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: ChesterJohn
If I'm not mistaken the security guards at Serrano junior high are off duty police and sheriff officers
originally posted by: Anyafaj
originally posted by: ChesterJohn
If I'm not mistaken the security guards at Serrano junior high are off duty police and sheriff officers
I honestly don't know, but if it's anything like past schools my daughter has attended, I'd say that's more than likely. And I would think off-duty can't write a ticket? Can they? As an off ticket officer? I would think you have to be on duty for that.
originally posted by: Anyafaj
originally posted by: skunkape23
I'm glad these were not my daughters.
There would be no lawsuit involved.
There would be blood.
From here as well. I'm on of those who can take a lot of crap, but mess with my kid and the Irish Hungarian comes out and you do NOT want to meet her!
originally posted by: Bigburgh
a reply to: Anyafaj
OK I'll play both ways here.. first off! That security guard is a perv! The guy should have notified the parents and local law.. ( local female cop ) to do the search...
What separates security vs. Real law enforcement is.... wait for it... use of coercive force.!
Next.. drugs were found. So thanks to a perverted twist of events. Two girls will walk free. ( personally I don't care if it was marijuana.. but they were to young to be in possession .. )
So now I look at the parents.. why was THAT OK?
But no seriously. What a perverted dumb@$$..
Edit: one of the girls had possession..
originally posted by: Bigburgh
Not in all cases. This guy was security.. not a sex act.. but still wrong. I went there
pittsburgh.cbslocal.com...
originally posted by: johnwick
Once they get the Irish up in you.....if is mothertruckin game the flock on!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
I would assist in the epic justice beatdown!!!!!!
These motherfathets need a good old fashioned country are whooping!!!!!
originally posted by: 3n19m470
a reply to: Bigburgh
Yeah but apparently the War on Drugs takes precedent over our young female's privacy, self respect, and their right to feel safe at school without the fear of being violated. Apparently they believe we must eliminate All illegal drugs By All Means Necessary. If they have to strip search teens, so be it.
originally posted by: Ameilia
originally posted by: Bigburgh
a reply to: Anyafaj
OK I'll play both ways here.. first off! That security guard is a perv! The guy should have notified the parents and local law.. ( local female cop ) to do the search...
What separates security vs. Real law enforcement is.... wait for it... use of coercive force.!
Next.. drugs were found. So thanks to a perverted twist of events. Two girls will walk free. ( personally I don't care if it was marijuana.. but they were to young to be in possession .. )
So now I look at the parents.. why was THAT OK?
But no seriously. What a perverted dumb@$$..
Edit: one of the girls had possession..
It does say in the OP that in an empty medicine bottle she had less than a gram. But it ALSO says that the girl refused to sign to sign anything admitting it was hers and that the bag was out of her possession for an unknown amount of time. Here is what I think about that.
1. What CHILD, after being sexually harassed (strip searched) and humiliated, is going to have the pretense of mind to deny it is hers AND refuse to sign, if it was really hers. I think refusing to sign shows mental fortitude and I'm surprised a female that young, having just been humiliated, would have the fortitude to do that - if she was in fact guilty. Therefore, I think she was probably not guilty.
2. These adults HAD TO KNOW they were wrong. So when they didn't find anything, it was planted to 'justify' if such a thing is even possible, their search. After all, why would the bag have been allowed out of her possession?
3. What kids that young wouldn't just say "OK it's in my bag" to avoid being STRIP SEARCHED? They would have confessed under threat of strip search to avoid it, had the pot been theirs.
originally posted by: 3n19m470
a reply to: c0gN1t1v3D1ss0nanC3
Well, if you read the full article, you'd know the girls were not lying. The school did not deny it. Instead they pointed out their search policy... which clearly contains provisions against intrusive searches!!
Dont you think they might also think to mention that certain aspects of the girls story Never happened if that were the case? They aren't even denying they did it!!