<p>"The picture that investigators from the office of District Attorney George P. Skumanick of Wyoming County had was taken two years earlier at a slumber party. It showed Marissa and a friend from the waist up. Both were wearing bras. </p>
<p>Mr. Skumanick said he considered the photo “provocative” enough to tell Marissa and the friend, Grace Kelly, that if they did not attend a 10-hour class dealing with pornography and sexual violence, he was considering filing a charge of sexual abuse of a minor against both girls. If convicted, they could serve time in prison and would probably have to register as sex offenders. "</p>
<p>A different cup of tea from being the recipient of unwanted and unsolicited nude photos. </p>
<p>Interesting question about the 4th amendment rights regarding cellular phones. I know that our local middle school discovered who had vandalized the school by examining a phone that had been confiscated for other reasons. Legal search?</p>
<p>ellemenope, I think schools are covered by “in loco parentis”. At least they are for locker and backpack searches, I suspect phones fall under the same umbrella. I know our hs says that they will often try to investigate suspicious things themselves before bringing in the police, because the school authorities have more leeway than the police do. Police need probable cause to search a backpack or locker, school authorities don’t.</p>
<p>No, public schools are not covered by “in loco parentis.” I’m not an attorney, nor do I play one on TV, but I do know:</p>
<p>1.) Students do not have full 4th amendment protections in public schools</p>
<p>2.) Students do have some 4th amendment protections in public schools</p>
<p>Locker searches are okay IF the school lets students know that lockers are school property and there is NO expectation of privacy. Backpacks, purses, and pockets CANNOT be searched on a whim; there must be a legitimate reason (“reasonable suspicion”) to violate the student’s privacy to search them. This reason does not have to meet the higher standards of probably cause.</p>
<p>I don’t know whether there are existing decisions about students’ cell phones yet – I’m betting not – but from what I’ve read online, I think a search of a student’s cell phone confiscated solely because the student had it in school and shouldn’t have is likely a violation of that student’s 4th amendment rights.</p>
<p>See New Jersey vs. T.L.O. for more info (readily Googleable).</p>
<p>1) shouldn’t there be a statute of limitation here?
2) I’m not sure what the law qualifies as pornographic, but I don’t think those pictures should qualify/
3) Cellphones and the information they contain are akin to purses in that there needs to be a reasonable suspicion of wrongdoing to justify search.<br>
“I know that our local middle school discovered who had vandalized the school by examining a phone that had been confiscated for other reasons. Legal search?”
No, not the way you put it. If there had been some suspicion of serious wrongdoing in which the phone was involved in the commission of the act or contains documentation of it (like it’s a ‘crime scene’ almost), searches should be illegal.
Lockers are school property. They can be searched. Backpacks can contain dangerous contraband. If there is reasonable suspicion or special circumstances (school does backpack searches at the front door for security reasons), they can be searched. Otherwise, no.</p>
<p>Isn’t this somewhat akin to blaming the victim? What about the person who took the picture of the girls (assuming it wasn’t them holding the phone at arm’s length)? They weren’t even naked. How is that different from them being photographed in a swimsuit? Who sent the photo to the recipient on whose phone it was found? </p>
<p>Also, if the girls are 15 now, that means they were about 13 when the photo was taken. Talk about overkill. The parents are right to sue the DA and I hope they win big time.</p>
<p>One of my friends’ older brothers is the attorney arguing this case before the Supreme Court. Though he isn’t identified by name the “board attorney’s” words are his.</p>