Strip Searching A Thirteen Year Old

[magekillr]

So, how about that Antonin Scalia?

 

 

 

You search in the students pack, you search the students outer garments, and you have a reasonable suspicion that the student has drugs, he said. Dont you have, after conducting all these other searches, a reasonable suspicion that she has drugs in her underpants?

 

 

 

Youve searched everywhere else, Justice Scalia said. By God, the drugs must be in her underpants.

 

 

 

 

Background:

 

 

 

A student at SMS, Savana Redding, was pulled from class on October 3, 2003 by the school's vice principal, Kerry Wilson. Earlier that day, the vice principal had found prescription-strength ibuprofen (400 mg, the strength of two advils) on one of Redding's classmates; prompting him to question the student in possession of the pills. The student blamed Redding, who had no history of disciplinary issues or drug abuse.

 

 

 

Redding was informed of the accusation in Wilson's office that day, and Redding claimed that she had no knowledge of the pills and had not seen them previously. Accompanied by the school's nurse and a female administrative assistant, Redding was ordered to strip to her underwear. The strip search failed to produce anymore ibuprofen.

 

 

 

The ACLU agreed to represent Redding in the San Francisco 9th Circuit Appeals Court after the trial court ruled that the strip search did not violate Redding's rights. The ruling was overturned in 2008.

 

 

 

In January 2009, the United States Supreme Court decided to review the 9th Circuit's ruling.

 

 

 

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Safford_Un ... v._Redding

 

 

 

I can't even express how outraged at this that I am. It's not [bleep]ing meth we're talking about, this was ibuprofen. And even if it were a serious drug, these are school officials, not police officers trained to search people. This is at school, where a child of 13 should feel safe, not threatened and abused. This is about a child, in a school, dealing with SCHOOL OFFICIALS WHO HAVE NO AUTHORITY TO BE MAKING THESE TYPES OF DECISIONS!

 

 

 

What's next? Cavity searches? "Oh, well, I don't see the medicine in her backback or on her clothes...it's gotta be in her underwear! Oh, no, it's not there? Hmm, well we have probable cause...so do a cavity search!"

 

 

 

I swear to God, if they rule in favor of the school and school board...I will be really pissed.

 

 

 

All of those cases in the 70's took away every single right that young people have in public schools.

 

 

 

Thank God for the ACLU.

 

 

 

Once again, I am going to donate more money to them if they win this case, just as they beat Obama over the state secrets.

[ElkNight]

That blows. :lol:

 

Over freaking Ibuprofen. LMAO

[evil_mumm_ra]

the only problem i see with this is the fact it was only ibuprofen.

[acowswrath]

I heard that the school officials didnt even ask her if she needed the drugs or anything.

[Deaners1212]

If this hadn't happened in school and wasn't conducted for some BS reason because of something as pathetic as a girl having Ibuprofen on her, what the vice principal had done to her would have been considered sexual assault towards a minor. Either way, the pervert deserves his [wagon] kicked and teethed pulled out one-by-one. Just because they're children does not mean they have any less rights than the adults.

[Riku3220]

I'm not seeing the problem here. I know for a fact that nearly every school code of conduct prohibits drugs of any kind unless a note is brought from a parent allowing the school nurse to administer the drug. Even if it is Ibuprofen she was accused of giving another student drugs (Which is bad) and she could have been hiding it somewhere.

 

 

 

Now who was it that did the underwear search? A female faculty member or a male?

[ilya]

I've been searched twice at school before, and the buttcrack is the best place to hide. However, no matter what the situation is, strip searching a 13 is messed.

[magekillr]

I'm not seeing the problem here. I know for a fact that nearly every school code of conduct prohibits drugs of any kind unless a note is brought from a parent allowing the school nurse to administer the drug. Even if it is Ibuprofen she was accused of giving another student drugs (Which is bad) and she could have been hiding it somewhere.

 

 

 

Now who was it that did the underwear search? A female faculty member or a male?

 

 

 

 

 

School officials. Strip searching a child. Officials that have no training, and frankly, no authority. You don't see the problem? These aren't police officers, these are teachers. Just imagine if you were a parent. Would you want your child to be forcibly searched by a school official? It's a blatant disregard for any rights whatsoever.

[Riku3220]

I'm not seeing the problem here. I know for a fact that nearly every school code of conduct prohibits drugs of any kind unless a note is brought from a parent allowing the school nurse to administer the drug. Even if it is Ibuprofen she was accused of giving another student drugs (Which is bad) and she could have been hiding it somewhere.

 

 

 

Now who was it that did the underwear search? A female faculty member or a male?

 

 

 

 

 

School officials. Strip searching a child. Officials that have no training, and frankly, no authority. You don't see the problem? Just imagine if you were a parent. Would you want your child to be forcibly searched by a school official? It's a blatant disregard for any rights whatsoever.

 

I believe that the people who have something to hide are the ones that object to searches.

 

 

 

Like I said. The only problem in this situation is if a male did the search.

[deathdrow]

I'm not seeing the problem here. I know for a fact that nearly every school code of conduct prohibits drugs of any kind unless a note is brought from a parent allowing the school nurse to administer the drug. Even if it is Ibuprofen she was accused of giving another student drugs (Which is bad) and she could have been hiding it somewhere.

 

 

 

Now who was it that did the underwear search? A female faculty member or a male?

 

 

 

 

 

School officials. Strip searching a child. Officials that have no training, and frankly, no authority. You don't see the problem? These aren't police officers, these are teachers. Just imagine if you were a parent. Would you want your child to be forcibly searched by a school official? It's a blatant disregard for any rights whatsoever.

 

Legally teachers/school officials, can search lockers, and pockets or clothing on a person.

[My_Eggs]

Wow.... Over ibuprofen? You can't even get high off of that. All you can really do with it is take a ton of it and destroy your liver. But seriosuly, who wants to do that?

[Riku3220]

Okay, let me just say anyone who's calling the VP a pervert over the strip search is wrong. The search was done by the nurse and the secretary and she didn't even take her underwear off.

 

 

 

"This strip search involved Savana taking all her clothes off besides her underwear, then pulling her bra out and to the side, while shaking her breasts back and forth. After that jiggling produced nothing, Savana was instructed to pull her underwear out at the crotch and shake it."

 

Now what exactly is wrong here?

[Zierro]

I agree with you Mage. I'm absolutely sick of school right now and can't wait til I graduate in a few weeks. Of course my school isn't as extreme as the one in the article but they have to be the most irrational human beings imaginable. The power to control thousands of children tends to get to their heads and inflate their egos. They're like cop-wannabes.

[____]

I believe that the people who have something to hide are the ones that object to searches.

 

 

 

Like I said. The only problem in this situation is if a male did the search.

 

 

 

Oh geez, it's that kind of thinking which allows governemtns to slowly strip away your rights little bit at a time. And before you know it just walking down the street will be reasonable suspicious to doing something illegal and land you in jail for x months while they build a false case against you before releasing you without an appology or compensation when they release a mistake was made.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Anyhow, I read about this quite a while ago and it's just BS. It's practically sexual assult, if the school wins this will just pave the way for sick pedophiliac officials to abuse kids in their care.

[Riku3220]

I believe that the people who have something to hide are the ones that object to searches.

 

 

 

Like I said. The only problem in this situation is if a male did the search.

 

 

 

Oh geez, it's that kind of thinking which allows governemtns to slowly strip away your rights little bit at a time. And before you know it just walking down the street will be reasonable suspicious to doing something illegal and land you in jail for x months while they build a false case against you before releasing you without an appology or compensation when they release a mistake was made.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Anyhow, I read about this quite a while ago and it's just BS. It's practically sexual assult, if the school wins this will just pave the way for sick pedophiliac officials to abuse kids in their care.

 

I'm not sure how that affects my rights at all. If I have nothing to hide then I'll gladly prove my innocence.

[Nadril]

That's [cabbage] riku. They had no reason to believe that she had drugs on her (and ibprofin, the hell?) and some student testimony isn't good enough to even get any sort of probable cause.

 

 

 

Usually I can see the point of the entire "if you don't have anything to hide, oh well?" arguement -- but think about it. A thirteen year old girl. Strip searched. At a SCHOOL with no good probable cause that she had something that it the same thing as some goddamn asprin. That is not within the schools rights and it shouldn't be. If they had reason to believe and it was done by the correct authorities, and it was something that was actually serious and not [cabbage] ibprofin? Then that would be an entirely different story. As it is they had no right and I can't believe you'd actually idly allow that.

 

 

 

 

 

You're telling me you'd be fine getting frisked by a male school attendant because some kid thought you had asprin? I mean, there is a limit to how much bs you can take man, dear god.

 

 

 

 

 

Anyways I hope they get found guilty for that. Unless it is a matter of life and death ... why?

[Riku3220]

That's [cabbage] riku. They had no reason to believe that she had drugs on her (and ibprofin, the hell?) and some student testimony isn't good enough to even get any sort of probable cause.

 

 

 

Usually I can see the point of the entire "if you don't have anything to hide, oh well?" arguement -- but think about it. A thirteen year old girl. Strip searched. At a SCHOOL with no good probable cause that she had something that it the same thing as some goddamn asprin. That is not within the schools rights and it shouldn't be. If they had reason to believe and it was done by the correct authorities, and it was something that was actually serious and not [cabbage] ibprofin? Then that would be an entirely different story. As it is they had no right and I can't believe you'd actually idly allow that.

 

 

 

 

 

You're telling me you'd be fine getting frisked by a male school attendant because some kid thought you had asprin? I mean, there is a limit to how much bs you can take man, dear god.

 

 

 

 

 

Anyways I hope they get found guilty for that. Unless it is a matter of life and death ... why?

 

I'm fairly sure it's in their student code of conduct that possession of any drugs (prescription or not) is forbidden.

 

 

 

It wasn't even a real strip search anyways. All that was was just pull and shake. Nobody even touched her. Should they have gotten an officer? Maybe, but you're all just seriously blowing this all out of proportion.

[The Dark Lord]

 

I'm not sure how that affects my rights at all. If I have nothing to hide then I'll gladly prove my innocence.

 

 

 

Even if you would gladly prove that you don't have any drugs in your possession, it is still embarrassing and uncomfortable to get strip searched a school. Just think about it. You're forced to take off your clothes in front of some adults that you don't know very well. What if you're wearing boxers and the flap isn't closed very well? Do you really want them to be able to see your pee-pee? I think not.

[Riku3220]

 

I'm not sure how that affects my rights at all. If I have nothing to hide then I'll gladly prove my innocence.

 

 

 

Even if you would gladly prove that you don't have any drugs in your possession, it is still embarrassing and uncomfortable to get strip searched a school. Just think about it. You're forced to take off your clothes in front of some adults that you don't know very well. What if you're wearing boxers and the flap isn't closed very well? Do you really want them to be able to see your pee-pee? I think not.

 

As I've stated before in other threads I really don't care about what others think of me.

[warri0r45]

Yeah, that's rediculous. Maybe if it was meth and they had a better reason to do the search than some other student making an accusation, but this is just too far.

[Nadril]

That's [cabbage] riku. They had no reason to believe that she had drugs on her (and ibprofin, the hell?) and some student testimony isn't good enough to even get any sort of probable cause.

 

 

 

Usually I can see the point of the entire "if you don't have anything to hide, oh well?" arguement -- but think about it. A thirteen year old girl. Strip searched. At a SCHOOL with no good probable cause that she had something that it the same thing as some goddamn asprin. That is not within the schools rights and it shouldn't be. If they had reason to believe and it was done by the correct authorities, and it was something that was actually serious and not [cabbage] ibprofin? Then that would be an entirely different story. As it is they had no right and I can't believe you'd actually idly allow that.

 

 

 

 

 

You're telling me you'd be fine getting frisked by a male school attendant because some kid thought you had asprin? I mean, there is a limit to how much bs you can take man, dear god.

 

 

 

 

 

Anyways I hope they get found guilty for that. Unless it is a matter of life and death ... why?

 

I'm fairly sure it's in their student code of conduct that possession of any drugs (prescription or not) is forbidden.

 

 

 

It wasn't even a real strip search anyways. All that was was just pull and shake. Nobody even touched her. Should they have gotten an officer? Maybe, but you're all just seriously blowing this all out of proportion.

 

 

 

It's still stupid. Having something that is the equivalent of asprin does not mean that you should strip search someone. It is an invasion of privacy.

 

 

 

And just think of it from the childs perspective. How [bleep]ing embarrassing (not to mention scary) would it be to be told that you had to strip down to your underwear and jiggle because they thought you put asprin in your underpants. :|

 

 

 

 

As I've stated before in other threads I really don't care about what others think of me.

 

 

 

That's great. However just because you're fine with people being able to search you (even strip search) at will with no probable cause does NOT mean it should be ok or that it is alright.

 

 

 

And I don't think it's blowing the situation out of proportion at all. It's an extreme example of authority abusing their power for matters that are not necessary.

 

 

 

 

 

As I said before if she was believed to be holding something like meth? A weapon? Then, yes, search her! However even if it is against school regulation to not have asprin at school it simply is not worth abusing someones right because of it. Keep in mind that they didn't even have reasonable enough suspicion. Like I said before it would be like if I told someone that I got my "drugs" from you and then simply had you deal with all the [cabbage] behind it, you would be the one searched and the one with your privacy invaded.

 

 

 

And yes I know that "you don't care" but in reality I don't think that you would be saying that if you were forced to strip down in front of authority.

[RichieMcD]

 

I believe that the people who have something to hide are the ones that object to searches.

 

 

 

 

 

 

And that's why certain countries make on-the-spot searches legal now. Yesterday I was walking to school in a hurry, a student who looked like me was caught with drugs there recently. The cops stopped me as they thought I was him, asked could they search me. I said "no, I'm in a rusg", then under "suspicious conduct section 3:14 under the misuse of drugs act" they searched my bag, my clothes, my shoes and my sports bag. The "suspicious conduct" was refusing to the search.

 

 

 

Riku, there is such a thing in life called privacy, and I personally don't wont some random person routing through my stuff unless they have a proper reason.

[Shiny]

Painkillers, seriously?

 

 

 

Why search a 13 year old anyway. They don't even have boobs.

[i_love_burritos]

You're telling me you'd be fine getting frisked by a male

 

 

 

Male on Male - Uncomfortable

 

Male on Female - Seedy

 

Female on Male - "Encouraged"

 

Female on Female - Yeah !!!

 

 

 

Funny how that works...

 

 

 

Still, says something about the level of authority in the school. Thats just peculiar. Also says something about the person who searched her.

[Faitality]

 

 

 

Male on Male - Uncomfortable

 

Male on Female - Seedy

 

Female on Male - "Encouraged"

 

Female on Female - Yeah !!!

 

 

 

Funny how that works...

 

 

 

 

:lol: