>> Home       Subscriber Services   |  e-Edition   |  Vacation Stop & Start   |  Pay Your Bill   |  Delivery Questions/Concerns   |   GET 2 WEEKS FREE!
Corvallis Gazette Times

Web Search
powered by YAHOO! SEARCH

55°F
Right now in Corvallis
  ARCHIVES Print this story  |  Email this story  |  Last modified: Wednesday, May 7, 2008 11:10 PM PDT   RSS  Add to My Yahoo!
Browse articles that have been published online at Gazettetimes.com. You can browse the last 14 days or click below to perform an advanced archive search going further back.
Cell phone search sparks complaint

West Albany High mom says students’ rights were violated

By Jennifer Moody

For the Gazette-Times

ALBANY — A West Albany High School parent is asking for a new policy on cell phones following an incident last week in which at least three students’ phones were searched for evidence of pornography.

Police and school officials confirmed the incident but said officers did the searching, not administrators, and no phones were searched without the consent of the owners. No pornography was found and no charges filed.

The incident occurred April 29. Parent Blanca Ruckert said she learned of it after friends of her son, a student at West, began contacting him to warn him to delete a nude picture of a fellow West student.

The student, a girl under the age of 18, allegedly had taken a photo of herself at home after school hours and forwarded it to at least one other person’s phone. It was not known how many people received or sent copies of the photo.

Ruckert said her son hadn’t received a copy and was not called in for questioning. But several of his friends were, she said, and she was outraged to learn that their phones had been searched, even by an officer.

“I totally disagree with this school action,” Ruckert wrote in her complaint to Principal Susie Orsborn. “It is a violation of students’ civil rights to privacy, unreasonable search and seizure and probably even our own state’s wiretapping laws.”

The boys involved may very well have consented, Ruckert said, but she doubts it was willingly. “They were just scared,” she said.

Officer Jed Wilson, West’s school resource officer, said he was at the school when administrators learned of the photo, from a teacher who said she overheard students talking about it. The teacher told an assistant principal because of concerns about possible distribution of child pornography.

Wilson said he talked with three students, two of whom volunteered their phones to show him they were not storing the photo. He asked the third if he could look at his phone and the boy said yes.

Had the students declined to let him see the phones, Wilson said he likely would have asked them why, but nothing further would have happened. A warrant is necessary to search a phone’s contents without consent, he said, and the investigation did not indicate that was necessary.

Wilson said he knows administrators continued to talk with students after he left but does not know if more phones were seen. Jim Haggart, executive assistant to the superintendent, said according to West officials, only Wilson searched the phones.

Ruckert said she has no problem with schools prohibiting phone use during school hours, or with confiscating phones if students break this rule.

However, she said, “I want to see a policy that says when and under what conditions are they authorized to look at text messages or pictures.”

She also wants the incident used to remind teens that any digital image takes on a life of its own as soon as it enters cyberspace, where it remains accessible by anyone for years to come and could be used for criminal purposes.

Wilson, the officer, said he tried to impress a similar message on the boys who reportedly had the photo.

“All the kids that I talked to — I can only assume the district did the same — I told, hey, look, you’re walking a fine line of having some very substantial charges, such as distributing child pornography, coming your way,” he said. “It could go that way very easily with some slight changes to the situation.”

   GT Reader Comments
The comments below are from readers of gazettetimes.com and in no way represent the views of the Gazette Times or Lee Enterprises.

Carmine wrote on May 8, 2008 7:58 AM:

" This should be a reminder to all parents of their parental and legal responsibility concerning their child's actions. You provide and pay for these cellphones and can be held liable along with your child if they use them to cause harm to others.

In this technological world, parents need to educate and monitor their children's activities on computers and cellphones, not only for their safety, but others as well.

"

Oregonian wrote on May 8, 2008 10:30 AM:

" In this... world, parents need to educate...their children... on their constitutional rights and let them know you'll stand up for them when they stand up for themselves. If they gave consent, it's too late to argue about it, if parents feel strongly about this they should make sure their children know it's ok to say "no" to a police officer. "

N Albany Resident wrote on May 9, 2008 2:06 PM:

" I'm glad to see that the police are finally making a difference in our schools by interrogating our children on cell phone use and dirty pictures, but they don't go far enough. We also need to make very clear to our children, as Officer Wilson said, that sending revealing photos of themselves to their friends, who in turn send those to others IS child pornography (afterall these children-almost-adults are still under 18) and can be dealt with harshly by the police and DA. In addition, it is imperative that they realize that if arrested and charged with child pornography, they will in all likelihood be required to register as sex offenders...possibly for life. We also don't do a good job of informing our children under 18 that having sex with other kids-almost-adults under 18 is also against the law and can bring charges of Rape 1. Heavy petting where privates are also touched falls into this category....yes, rape (I'm sure no one reading this ever did these things growing up). If charged and convicted, this is a Measure 11 crime punishable by up to 6 years, 3 months in prison and lifetime sex offender registration (yes, even mutual adolescent exploration is a crime in Oregon with very severe consequences). This paper would do a great service if they provided an expose' on this topic to keep families and kids informed of the horrible consequences of teenage sexuality (besides the normal pregnancy, disease sort of thing) that would befall them if found and caught by the good police and DA's of Oregon. "

*Member ID:
*Password:
Remember login?
(requires cookies)
 
You must be logged
in to comment.

Sign Up Now