid. She got caught. Too me, she should hang her head in shame/embarassment, shut up, and get on with her life.
Sorry but getting/not getting drunk, partying, doing drugs isnt a reflection on how good nor bad of parents one had/has. And its not 'child porn' if its YOUR body that is on YOUR phone. If anything the principal and the D.A. should catch some child porn charges and have to register on the 'list' for looking at her. There was no reason for him to believe there was nudie pictures on her phone, he was looking at the phone and thought "gee I wounder?" and he snooped. Plain and simple! He probably is a close pedophile maybe they should take his computer and have a look at what he surfs on the net! You might be surprised at what they find....

Tell me when this thread is updated:

Subscribe Now Add to my Tracker
First Prev
of 2
Next Last

Add your comments below

Characters left: 4000

Please note by submitting this form you acknowledge that you have read the Terms of Service and the comment you are posting is in compliance with such terms. Be polite. Inappropriate posts may be removed by the moderator. Send us your feedback.

Tunkhannock Discussions

Title Updated Last By Comments
News A rail and trail ride (Jun '14) Mar '16 double aught buck... 2
News Weird winter weather makes for lousy ski season Mar '16 Enzo49 2
Run at the park Feb '16 Jake 1
Ocean Roberts SUCKS (Burn IN HELL) be ashamed (Dec '15) Feb '16 Anonomys 13
I Hate Gin's Tavern (Feb '09) Jan '16 McClain 25
Anybody Remember Ol Jimmy The Boozer "Mr Pengel... Jan '16 Annonomys 1
In Memory Of Raymond Hinkley (1930-1992) (Nov '15) Jan '16 Jayson K 3
More from around the web

Personal Finance

Tunkhannock Mortgages