LMSD secretly recorded "thousands" of images in student homes over extended periods

Parents Forum Parent Cafe
#1

<p>There have been some very interesting developments in the Lower Merion School District "spycam" case. </p>

<p>For those who aren't familiar, LMSD is accused of secretly recording images inside student homes by covertly activating the webcam in school issued laptops without the knowledge of students or their parents. In LMSD every high school student is given a MacBook to use 24/7, including at home, during the school year. The school issued laptops were mandatory.</p>

<p>The school, which quickly admitted they erred in not informing families of their covert abilities (enabled because of secret software installed on the machines) claims that their actions were justified because they only collected and viewed images for the purposes of recovering lost or stolen laptops. </p>

<p>Recent court documents have revealed that far from the school officials' first assertions about limited use and theft recovery, the ongoing e-discovery IT investigation has revealed that the school has "thousands" of images of students in their homes. Furthermore, throwing a big wrench in LMSD's claims of "theft recovery" the investigation has revealed that the school was monitoring the plaintiff at home for two weeks. If LMSD was truly only interested in recovering the laptop a single IP address ping, without images, would have provided all the information necessary to find the computer.</p>

<p>The school claimed the plaintiff wasn't supposed to have that particular laptop at home and hence why they activated the camera. However, the evidence now shows that rather than quickly recovering the device following the start of their monitoring, they continued to monitor the student with the camera for an extended period. </p>

<p>The investigation is also revealing evidence that school officials were quite thrilled to have secret views into student homes. </p>

<p>When viewing a set of covertly collected images one LMSD employee commented in an internal e-mail that it was ""a little LMSD soap opera" and an IT official responded by e-mail saying "I know, I love it."</p>

<p>The person who made the "I love it" comment is refusing to testify in depositions claiming 5th amendment rights against self incrimination. </p>

<p>This thing is far from over and, despite a lot of mud thrown on the family claiming they were filing a frivolous case to get money, this case is unveiling some seriously shady and creepy activities that were going on within LMSD. </p>

<p>1,000s</a> of Web cam images, suit says | Philadelphia Inquirer | 04/16/2010</p>

#2

<p>Wow. Can you imagine finding out that your kid's school was doing this? Kind of like the tv in 1984.</p>

#3

<p>This story has blown my mind since I first heard about it. I can't believe it hasn't gotten more attention nationally. Taking secret pictures of 15 year olds in their bedrooms, sometimes at least partially undressed? And then sharing the pictures? These people need to be prosecuted, not just sued.</p>

#4

<p>I recall the mud being slung at this kid and his family, even here on CC. Motives of the family aside, what the school board did could not have been more wrong. And then "giggling" about it in emails. Folks need to go to jail over this.</p>

#5

<p>No wonder Cafiero invoked the 5th. </p>

<p>
[quote]
Back at district offices, the Robbins motion says, employees with access to the images marveled at the tracking software. It was like a window into "a little LMSD soap opera," a staffer is quoted as saying in an e-mail to Carol Cafiero, the administrator running the program.</p>

<p>"I know, I love it," she is quoted as having replied.

[/quote]

Wow. just wow.</p>

#6

<p>It's such an awful story. If I were a taxpayer in that school district I would be so mad at the time, money and effort that was being spent on a totally non-necessary and non-essential activity not to even mention the apparent disregard for people's right to privacy. Clearly a district with too much money, too many administrators, and a total entitlement mentality. Yuck. I'm thrilled I don't live in that environment.</p>

#7

<p>The actual court filing (PDF link in the original article) has some interesting additional developments and information that contradict what LMSD had originally stated when this whole thing blew up:</p>

<p>
[quote]
spying technology was activated for a 15 day period from October 20th - November 4th 2009

[/quote]

This fact on it's own is quite damning. There's no possible excuse, none, that could justify this. Even if they thought conducting warrant-less covert surveillance for "laptop recovery" was legal there's no reason why you'd need to secretly photograph a kid in his home for half a month. This is just creepy. </p>

<p>
[quote]
there were numerous pictures of Blake [the plaintiff] and other members of his family, including pictures of Blake partially undressed

[/quote]

Given that these laptops were certainly spending a lot of time in kids' bedrooms everyone only suspected this, but now we know it's true. Sick sick sick. </p>

<p>
[quote]
there are additional webcam pictures and screen shots taken of Blake Robbins which, to date, have not been recovered because the evidence was purged by the IT department

[/quote]

You kind of have to wonder what was in those images they were so anxious to destroy. </p>

<p>
[quote]
recent testimony under oath has now confirmed that the activation of the LanRev technology to take pictures of Blake Robbins in his home was not in accordance with LMSD's own policies

[/quote]
</p>

<p>
[quote]
thousands of webcam pictures have been taken of students in their homes, many of which never reported their laptop lost or missing

[/quote]
</p>

<p>
[quote]
Carol Cafiero [one of the district officials], unlike any of the witnesses asked to testify, invokes the Fifth Amendment to every question asked of her, including a question asked as to whether she had ever downloaded pictures to her own personal computer, including pictures of students who were naked while in their home

[/quote]

I'm basically speechless here. It's interesting to note too that her lawyer was the one of the ones so fiercely trying to get this whole thing knocked down so Ms. Cafiero didn't have to be subjected to a deposition... and now she's pleading the fifth when asked if she has pics of these school kids on her home computer!?!?!?</p>

<p>This whole thing exposes an almost unconscionable level of corruption and incompetence within LMSD. Not only were there those that were conducting these sick activities, but there were others that knew it was going on (and in the case of the AP, those that allegedly used these images for official purposes other than "theft recovery"... let alone what others may have been secretly using images for) and seemingly did nothing to stop it until they got sued.</p>

#8

<p>I'm honestly shocked by this story and have been from the very beginning. To be honest, I thought it couldn't even be true and questioned, in my mind, the veracity of the charges. It is really inconcievable to me that something like this could be undertaken with or without taxpayer dollars. Entirely reprehensible. Two weeks????? Adults spying on teenagers in thier bedroom? This has got to be a crime. </p>

<p>What are they being charged with?</p>

#9

<p>
[quote]
What are they being charged with?

[/quote]
</p>

<p>The current proceeding is a civil case against the district alleging 4th amendment violations via warrant-less search by a government entity (the school). Given the most recent revelations it's difficult to see how the district can really have any viable defense whatsoever on these charges unless they somehow find a technicality to get off on. </p>

<p>However, a criminal investigation is also ongoing into the actions of specific school officials. On that front a lot of questions remain. </p>

<p>The district went from insisting that there was no wrongdoing to now having one of their own officials pleading the fifth. What potentially incriminating information does Carol Cafiero know that she doesn't want the court to know? That's what the investigation will have to uncover on its own.</p>

#10

<p>If a way to invade privacy exists, a bureaucrat somewhere will somehow rationalize its use in ways not originally intended. Britain is way 'ahead' of the US, if you want to see this problem live, but the monster that is DHS is quickly catching up.</p>

<p>Regarding this case specifically, a senior official from the school district had this to say on 4/13
[quote]
We are able to share tonight the following information:</p>

<ol>
<li>The investigation has uncovered no evidence of intentional misuse of the LANrev tracking feature.</li>
<li>The investigation has confirmed that there were fewer than 50 activations during the current school year that would have resulted in photos, IP address identification and the capture of a desktop screenshot.</li>
<li>Once activated, there is no way to manipulate LANRev to capture images in "real time" or video.</li>
<li>All relevant evidence has been turned over by the District and will continue to be shared with the FBI.

[/quote]
</li>
</ol>

#11

<p>This whole case is unbelievable, and one that should scare the living crap out of all of us.</p>

<p>These school employees need some jail time to ponder their misdeeds.</p>

#12

<p>The school district officials under the microscope had zero regard for the constitutional rights of the students and their families... but, at least one of them, is now expressing their constitutional right to avoid spilling the beans in regards to their secret monitoring program..</p>

<p>Oh the irony ;-).</p>

#13

<p>[Cafiero's lawyer on Thursday night disputed the suggestion that his client had downloaded any such photos to her home computer. Lawyer Charles Mandracchia said Cafiero had cooperated with federal investigators and was willing to let technicians hired by the district examine her computer if the judge so ordered.</p>

<p>He also said Robbins' attorney had never asked him for Cafiero's personal computer. "He's making this up because his case is falling apart," Mandracchia said.]</p>

<p>If his case is falling apart, then why is your client asserting her Fifth Amendment rights?</p>

#14

<p>Cafiero's lawyer isn't even making any sense. What he's saying essentially amounts to:</p>

<p>"My client is totally innocent and has done nothing wrong, but she can't answer any questions because it might show she's done something illegal. By the way, the case is falling apart--there's nothing to see here so move along please."</p>

#15

<p>This is the most outrageous abuse of power I've ever heard of. I'm recalling the long prison sentences handed down for those caught with child pornography - it seems to me that what they've done (regardless of the images captured) is at the very least an attempt at capturing nude photos of children with only harmful intentions because there simply is no reasonable explantion for what they've done. None. They handed out these "free" and "required" machines knowing full well what they were capable of and what they planned to do with that capability; that level of premeditation followed by implementation should equal some lengthy prison time. And all of the children involved should collect hefty sums in damages - enough to pay for the couch time they'll all need and their college educations. Obviously these kids are long overdue for some learning experiences delivered by ethical, qualified professionals - not pedophiles in training!</p>

#16

<p>School officials have now responded to the latest details and say they will begin the process of contacting the families of those children who had been subjected to covert surveillance: </p>

<p>
[quote]
The Lower Merion School District today acknowledged that investigators reviewing its controversial laptop tracking program have recovered "a substantial number of webcam photos" and that they expect to soon start notifying parents whose children were photographed.

[/quote]
</p>

<p>The school district continues to insist they, nor their officials, had sinister intentions but to be honest I don't think that counts for much at this stage. Regardless of why they did it, they still did it.</p>

<p>I wonder if any of the LMSD parents previously throwing mud on the plaintiff's family are going to be among those finding out--as a result of the suit--that the school had been taking pictures of their, potentially unclothed, child in their bedroom?</p>

#17

<p>Wow, I thought this case was awful before when it was supposedly just a "few" images . . . but this really takes the cake.</p>

#18

<p>It would be very gratifying to see the high and mighty practitioners of Zero Tolerance get a big dose of their own medicine. But I know that's not the way it works.</p>

#19

<p>No kidding, toblin. </p>

<p>These same school districts that expel a kid for carrying cuticle scissors or Motrin for Zero tolerance...it will be interesting to see how it is handled. Some administrator will gracefully resign/be let go (probably with a large severance package and nice recommendations to follow). </p>

<p>Not good enough. Not by any stretch. These were minors. It's like having a camera in the dressing room of the girls or boys gym without their knowledge.</p>

#20

<p>"They will begin the process of notifying the parents of families who have been under surveilance" </p>

<p>Has nobody been fired yet? Has nobody been arrested?</p>

<p>How long have they known about these photos. Oh man, I would be through the roof angry and I don't even get angry very often.</p>