Parents furious after middle school strip searches teenage girls

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.

a reply to: Sublimecraft

Thank you!

Just protest outside his house branding him a paedophile. You can guarantee he will quit his job, move house, and live in shame.


He done the deed, he can pay the price.

He damaged his own name, let him live with it.

Everywhere he goes, make it publicly known. That is one sure way to prevent others from doing "their job".

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: 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.

I think a bra is very different from shoes and socks.

Do you get an erection when looking at shoes and socks? Maybe in Saudi Arabia *shrugs*

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: 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.

Yeah because they were looking for advil

"Francisco M. Negrón Jr., general counsel for the National School Boards Association, said he was glad the court recognized that the school officials had acted "in good faith." But he said the decision did not provide clear guidelines about how specific the accusation must be, or how dangerous the alleged drugs, before school officials employ such an intrusive search"

Any proof that this case 100% violates that ruling?

Whilst this is completely wrong, my beef would not be with the Security Guard - it would be with the school authorities.

I don't actually understand all these reactions on this thread against the security guard. If the US is anything like over here, the Security Guard will be on minimum pay and simply doing what he is told by his employers. Yes, he could have refused but then he could also quite simply have lost his job. Whilst his actions weren't correct, he was simply following orders from his employers.

The school on the other hand have absolutely no excuse. Aside from anything else, they should be perfectly aware of the legal protection of children.

Does anyone get an erection looking for secret compartments in a sweaty bra? She wasn't naked.

originally posted by: BanTv
Does anyone get an erection looking for secret compartments in a sweaty bra? She wasn't naked.

Number 1 mistake here was a MALE searching a FEMALE, even the dumbest of the dumbest Swiss mountain goat up the Alps knows this. They walked right into a million dollar lawsuit and shame.

Well, that's quite a big budget cut for a few years for that school. Rather, the tax payer, YOU get to PAY for THEIR mistakes.

Enjoy paying them from your taxes.

Good to know where your money is going isn't it.

a reply to: bullcat

Better my money go to this than into the hands of some fat over paid politician for a six course meal, 1st class seats to Hawaii, and a luxery car to drive around in while there. That might just be my opinion though.

As long as those who offended are likewise prosecuted, in my opinion, as long as justice is done, that's what my money went towards.

If those who offended get to walk away scott free, and nothing happens to them, AND we pay more in taxes to pay the family off, then I'd have a problem.

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.

"Wilson-Pringle (the mother) said that the bag was unattended for some time PRIOR to the *accusation* and denies that the bottles belonged to her daughter."

Prior to the accusation. "But mom! I didn't even have my bag all morning! Someone set me up!" Of course she said that, and of course mommy believes her.

This is pretty simple, what happened is felony sexual assault on a minor. Assuming the story is accurate, both of the adults involved should be arrested immediately.

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.

Well, when their ILLEGAL STRIP SEARCH gets thrown out what will they have then? What makes you think this strip search DID NOT happen?? Did you read the link in the OP? Why would the mother lie? There were witnesses to the search, including the girls, the principal and the (sick) man who performed it.

You'd think the security guard would've said "Oh hell no! I am not doing that!!" but, he went ahead and did it anyway. If they were really that concerned about drugs then they should have called in the actual LEO's and a dog. They went about this ALL wrong, especially by not informing the parents of what was suspected BEFORE any search or questioning occurred.

Another pro LEO apologist thinking it is A-OK to strip search, threaten and harass young teen agers. This type of thinking is what is so wrong with out society and why nothing will change...

a reply to: BanTv

I think this is just wrong on so many levels. And the people that support the efforts of this vp and guard are just stupid. The law only works when it's followed by the law procedures. Which this was not. So don't even try defending the perverted people. If you support this. It just goes to show that you think people can be above the law when that's not right.

Bantv I hope your wife or kids or even you get illegally strip search and drugs planted on you so you would know the true pain of these individuals. And stop scrutinizing these girls.

a reply to: BanTv

And if you had read the article post in the op. The bras were removed prior to the breast shake. So just saying .......

a reply to: KuzKuz

I can see hoping for him to experience, but his wife or kids? What makes you think they deserve such a life lesson?

Even hoping he experiences it is a bit much. I'd rather hope he just reconsider things and get some sympathy for the other side. I don't really hope harm for anyone... Especially not something so life altering as that could be.

His opinions on this situation are hardly worth what might come out of him running into a corrupt cop that has a bug up their butt, and plants evidence so they can have a free pass to harm him and lock him up or something. Losing his job, or potentially getting jail time or losing his family from the drama.

Even worse someone innocent from his opinion, his kids or wife... None of this is justice.

a reply to: Puppylove

Actually here on earth a lot of people, such as evil elites and crime lords, get away with crimes all the time.

People here are programmed from cradle to grave to lose their love, and to be harsh and punitive and demonic like the elite are, to be fit only for hell zones.

However, when it comes to real punishment, our own conscience, Spirit and Soul, hold us back. Arrange more lessons.

So for example, if what occurred was sexually tinged abuse, as it appears to be, a person's own conscience makes them learn that lesson at a later date.

We're dealing with shadows here and trying to purge them and what isn't dealt with is still something that gets dealt with.

As for basic laws that Serve and Protect, especially our youth, they are not to be violated for any reason.

originally posted by: AdmireTheDistance
I smell a major lawsuit coming from this one...

i hope they sue the pants of that perverted vice principal! might be a good idea to search his computer too! what a pervert.

a reply to: Puppylove

You know what puppylove I totally agree. Sorry I lost my cool. Is family shouldn't have to pay for his stupidity only him.