SC - Columbia - Sheriff Slams Female Student to Floor In Class

[Brightbird]

"The officer responded to the crime scene and upon arrival feared for his safety and the safety of the civilians in the room."

"Civilians were in imminent danger of missing 20 minutes of a taxpayer funded math lesson. The officer had no alternative but to neutralise the threat with a series of tactical take down manoeuvres."

 

[al66pine]

Both students were arrested for the misdemeanor Disturbing Schools which is an overly ambiguous SC law with legally undefined words like obnoxious in it....

^sbm Catching, sorry if covered since last night. Here is excerpt from SC law re Disturbing Schools*

"...person wilfully or unnecessarily (a) to interfere with or to disturb in any way or in any place the students or teachers of any school ... (b) to loiter about such school or college premises or (c) to act in an obnoxious manner thereon; or..."

On its face, seems somewhat vague. I wonder how these phrases have been further defined thru ct opinions.

Seeing vid before SRO was standing beside her desk would be enlightening to show the basis or lack of basis for arrests. JM2cts.



________________________________________________________________
(The Full Monty)
* SC statute, Sec. 16-17-420
"Disturbing schools; summary court jurisdiction.
(A) It shall be unlawful:

(1) for any person wilfully or unnecessarily (a) to interfere with or to disturb in any way or in any place the students or teachers of any school or college in this State, (b) to loiter about such school or college premises or (c) to act in an obnoxious manner thereon; or
(2) for any person to (a) enter upon any such school or college premises or (b) loiter around the premises, except on business, without the permission of the principal or president in charge.

(B) Any person violating any of the provisions of this section shall be guilty of a misdemeanor and, on conviction thereof, shall pay a fine of not more than one thousand dollars or be imprisoned in the county jail for not more than ninety days.

(C) The summary courts are vested with jurisdiction to hear and dispose of cases involving a violation of this section. If the person is a child as defined by Section 63-19-20, jurisdiction must remain vested in the Family Court.

HISTORY: 1962 Code Section 16-551; 1952 Code Section 16-551; 1942 Code Section 1129; 1932 Code Section 1129; Cr. C. '22 Section 28; 1919 (31) 239; 1968 (55) 2308; 1972 (57) 2620; 2010 Act No. 273, Section 12, eff June 2, 2010.

^ http://www.scstatehouse.gov/code/t16c017.php

From the legislative history notes, some version of this statute has been in force for many yrs.

 

[Hope4More]

I honestly can not comprehend this parenting style where a child is expected to never question anything and comply with all commands. How is that productive to learning or growing or being an adult?

I honestly think a lot of this is parents being so wrapped up in their off-spring that any thing that child does is a reflection on them and it "embarrasses" them when the child isn't perfect. So they micromanage every part of that child's life.
It also is partially because these parents can never admit they are wrong and especially not to

 

[nomoresorrow]

I've taught my 13 year son to question authority. He's allowed to argue with me and his dad about many things. But, he is NOT allowed to talk back to his teachers or disobey them, nor to break rules he doesn't agree with.

He's written petitions and asked his classmates to sign them when he's strongly disagreed with this or that rule, and he's spoken directly to teachers after class when he felt he was treated unfairly.

It is called being respectful, IMO, and aware of the rights of everyone else in the class, not just his own.

Great! However, this young lady is not your son and her life circumstances are entirely different. She no longer has parents, was recently placed in foster care, and entered a new school system. This young lady needed care and support - not physical brutality!

 

[EllieBee]

True. Look what happened to the student who stepped up.

That'll learn her to speak up for people being abused.

Thread after thread on WS is about "OMG, how could people see this happen and not call LE?".

There's your answer. "Shut up or you'll go to jail, too".

 

[EllieBee]

I've taught my 13 year son to question authority. He's allowed to argue with me and his dad about many things. But, he is NOT allowed to talk back to his teachers or disobey them, nor to break rules he doesn't agree with.

He's written petitions and asked his classmates to sign them when he's strongly disagreed with this or that rule, and he's spoken directly to teachers after class when he felt he was treated unfairly.

It is called being respectful, IMO, and aware of the rights of everyone else in the class, not just his own.

Abd if that teacher asked him to engage in some activity that ran counter to his moral compass or endangered his safety? Just suck it up and do what the teacher says?

Interesting. And worrisome.

 

[vestigare]

I've taught my 13 year son to question authority. He's allowed to argue with me and his dad about many things. But, he is NOT allowed to talk back to his teachers or disobey them, nor to break rules he doesn't agree with.

He's written petitions and asked his classmates to sign them when he's strongly disagreed with this or that rule, and he's spoken directly to teachers after class when he felt he was treated unfairly.

It is called being respectful, IMO, and aware of the rights of everyone else in the class, not just his own.

Civil disobedience is a revered part of American History and Culture. Well...it was, not sure anymore.

 

[Hope4More]

Great! However, this young lady is not your son and her life circumstances are entirely different. She no longer has parents, was recently placed in foster care, and entered a new school system.

 

[Hope4More]

Abd if that teacher asked him to engage in some activity that ran counter to his moral compass or endangered his safety? Just suck it up and do what the teacher says?

Interesting. And worrisome.[/QUOT

 

[Sulamith]

I've taught my 13 year son to question authority. He's allowed to argue with me and his dad about many things. But, he is NOT allowed to talk back to his teachers or disobey them, nor to break rules he doesn't agree with.

He's written petitions and asked his classmates to sign them when he's strongly disagreed with this or that rule, and he's spoken directly to teachers after class when he felt he was treated unfairly.

It is called being respectful, IMO, and aware of the rights of everyone else in the class, not just his own.

For your son's sake I hope he never runs in to an authority figure like Pamela Smart.

 

[Hope4More]

For your son's sake I hope he never runs in to an authority figure like Pamela Smart.

OMG, what a truly horrible thing to say. I'm beyond sorry I visited this thread at all.

 

[bluesneakers]

Well sure, about not needing or deserving physical brutality. Already said that. And sure about needing care and support. And the teacher should have handled it better from the get go. Already said that.

But, sorry. She had no right to disturb the entire class, nor to disobey her teacher and principal. Nope.

What she did happens multiple times every day in classrooms all across the country. I can't believe what a huge deal it's turned in to, as if her actions have anything to do with the story. I also can't believe how many people are so meek they never dared question or disobey a teacher, or how anyone can positively say "Not MY kid!" She wasn't selling drugs or waving a gun around. She wasn't harassing other students. The drama her moment of defiance has created is mind-blowing to me.

This was really not a big deal until the SRO turned it into one.

JMO.

 

[vestigare]

Hope4more,
Why are your posts edited when I go to reply?
Anyway to answer you post about her not being permitted to disrupt class.
From everything we have been told there is no indication she disrupted the class at all.
It appears from what every one has said including the Sheriff that the teacher is the one who did the disrupting.

 

[vestigare]

What she did happens multiple times every day in classrooms all across the country. I can't believe what a huge deal it's turned in to, as if her actions have anything to do with the story. I also can't believe how many people are so meek they never dared question or disobey a teacher, or how anyone can positively say "Not MY kid!" She wasn't selling drugs or waving a gun around. She wasn't harassing other students. The drama her moment of defiance has created is mind-blowing to me.

This was really not a big deal until the SRO turned it into one.

JMO.

Until the Teacher turned it into a contest of wills and obviously lost, so had to call in an admin who obviously lost, and had to call in the RO who obviously lost.

 

[nomoresorrow]

"Originally Posted by Hope4More View Post
Well sure, about not needing or deserving physical brutality. Already said that. And sure about needing care and support. And the teacher should have handled it better from the get go. Already said that.

But, sorry. She had no right to disturb the entire class, nor to disobey her teacher and principal. Nope."

I guess what amazes me is how, because she's a teen, this is being treated as if she committed an unspeakable crime. And, as far as the "She had no right..." argument; that does not absolve any ADULT or OFFICER OF THE LAW from their obligations and duty to act appropriately, professionally, and lawfully.

MO ~

 

[JeannaT]

Hope4more,
Why are your posts edited when I go to reply?
Anyway to answer you post about her not being permitted to disrupt class.
From everything we have been told there is no indication she disrupted the class at all.
It appears from what every one has said including the Sheriff that the teacher is the one who did the disrupting.

The sheriff, in the PC said she had a prolonged period of disrupting the class. It was in the first 2 minutes or so of the PC. She was disruptive, in an ongoing way, and continued to be disrespectful. She wasn't sitting there quietly saying oh sorry.

 

[vestigare]

"Originally Posted by Hope4More View Post
Well sure, about not needing or deserving physical brutality. Already said that. And sure about needing care and support. And the teacher should have handled it better from the get go. Already said that.

But, sorry. She had no right to disturb the entire class, nor to disobey her teacher and principal. Nope."

I guess what amazes me is how, because she's a teen, this is being treated as if she committed an unspeakable crime. And, as far as the "She had no right..." argument; that does not absolve any ADULT or OFFICER OF THE LAW from their obligations and duty to act appropriately, professionally, and lawfully.

MO ~

Thank you for bringing that forward. When I went to reply the post had been edited.
I agree with you.

I have to say I am sick of the "rights" angle.
Cops have the "right" to do this.
People have no "right" to do that.
It is IMO an attempt to minimize the rights we do have.

People seem to not understand what a RIGHT actually is.

I just can not get anyone to explain to me in any legal or common sense way she should have ever been removed from the class for what she was doing.

This is a public school. She is required to be there, however, people think she can just be removed for something so innocuous as dissing a teacher because she wasn't staring at her laptop?

Every child should feel empowered to say "hold up teach, how does this make sense?"

 

[BayouBelle_LA]

How so?

eta: Or are you making a joke?

I'm not making a joke. But I have to wonder if you are. I wouldn't have to explain the obvious to a critical thinker.

 

[vestigare]

The sheriff, in the PC said she had a prolonged period of disrupting the class. It was in the first 2 minutes or so of the PC. She was disruptive, in an ongoing way, and continued to be disrespectful. She wasn't sitting there quietly saying oh sorry.

Did you read the transcript I provided ? He did not say that.'
Every student interviewed has said she was not talking or saying anything other than to answer the teacher that she would not hand over her phone and would not leave the class.

The disruption started after the teacher made a ludicrous request.

 

[JeannaT]

"Originally Posted by Hope4More View Post
Well sure, about not needing or deserving physical brutality. Already said that. And sure about needing care and support. And the teacher should have handled it better from the get go. Already said that.

But, sorry. She had no right to disturb the entire class, nor to disobey her teacher and principal. Nope."

I guess what amazes me is how, because she's a teen, this is being treated as if she committed an unspeakable crime. And, as far as the "She had no right..." argument; that does not absolve any ADULT or OFFICER OF THE LAW from their obligations and duty to act appropriately, professionally, and lawfully.

MO ~

There are two things here. I don't know why this has to always be treated as one thing - like, you have to find either the girl or the RO guilty.

They're both guilty. That girl's behavior was not appropriate for a public school setting, and she needed to be removed for her behavior. You can't allow that to go unpunished/unresolved in a classroom or it would be bedlam by the end of the school day.

The RO was also very wrong. He was right to attempt to remove her, as was his job, but wrong in how he carried out that effort and now he's been fired.

There is more than one thing here. We aren't required to find one of the other at fault. Both are. The RO's completely unacceptable behavior in removing her doesn't wipe clean her completely inappropriate behavior in class, that still needs to be addressed if she is to return to public school classes. That behavior is intolerable.