It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.
Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.
Thank you.
Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.
originally posted by: BanTv
Are you telling me that when someone gets busted for illegal drugs, the state has to prove it is yours? That is absolutely not the case. A 13 year old girl had an illegal substance in her bag. That's what the offense is for, possession. They don't care if you say some bs like 'b-but I was holding it for a friend!'.
Are you also saying that pat down searches are illegal? This sounds like a pat down with one exception, they checked her bra as well. Just like they will make a male remove his shoes and socks. The school will not be sued for this, and the girl/s will have drug charges to deal with unless they can prove there is no marijuana in their system. That would prove that they don't smoke, and they might get off.
originally posted by: Sublimecraft
PEOPLE - IT WAS AN ILLEGAL SEARCH THAT VIOLATED HER RIGHTS.
PRECEDENT HAS BEEN SET ALREADY.......
and I quote from 2009 - US Supreme Court rules strip search violated 13-year old girls rights
And Savanna Redding was strip searched by 2 FEMALES
ILLEGAL.....PERIOD.
And......I won't charge legal fees this time.....it's on the house.
originally posted by: BanTv
Does anyone get an erection looking for secret compartments in a sweaty bra? She wasn't naked.
originally posted by: Puppylove
a reply to: BanTv
Innocent until proven guilty, if there is enough reason to bring things into a reasonable doubt, they damn well do have to. We're dealing with an illegal strip search and people without proper authority taking the bag off then bringing it back. Note that the bag was away from the girl was not disputed either. The case is not typical, there's too much controversy, as such, everything being suspect, much more scrutiny is necessary to prove the case.
As for having to prove the drugs are the persons, I definitely think that more scrutiny needs to be done, especially with the proven fact that some corrupt cops plant evidence. The possession is assumed, with little done to prove ownership is in my personal opinion unconstitutional as by law we are supposed to be innocent until proven guilty.
That more than one cop has been found to have planted evidence, means that all claimed possession by cops on that merit alone is not and should not be considered enough in my opinion. All more reasons all cops should be required to wear cameras that record all that happens at all times while on duty.
originally posted by: BanTv
The problem the girls have, is that they were in possession. The legal system doesn't really care why you had illegal drugs on you, unless maybe you can prove you were set-up. Which is why if they were set up, I'm sure they could get it dismissed with a hair follicle test. It would at least prove they don't use.
Also (to everyone): I'd just like to point out that I'm somewhat playing devils advocate. I don't think it's right for a student to be strip searched. My position is that maybe this story didn't happen the way it sounds. Surely they wouldn't be stupid enough to actually strip search some middle school girls. I'm thinking that at most, they made them take off their shirts and made sure no baggies fell out of their cleavage. Not to say that is great or anything, but I'm 100% convinced they weren't nude. I could be wrong though.
originally posted by: AdmireTheDistance
I smell a major lawsuit coming from this one...