Girl, 12, 'interrogated' by school staff until she gives up Facebook password

[Jack]

Well what if a child says, I hate so and so I wish I could put a bullet between their eyes? or I just might blow their head off one day?

Then it becomes a crime and gets reported to the police who can get a warrant for FB to supply the contents. The school would not need to be involved in the investigation.

 

[legalmania]

Then it becomes a crime and gets reported to the police who can get a warrant for FB to supply the contents. The school would not need to be involved in the investigation.

If they have probable cause they don't need a warrant to arrest or to search. An officer was present at the time and the school claims when all the facts of the case are out that it will be found their actions were appropriate.

http://dictionary.law.com/Default.aspx?selected=1618

 

[Kat]

I thought this was an interesting article. It's about a man that was job hunting and at the interview he was asked to hand over his user name and password for his facebook account because it was set to private.

He withdrew his application.

http://www.hawaiinewsnow.com/story/17196850/job-seekers-getting-asked-for-facebook-passwords

Other instances are outlined in the article.

 

[AnaTeresa]

I'd have no problem lying in an interview and saying I don't have a Facebook profile. After all, my posts and profile are only visible to friends anyway.

Unfortunately, Facebook broadcasts the existence of my profile, so it turns up in a simple google search.

Certainly, tiredblondy is correct that seeing my profile might be useful to anyone wanting info about me. But the same may be said of my ATM code, a camera in my bedroom, or, hell, a letter I write to my sister: all would provide info about my character, but that doesn't mean an employer is entitled to that info.

You can turn that off under privacy settings, Nova.

 

[i.b.nora]

Another school district, another state:

Teacher banned students from school trip if they badmouthed her on Facebook

"Spanish teacher Angelica Cruikshank, 33, faces being fired from a Florida school after she allegedly checked the private accounts and then banned several students from a school trip to a museum. She allegedly forced students to log onto their Facebook accounts on her personal mobile and put their pages up on projectors."

"In a termination later superintendent Heather Fiorentino described the incident that followed Cruikshank learning some students had made negative remarks about her on a Facebook page she could not access.

'This situation is very troubling to me,' superintendent Fiorentino wrote."

'You seem unaware of student privacy concerns and used extremely poor judgment in taking the steps you took to address these concerns.'"

much much more . . .

 

[hambirg]

If they have probable cause they don't need a warrant to arrest or to search. An officer was present at the time and the school claims when all the facts of the case are out that it will be found their actions were appropriate.

http://dictionary.law.com/Default.aspx?selected=1618

They do need a warrant. Private messages in FB are not in plain sight nor would this situation fall under emergency exceptions.

 

[Nova]

You can turn that off under privacy settings, Nova.

Thank you, AnaTeresa. I'm off to do so.

 

[legalmania]

They do need a warrant. Private messages in FB are not in plain sight nor would this situation fall under emergency exceptions.

We don't know what was said on FB, so nobody knows why this officer felt he had the right to access her account. We do know she had two detentions for previous FB posts. It will be up to the court to decide whether her first and fourth amendment rights very violated.

 

[kgeaux]

We don't know what was said on FB, so nobody knows why this officer felt he had the right to access her account. We do know she had two detentions for previous FB posts. It will be up to the court to decide whether her first and fourth amendment rights very violated.

We don't even know why the officer was there. Maybe he was called in, and maybe he is assigned to the school. Do we even know if the officer did the interrogating?

 

[legalmania]

We don't even know why the officer was there. Maybe he was called in, and maybe he is assigned to the school. Do we even know if the officer did the interrogating?

No we only know one side of the story that is the side of the girl through the ACLU. Until I hear both sides then I can have a better idea of what went on.

 

[LinasK]

Facebook has spoken out against businesses that demand Facebook usernames and passwords from their employees and prospective hires.
“In recent months, we’ve seen a distressing increase in reports of employers or others seeking to gain inappropriate access to people’s Facebook profiles or private information. This practice undermines the privacy expectations and the security of both the user and the user’s friends. It also potentially exposes the employer who seeks this access to unanticipated legal liability,” Facebook chief privacy officer Erin Egan writes in a Friday blog post.
“If you are a Facebook user, you should never have to share your password, let anyone access your account, or do anything that might jeopardize the security of your account or violate the privacy of your friends.”
Reports of such practices are widespread. In June 2009, the city of Bozeman, Montana made headlines when it was revealed that its job applications forms asked for usernames and passwords for the job seekers accounts on “social networking,” including everything from Facebook and Twitter to YouTube and Google. Earlier this year, the American Civil Liberties Union took aim at the Maryland Department of Corrections after it asked a Maryland man for his Facebook credentials during a recertification interview. And just this week, the Calgary Herald reported on a similar incident in Canada.
A day before this report, US Senator Richard Blumenthal told Politico that such requests are an “unreasonable invasion of privacy” and that they should be prohibited in the business world, much like lie detector tests.
In her blog post, Facebook’s Egan went on to say that Facebook would take action to protect the privacy and security of its users by engaging policymakers or “initiating legal action, including by shutting down applications that abuse their privileges.” more at link: http://www.wired.com/wiredenterprise/2012/03/facebook-password-employers/

 

[legalmania]

Facebook has spoken out against businesses that demand Facebook usernames and passwords from their employees and prospective hires.
“In recent months, we’ve seen a distressing increase in reports of employers or others seeking to gain inappropriate access to people’s Facebook profiles or private information. This practice undermines the privacy expectations and the security of both the user and the user’s friends. It also potentially exposes the employer who seeks this access to unanticipated legal liability,” Facebook chief privacy officer Erin Egan writes in a Friday blog post.
“If you are a Facebook user, you should never have to share your password, let anyone access your account, or do anything that might jeopardize the security of your account or violate the privacy of your friends.”
Reports of such practices are widespread. In June 2009, the city of Bozeman, Montana made headlines when it was revealed that its job applications forms asked for usernames and passwords for the job seekers accounts on “social networking,” including everything from Facebook and Twitter to YouTube and Google. Earlier this year, the American Civil Liberties Union took aim at the Maryland Department of Corrections after it asked a Maryland man for his Facebook credentials during a recertification interview. And just this week, the Calgary Herald reported on a similar incident in Canada.
A day before this report, US Senator Richard Blumenthal told Politico that such requests are an “unreasonable invasion of privacy” and that they should be prohibited in the business world, much like lie detector tests.
In her blog post, Facebook’s Egan went on to say that Facebook would take action to protect the privacy and security of its users by engaging policymakers or “initiating legal action, including by shutting down applications that abuse their privileges.” more at link: http://www.wired.com/wiredenterprise/2012/03/facebook-password-employers/

Oh this coming from people who have hacked into peoples private accounts for the government. Lets see if it really comes down to the nitty gritty if they stick to their guns.

Criticism of Facebook - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Government authorities rely on Facebook to investigate crimes and obtain evidence to help establish a crime, provide location information, establish motives, prove and disprove alibis, and reveal communications.[18] Federal, state, and local investigations have not been restricted to profiles that are publicly available or willingly provided to the government; Facebook has willingly provided information in response to government subpoenas or requests, except with regard to private, unopened inbox messages less than 181 days old, which require a warrant and a finding of probable cause under federal law.[19] An article by Junichi Semitsu published in the Pace Law Review, reports that "even when the government lacks reasonable suspicion of criminal activity and the user opts for the strictest privacy controls, Facebook users still cannot expect federal law to stop their 'private' content and communications from being used against them. "[19] Facebook's privacy policy states that "We may also share information when we have a good faith belief it is necessary to prevent fraud or other illegal activity, to prevent imminent bodily harm, or to protect ourselves and you from people violating our Statement of Rights and Responsibilities. This may include sharing information with other companies, lawyers, courts or other government entities."[19] Since Congress has failed to meaningfully amend the Electronic Communications Privacy Act - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia to protect most communications on social networking sites such as Facebook and since the Supreme Court has largely refused to recognize a Fourth Amendment privacy right to information shared with a third party, there is no federal statutory or constitutional right that prevents the government from issuing requests that amount to fishing expeditions and there is no Facebook privacy policy that forbids the company from handing over private user information that suggests any illegal activity.[19]

 

[RoseRed]

We don't know what was said on FB, so nobody knows why this officer felt he had the right to access her account. We do know she had two detentions for previous FB posts. It will be up to the court to decide whether her first and fourth amendment rights very violated.

What you do not seem to understand is they had NO right to give a detentsion the very first time. What do you have against this little girl? Her rights were violated 3 times by this school; administration.

 

[legalmania]

What you do not seem to understand is they had NO right to give a detentsion the very first time. What do you have against this little girl? Her rights were violated 3 times by this school; administration.

That's not what the lawsuit is about, we've only heard one side of the story it's like going to court and only hearing the prosecutions side and then having the jury go back and make a decision. It has nothing to do with her rights being violated 3 times because she got detention, it's whether her first and fourth constitutional rights were violated.

 

[JaneDoe91]

I'll admit up front that like most, I have only heard one side of this story. That being said, based on what I have heard and read regarding this law suit, I find this case to be very alarming. This is a 12 yr old girl who has been proven guilty of nothing more than posting personal opinions (derrogatory or otherwise) on her FB page. The issue of whether or not she should have a FB page in the first place, is an issue between this girl's parents, FB, and LE (if her conduct has been proven criminal in any way).

If the school honestly believed that this girl was posting violent threats, than why not notify the parents and file a report with LE for further investigation? If the school believed that this girl was simply using FB inappropriately, than why not notify the parents and report the incident to FB? The fact that the school allegedly did neither of those, but rather proceeded without parental involvement speaks volumes. I have a feeling that if the school believed that they had a right to access this student's FB account, or had a right to interrogate her for the password, they would have contacted the parents and made every effort to include them in the matter. Based on the facts that have been presented to date, this girl has been disciplined for nothing more than having and expressing an opinion. The school obviously wasn't punishing this student for using social media underage (either on school grounds or otherwise) because in that case her password would not have been necessary. The fact that she had a page would have been enough for disciplinary action.
I look forward to hearing the school's response to this family's lawsuit, because I get the feeling that the full story hasn't been told yet. By either party.

 

[JaneDoe91]

BTW...this case is exactly why I make it a point to avoid any form(s) of social media/opinion forums/message boards/etc. in which I am not allowed to participate under an assumed name. I am an adult with rights! As long as I am not involved in any criminal activity (and I'm not LOL), it isn't up to my employer, potential employer, or any school entity to dictate my online practice IMHO.
When I was a school student, my parents didn't wait for the school to monitor my online activities. My computer was never allowed to be anywhere other than the family room, because in their opinion, if I needed privacy to browse the web, then I was probably up to no good, LOL. Of course this was back when you actually needed a computer to access the internet (wow, I feel old!). My point is this.....cases like this make me really grateful I have the parents I do!

 

[MCDRAW]

I'm wondering if there was such a huge problem, why were her parents not called. Regardless of her age or if she should or should not have a Facebook, she should have never been asked or made to feel like she had to give out her personal information. I just read an article that said this is happening in the work force. Employers are wanting employees passwords to their Facebook account. I'm sorry regardless of age that crosses the line.

 

[MCDRAW]

It's a federal law that a 12 yr old can't be on a social media site. It's called COPPA. Link below. I would say that because she was addressing a staff member that they had a right to see if any threats were mentioned. She also continued to post after the initial punishment.

http://www.allfacebook.com/facebook-age-limit-2011-11

This law is being broken repeatedly! I know tons of kids under 12 on Facebook. I don't let my children on the Internet. But it appears everyone else does, if you don't believe me, just ask my children.

 

[kgeaux]

This law is being broken repeatedly! I know tons of kids under 12 on Facebook. I don't let my children on the Internet. But it appears everyone else does, if you don't believe me, just ask my children.

The law doesn't say it is illegal for underaged kids to be on social media. The law says that FB and other social media can't collect personal information about underaged kids. So the social media sites have a policy forbidding underaged members......the kids who join are breaking a policy, not a law.

 

[Soulmagent]

Just getting them ready for corporate America.

My husband bought home an application that asked him to sign it ,saying at any time during employment with that company they could search his car while he was employed with them.

I pictured men coming into our driveway in the middle of the night to search our car.