US: Arrest of girl who texted in class prompts civil rights case

[Thaidream]

The girl and her family may make this a racial issue but it is not. It is about defiance. However, the policeman overreacted and should have never been called in to do the job of the teacher or the administrator. The police in America are trained poorly. Their job is to diffuse situations not add to the situation > If you cannot figure out how to handle a teenage student neither the teacher, administrator or policeman should remain in their job.

[ClutchClark]

The article states someone suggested this never happens to white kids.

Can someone tell me why white kids follow the rules and black kids are defiant?

Or was that not what the person quoted was suggesting?

White kids follow the rules and are never defiant??? What tiny isolated world do you live in?

Ed,

I didn't say that. It appeared the article said that and I was simply asking if I read that correctly.

But I really do appreciate the respectful way you asked ;-)

Edited October 28, 2015 by ClutchClark

[ClutchClark]

The girl and her family may make this a racial issue but it is not. It is about defiance. However, the policeman overreacted and should have never been called in to do the job of the teacher or the administrator. The police in America are trained poorly. Their job is to diffuse situations not add to the situation > If you cannot figure out how to handle a teenage student neither the teacher, administrator or policeman should remain in their job.

Should not remain in their job?

As in be fired?

I would think a reprimand and sensitivity training is sufficient rather than casting them out on the street.

Your answer sounds like quite an over reaction IMO.

[ClutchClark]

American police are way out of control, it was a girl he was throwing around.

To be honest, when I was growing up you knew better than to mouth off or defy the police.

I have zero sympathy for the girl but I do for the officer.

[fanof3d]

Sometimes you have to lose a battle to win a war.

Some years ago, I had a student who had always been one of the top students in the class. She went through a surly time (adolescents) and she was asked to stop doing something and said 'no'. I asked her to stand in the hallway and she said 'no.' I proceeded with the lesson for a few minutes and then asked all the students to stand, which they did, with the exception of her. I told them to line up in the hallway and then follow me. We went to the library, which was considered a treat. She was left sitting alone in the classroom (but within the view of one of the other teachers). I had a couple of other little run-ins with her before she finally got back on track and continued to be a fantastic student.

Boys usually grow up with a little better idea of the realities of what can happen to them when it comes to physical discipline and strength. Girls sometimes don't and when they misbehave they can be harder to deal with.

There are many, many options that could have been taken. As of right now this girl has won and the school has lost. Talk about shooting a fly with a shotgun.

Excellent example of how to peacefully turn the tables and prevent a negative situation while providing the other students a little treat.

[metisdead]

A flame post has been removed:

7) You will respect fellow members and post in a civil manner. No personal attacks, hateful or insulting towards other members, (flaming) Stalking of members on either the forum or via PM will not be allowed.

[MaeJoMTB]

Any adult in a classroom than needs to touch a student (who isn't endangering any other student) needs to be dismissed.

These are the rules in UK schools, you don't touch students.

It was never a problem for me or any other barely competent teacher.

And I've worked in the very worst council estate schools in the UK, with drug and violence problems.

The policeman shouldn't have been in the classroom.

It's not his job to control students, that's the teachers job.

If the teacher isn't up to the job, they call HoD, deputy Head, Headmaster.

Edited October 28, 2015 by MaeJoMTB

[ClutchClark]

Any adult in a classroom than needs to touch a student (who isn't endangering any other student) needs to be dismissed.

These are the rules in UK schools, you don't touch students.

It was never a problem for me or any other barely competent teacher.

And I've worked in the very worst council estate schools in the UK, with drug and violence problems.

Out of curiousity, did your schools have police officers assigned full-time?

Also, did you ever find a situation at your school that required you to request assistance from law enforcement?

[MaeJoMTB]

Any adult in a classroom than needs to touch a student (who isn't endangering any other student) needs to be dismissed.

These are the rules in UK schools, you don't touch students.

It was never a problem for me or any other barely competent teacher.

And I've worked in the very worst council estate schools in the UK, with drug and violence problems.

Out of curiousity, did your schools have police officers assigned full-time?

Also, did you ever find a situation at your school that required you to request assistance from law enforcement?

Never, and in the US the police are to stop guns and weapons coming in.

Never, HoD, Deputy Head, Headmaster.

Classroom management skills cover most classroom problems.

Outside the classroom, not my concern.

[ClutchClark]

The policeman shouldn't have been in the classroom.

It's not his job to control students, that's the teachers job.

If the teacher isn't up to the job, they call HoD, deputy Head, Headmaster.

The teacher did request the principal to address the situation.

The child was apparently behaving so irrationally that the principal then felt the necessity to request assistance from the school resource officer (the police officer).

[MaeJoMTB]

The policeman shouldn't have been in the classroom.

It's not his job to control students, that's the teachers job.

If the teacher isn't up to the job, they call HoD, deputy Head, Headmaster.

The teacher did request the principal to address the situation.

The child was apparently behaving so irrationally that the principal then felt the necessity to request assistance from the school resource officer (the police officer).

Any student sitting at their desk ain't that much of a problem.

The ones that are jumping on tables throwing chairs at other students (and me) are problems.

Then there's the ones climbing out of windows, then there's the under table crawlers ........

You wouldn't believe what happens.

Part of the art, is never start a confrontation, especially one you can't win.

Having an entire class sitting at their desks ....... good enough.

Edited October 28, 2015 by MaeJoMTB

[ClutchClark]

Any adult in a classroom than needs to touch a student (who isn't endangering any other student) needs to be dismissed.

These are the rules in UK schools, you don't touch students.

It was never a problem for me or any other barely competent teacher.

And I've worked in the very worst council estate schools in the UK, with drug and violence problems.

Out of curiousity, did your schools have police officers assigned full-time?

Also, did you ever find a situation at your school that required you to request assistance from law enforcement?

Never, and in the US the police are to stop guns and weapons coming in.

Never, HoD, Deputy Head, Headmaster.

Classroom management skills cover most classroom problems.

One of the responsibilities of a school resource officer is to stop weapons from being brought in the school. They are aslo tasked with keeping trespassers from entering the schools.

They are also tasked with stopping drug use or sales from taking place at the school.

The teacher and/or principal felt the situation required the SRO's presence and they had every right to do so.

As the article states, "Schools noe routinely summon police to discipline students" according to experts.

Unfortunately, it appears the SRO did not fully consider available options; however, I was not there and so I am not going to monday morning quarterback is such definitive terms as you have chosen to do.

The video provides helpful insight; however, it does not include the entire incident from the start and does not show the escalation.

But based on the actions taken by the SRO's supervisor, it would appear the officer acted outside of protocol...or maybe the superiors are scared to death of any white officer interaction with a black today because of the current frequency of riots tsking place around our country.

Thanks for the insight into your own experience.

Edited October 28, 2015 by ClutchClark

[lovelomsak]

Has anyone thought to ask

Why was the girl defiant?

I see it as just being trouble and I feel dealing with trouble head on is the way to curb it. Push buttons and get hurt.she got what she deserved being a woman or black has nothing to do with it. Push your luck things happen.

[whybother]

The policeman shouldn't have been in the classroom.

It's not his job to control students, that's the teachers job.

If the teacher isn't up to the job, they call HoD, deputy Head, Headmaster.

The teacher did request the principal to address the situation.

The child was apparently behaving so irrationally that the principal then felt the necessity to request assistance from the school resource officer (the police officer).

She looked completely irrational while she was sitting at her desk doing nothing.

[whybother]

The girl had her phone out for a second and didn't want to give it to the teacher. It hardly deserves being tackled to the floor by a police officer.

[ClutchClark]

The policeman shouldn't have been in the classroom.

It's not his job to control students, that's the teachers job.

If the teacher isn't up to the job, they call HoD, deputy Head, Headmaster.

The teacher did request the principal to address the situation.

The child was apparently behaving so irrationally that the principal then felt the necessity to request assistance from the school resource officer (the police officer).

She looked completely irrational while she was sitting at her desk doing nothing.

It could easily be argued that defying the directive of a teacher, a principal AND a police officer over something so simple is acting "irrationally".

Edited October 28, 2015 by ClutchClark

[Mosha]

The police should not be called for a school discipline matter, unless the safety of other students is at risk. An obstreperous student disobeying about a phone is not a police matter.

The administrator is a dork.

Teachers Unions in the UK campaigned against corporal punishment, Now teachers complain they have no control in the classroom, but can not see the connection.

[ross163103]

It's strange but every time I've had dealings with authority figures--including the police numerous times, I've cooperated and did what they told me and I was never drug across the floor, beaten up by them, tased, hit with batons, or got shot in the back trying to run away. I think a lot of these issues come down to our "me, me, me" society where everyone feels their rights are being violated, and they're entitled to everything. I know the policeman seemed overly forceful, but I can't help but think if she had done what numerous people told her how this would have turned out completely different. Why didn't she just stop playing with her phone?! Was the text message that important it had to be sent that second?! I think not. Once something like this happens people seem to lose sight of the original request and how this girl chose to indirectly escalate the situation through defiance. In life there are always going to be authority figures/rules we all have to follow, she needs to learn this before she ends up in bigger long term trouble.

But the policeman will probably lose his job and sleazy lawyers will file a multi million dollar civil suit against the cop, the teachers and the school....which will probably be settled out of court in the girls favor.....not a very good message for her.

And no, I'm not a cop and never have been, in fact I don't like cops that much but do realise the need for them, and laws, in order to have an orderly society.

[ggt]

The smart phone has done more to expose the evil of the police culture than any person ever could...many police are now acting petulant...not responding to calls where they might (place themselves in a sensitive position),...

The exposure of wrongdoing is absolutely necessary to change the culture of lying, planting evidence, and falsifying reports...which the police culture of cover-up has been doing for decades...

People are armed with cameras...police with guns and clubs...we need to level the playing field...

[Tywais]

I just watched the video and I find it just wrong on so many levels what he did.

[whybother]

The policeman shouldn't have been in the classroom.

It's not his job to control students, that's the teachers job.

If the teacher isn't up to the job, they call HoD, deputy Head, Headmaster.

The teacher did request the principal to address the situation.

The child was apparently behaving so irrationally that the principal then felt the necessity to request assistance from the school resource officer (the police officer).

She looked completely irrational while she was sitting at her desk doing nothing.

It could easily be argued that defying the directive of a teacher, a principal AND a police officer over something so simple is acting "irrationally".

Or acting childish? Scared about what was going to happen?

[inzman]

This incident shows the reality of how police react today vs the old days. Today's police resort to physical violence at a drop of a hat. They are vastly undertrained and ready to snap. This is the new reality. I'm glad I grew up in the 70s. Then police defused situations. Today they incite them.

[Mosha]

This incident shows the reality of how police react today vs the old days. Today's police resort to physical violence at a drop of a hat. They are vastly undertrained and ready to snap. This is the new reality. I'm glad I grew up in the 70s. Then police defused situations. Today they incite them.

In the UK 1960s the police woukd nit have been called.

[ClutchClark]

The teacher did request the principal to address the situation.

The child was apparently behaving so irrationally that the principal then felt the necessity to request assistance from the school resource officer (the police officer).

She looked completely irrational while she was sitting at her desk doing nothing.

It could easily be argued that defying the directive of a teacher, a principal AND a police officer over something so simple is acting "irrationally".

Or acting childish? Scared about what was going to happen?

Yes...it could be argued that way as well. There are various interpretations or conclusions possible about whether she was acting irrationally or not.

But your claim she was sitting there doing nothing was not entirely accurate--she was "doing" something, she was defying the rules of the class and the instructions of authority figures.

I am not saying that justifies the outcome so please do not put those words in my mouth. I am simply responding specifically to your specific claim that she was not irrational and was not doing anything.

Edited October 28, 2015 by ClutchClark

[ClutchClark]

This incident shows the reality of how police react today vs the old days. Today's police resort to physical violence at a drop of a hat. They are vastly undertrained and ready to snap. This is the new reality. I'm glad I grew up in the 70s. Then police defused situations. Today they incite them.

Actually the hours of training is significantly more than what was available in the 1960's.

There was almost zero formal classroom training in the 60's. There was field training. Formalized training came about as a response to lawsuits as well as to build a professional police force.

I would fully agree with your statement that officers back then used to "defuse" situations. No truer words were ever spoken.

Edited October 28, 2015 by ClutchClark

[whybother]

Yes...it could be argued that way as well. There are various interpretations or conclusions possible about whether she was acting irrationally or not.

But your claim she was sitting there doing nothing was not entirely accurate--she was "doing" something, she was defying the rules of the class and the instructions of authority figures.

I am not saying that justifies the outcome so please do not put those words in my mouth. I am simply responding specifically to your specific claim that she was not irrational and was not doing anything.

Nothing is exactly what she was doing.

She wasn't doing what she was told. She wasn't screaming and yelling. She wasn't a threat to anyone.

[ClutchClark]

Yes...it could be argued that way as well. There are various interpretations or conclusions possible about whether she was acting irrationally or not.

But your claim she was sitting there doing nothing was not entirely accurate--she was "doing" something, she was defying the rules of the class and the instructions of authority figures.

I am not saying that justifies the outcome so please do not put those words in my mouth. I am simply responding specifically to your specific claim that she was not irrational and was not doing anything.

Nothing is exactly what she was doing.

She wasn't doing what she was told. She wasn't screaming and yelling. She wasn't a threat to anyone.

You have just contradicted yourself.

You have said she was doing nothing AND she was not doing what she was told (which is doing something).

If you are instructed to follow a police command and you choose not to then you are actually "doing" something. You are not following a police order. I do understand what you are saying but its not accurate in the eyes of the law.

Again, I am not condoning the actions of the officer; however, I always prefer to see an entire video of events rather than a snapshot. Would you agree that a snapshot can be misleading?

[whybother]

Yes...it could be argued that way as well. There are various interpretations or conclusions possible about whether she was acting irrationally or not.

But your claim she was sitting there doing nothing was not entirely accurate--she was "doing" something, she was defying the rules of the class and the instructions of authority figures.

I am not saying that justifies the outcome so please do not put those words in my mouth. I am simply responding specifically to your specific claim that she was not irrational and was not doing anything.

Nothing is exactly what she was doing.

She wasn't doing what she was told. She wasn't screaming and yelling. She wasn't a threat to anyone.

You have just contradicted yourself.

You have said she was doing nothing AND she was not doing what she was told (which is doing something).

If you are instructed to follow a police command and you choose not to then you are actually "doing" something. You are not following a police order. I do understand what you are saying but its not accurate in the eyes of the law.

Again, I am not condoning the actions of the officer; however, I always prefer to see an entire video of events rather than a snapshot. Would you agree that a snapshot can be misleading?

No, you are contradicting yourself when you say "she was not doing" something. If "she is not doing" something, then she is doing nothing.

In no way am I saying she shouldn't have done what she was told. She should be punished for having her phone out. She should be punished for not doing what the teacher and administrator told her to do.

But the police shouldn't have been called into such a situation, and the police officer certainly shouldn't have dragged her to the floor.

I do agree that a snapshot can be misleading, but there has been an additional video released and reports from students. Everything I have seen so far indicates that the police officer's actions were WAY out of proportion to the situation.

[ClutchClark]

Yes...it could be argued that way as well. There are various interpretations or conclusions possible about whether she was acting irrationally or not.

But your claim she was sitting there doing nothing was not entirely accurate--she was "doing" something, she was defying the rules of the class and the instructions of authority figures.

I am not saying that justifies the outcome so please do not put those words in my mouth. I am simply responding specifically to your specific claim that she was not irrational and was not doing anything.

Nothing is exactly what she was doing.

She wasn't doing what she was told. She wasn't screaming and yelling. She wasn't a threat to anyone.

You have just contradicted yourself.

You have said she was doing nothing AND she was not doing what she was told (which is doing something).

If you are instructed to follow a police command and you choose not to then you are actually "doing" something. You are not following a police order. I do understand what you are saying but its not accurate in the eyes of the law.

Again, I am not condoning the actions of the officer; however, I always prefer to see an entire video of events rather than a snapshot. Would you agree that a snapshot can be misleading?

No, you are contradicting yourself when you say "she was not doing" something. If "she is not doing" something, then she is doing nothing.

Simple example:

Officer gives you an order: "Place your hands on the hood of the car".

Instead you do not move and do not comply with the officer's order--you do not place your hands on the hood of the car.

In this example, you are doing something even though you are not moving. You are refusing to foolow the police order.

That may seem contradictory to you but that is the way the law works. It is not me who wrote the law and it is not me who is being contradictory, I am simply explaining to you how the law works. If you think this is contradictory then your issue is with the law and not with me.

[JHolmesJr]

I wonder what might have happened if the officer had pnt touched her but just pulled her chair...slid it along the floor and got her out of the classroom that way.