SC - Columbia - Sheriff Slams Female Student to Floor In Class - #2

[katydid23]

Link please.

link what? I did open the sentence by saying " I bet."

 

[bluesneakers]

No, you are not legally obligated to shut up just because a cop doesn't like what you are saying.
I want to remind everyone else (lest we have confusion) we are not discussing the girl who was thrown around. We are discussing the girl who was arrested for "disturbing schools" because she said something to the cop he didn't like.

You do not have to obey unlawful orders of a cop. Unlawful would be telling me I can't speak up about what he is doing to another student. Even if using colorful language.

In this case the SRO could arrest anyone. He is a Sheriff's Deputy with full powers of arrest who just happens to work in a school for his prime duty.
He can arrest people outside of school too.

The teachers, however, are also mandatory reporters under South Carolina law so had the obligation to at least report the abuse.

This is why they have vague rules about defiance, disruption, and disrespect. He made a judgment call that she was interfering with an arrest or behaving in a disrespectful manner and she had no argument. It wasn't that she didn't obey an unlawful order, it's that she hurt his feelings and THAT can get you arrested.

Although I agree with you she was stepping up in defense of another student who needed help from SOMEONE. I worry about the adults who stood by and watched him, but I can see how the kids knew it would only get worse if they said or did anything. (Thankfully the pulled out their cell phones though!)

JMO.

 

[popsicle]

No, you are not legally obligated to shut up just because a cop doesn't like what you are saying.
I want to remind everyone else (lest we have confusion) we are not discussing the girl who was thrown around. We are discussing the girl who was arrested for "disturbing schools" because she said something to the cop he didn't like.

You do not have to obey unlawful orders of a cop. Unlawful would be telling me I can't speak up about what he is doing to another student. Even if using colorful language.

In this case the SRO could arrest anyone. He is a Sheriff's Deputy with full powers of arrest who just happens to work in a school for his prime duty.
He can arrest people outside of school too.

The teachers, however, are also mandatory reporters under South Carolina law so had the obligation to at least report the abuse.

BBM Like criminal defense lawyer Joey Jackson says, you do what the LEO says and file your complaint afterwards. Wise words imo

 

[vestigare]

This is why they have vague rules about defiance, disruption, and disrespect. He made a judgment call that she was interfering with an arrest or behaving in a disrespectful manner and she had no argument. It wasn't that she didn't obey an unlawful order, it's that she hurt his feelings and THAT can get you arrested.

Although I agree with you she was stepping up in defense of another student who needed help from SOMEONE. I worry about the adults who stood by and watched him, but I can see how the kids knew it would only get worse if they said or did anything. (Thankfully the pulled out their cell phones though!)

JMO.

Exactly. I realize it can be very difficult to stand up to injustices and I can't fault those who weigh the consequences and choose not to. I question those who condemn those who choose to face the consequences and fight the injustice as if what they are doing is wrong or unconstitutional or unlawful.

 

[bluesneakers]

You can stand outside the door but not leave entirely.

Do you mean stand outside the door, with the door open? I think that would be distracting to the students in class. They'll all be tempted to watch and try to eavesdrop on what's happening.

Do you have a link that explains this policy in greater detail? TIA.

 

[Hope4More]

No, you are not legally obligated to shut up just because a cop doesn't like what you are saying.
I want to remind everyone else (lest we have confusion) we are not discussing the girl who was thrown around. We are discussing the girl who was arrested for "disturbing schools" because she said something to the cop he didn't like.

You do not have to obey unlawful orders of a cop. Unlawful would be telling me I can't speak up about what he is doing to another student. Even if using colorful language.

In this case the SRO could arrest anyone. He is a Sheriff's Deputy with full powers of arrest who just happens to work in a school for his prime duty.
He can arrest people outside of school too.

The teachers, however, are also mandatory reporters under South Carolina law so had the obligation to at least report the abuse.

As I said, I'd be interested in seeing the case you first mentioned play out, because I have a sneaking suspicion the bystander student's rights in that situation are WAY more circumscribed than what you're stating with such certainty.

BTW....did you catch my earlier post that corporal punishment is still legal in SC? If teachers and principals are allowed to smack kids there, I'm thinking maybe the definition and perception of abuse AND of disobediance there is also a whole lot different than what has become the norm most places.

 

[bluesneakers]

Exactly. I realize it can be very difficult to stand up to injustices and I can't fault those who weigh the consequences and choose not to. I question those who condemn those who choose to face the consequences and fight the injustice as if what they are doing is wrong or unconstitutional or unlawful.

BBM Especially when they're kids going up against authority figures in a situation like the one we witnessed.

 

[vestigare]

BBM Like criminal defense lawyer Joey Jackson says, you do what the LEO says and file your complaint afterwards. Wise words imo

Assuming you don't want to be beaten or arrested.
Some people have calculated the risk and decided the beating or arrest is worth the cause.
Others might not have thought about it at all and just reacted to an injustice.

 

[Brightbird]

I remain baffled why the interest here remains focused like a laser on Fields as an individual rather than Fields as a generic cop who should never have been summoned to the classroom in the first place.


SC has criminalized unruly student behavior. SC still allows corporal punishment in schools. SC hires regular police officers-- trained in how to handle adult criminals--and sets them loose in schools.

A school admininistrator summoned Fields to the classroom for the explicit purpose of removing her from the class.

WTH does anyone here think there is anything surprising about what happened?

I'm puzzled why there is a special law regarding classroom disruption. If someone's behaviour is so disruptive it warrants arrest, I would have thought it could fall under the more general "disturbing the peace" type law. Criminalising non-violent defiant or unruly classroom behaviour is one of the most ridiculous laws I've heard. I don't have a problem with police in schools per se. It could be a good opportunity for positive community engagement. I do have a problem with bringing the macho police culture into schools. I agree this incident was waiting to happen. Criminalising classroom disruptions and employing cops in schools to uphold the law, well, it's obvious where that leads. But Fields handling of this situation was excessive, he went way beyond the level of force I'd expect a street cop to use with an adult that is being non-violently defiant. So for that, I think he deserves attention as an individual.

 

[KaaBoom]

Where is it stated that the girl was beat and/or choked? Beat means to hit repeatedly.

Please post a link to support your statement that the girl was beat and choked.

:facepalm:Body slamming a girl and throwing her across the room equals a beating by any reasonable standards.

 

[K_Z]

Here's a little more about the school.

http://www.usnews.com/education/bes...land-02/spring-valley-high-17710/student-body

Economically Disadvantaged Students

These are the percentages of the school's students eligible for free or reduced-price lunch, based on data reported to the government.

Free Lunch Program (% of total) 28%
Reduced-Price Lunch Program (% of total) 7%
Total Economically Disadvantaged (% of total) 35%

That's a pretty low percentage of free and reduced for a public school in a large city (which is a universal measure of the economic means of the student body, and as an extension, the community).

From my knowledge of F/ RP data in my state (from school committees I'm on), that indicates a fairly middle class, to upper middle class socioeconomic status. This is not a "poor" community, IMO.

Which may be an indicator to help identify some of the "whys" as to how the situation unfolded as it did, IMO.

 

[popsicle]

Assuming you don't want to be beaten or arrested.
Some people have calculated the risk and decided the beating or arrest is worth the cause.
Others might not have thought about it at all and just reacted to an injustice.

Or killed. He told his son, do what the Officer says and come home alive. Everything else can be dealt with afterwards.

 

[Sillybilly]

LET IT GO FOLKS !! We do not badger other WSers. Fourteen post removed due to bickering when a poster already explained what they meant.

Extremely disappointing after Tricia made her point very clearly earlier today.

 

[kimlynn]

Or killed. He told his son, do what the Officer says and come home alive. Everything else can be dealt with afterwards.

Just in general (no specific case) sometimes doing what you're told by LE doesn't always mean you come out unharmed. IMO

 

[vestigare]

As I said, I'd be interested in seeing the case you first mentioned play out, because I have a sneaking suspicion the bystander student's rights in that situation are WAY more circumscribed than what you're stating with such certainty.

BTW....did you catch my earlier post that corporal punishment is still legal in SC? If teachers and principals are allowed to smack kids there, I'm thinking maybe the definition and perception of abuse AND of disobediance there is also a whole lot different than what has become the norm most places.

I realize in a school student have their first amendment rights curbed for various reasons, however, this incident of arrest did not involve school action. It involved police action independent of the school.

Corporal punishment is ridiculous and shouldn't be allowed in schools but that has to come from the parents because it is only allowed if the parent allows it. My mother always signed the disclaimer that no one at school was allowed to touch her kids and we were told this and told that if they ever threaten to paddle us or whatever they were to call my mother and consult my file. If they even tried to bypass her orders we were to resist, run, whatever we needed to do and then find a phone and call her.

I agree that disobedience and abuse differ from person to person but in this case I agree with you that the punishment of excessive force in no way should have fit a school policy infraction.
I think this is why they should have well fleshed out legal definitions of what is an infraction, abuse, punishment etc...

 

[katydid23]

Do you mean stand outside the door, with the door open? I think that would be distracting to the students in class. They'll all be tempted to watch and try to eavesdrop on what's happening.

Do you have a link that explains this policy in greater detail? TIA.

I only know about California. Which is apparently too confusing for others so we shall not talk about it here. I do know that if a teacher had to leave students alone in a classroom that another credentialed adult needed to be present. Not just any adult.

 

[Hope4More]

This is why they have vague rules about defiance, disruption, and disrespect. He made a judgment call that she was interfering with an arrest or behaving in a disrespectful manner and she had no argument. It wasn't that she didn't obey an unlawful order, it's that she hurt his feelings and THAT can get you arrested.

Although I agree with you she was stepping up in defense of another student who needed help from SOMEONE. I worry about the adults who stood by and watched him, but I can see how the kids knew it would only get worse if they said or did anything. (Thankfully the pulled out their cell phones though!)

JMO.

Unlawful order? No, it wasn't. Arrested her because she hurt his feelings? That's one opinion for sure.

Another is that the situation was spiraling way out of control and that allowing a hysterical girl to keep on screaming risked pushing others over the edge.

I'd feel different if the bystander student was more in control of herself and /or had directly challenged Fields. She wasn't and didn't and he did the right thing by arresting her since the teacher and the AP sure weren't stepping up to take responsibility for anything.

 

[vestigare]

I'm puzzled why there is a special law regarding classroom disruption. If someone's behaviour is so disruptive it warrants arrest, I would have thought it could fall under the more general "disturbing the peace" type law. Criminalising non-violent defiant or unruly classroom behaviour is one of the most ridiculous laws I've heard. I don't have a problem with police in schools per se. It could be a good opportunity for positive community engagement. I do have a problem with bringing the macho police culture into schools. I agree this incident was waiting to happen. Criminalising classroom disruptions and employing cops in schools to uphold the law, well, it's obvious where that leads. But Fields handling of this situation was excessive, he went way beyond the level of force I'd expect a street cop to use with an adult that is being non-violently defiant. So for that, I think he deserves attention as an individual.

I agree.
http://news.yahoo.com/disturbing-sc...south-carolina-students-arrest-200805356.html
IMO is was a knee-jerk feel good law that was passed to appease teachers when they knew the disturbing the peace or other laws wouldn't hold up in court.

 

[bluesneakers]

I'm puzzled why there is a special law regarding classroom disruption. If someone's behaviour is so disruptive it warrants arrest, I would have thought it could fall under the more general "disturbing the peace" type law. Criminalising non-violent defiant or unruly classroom behaviour is one of the most ridiculous laws I've heard. I don't have a problem with police in schools per se. It could be a good opportunity for positive community engagement. I do have a problem with bringing the macho police culture into schools. I agree this incident was waiting to happen. Criminalising classroom disruptions and employing cops in schools to uphold the law, well, it's obvious where that leads. But Fields handling of this situation was excessive, he went way beyond the level of force I'd expect a street cop to use with an adult that is being non-violently defiant. So for that, I think he deserves attention as an individual.

Something very wrong about criminalizing students for being students, I agree.

I agree with the BBM too. He needs some special attention.

 

[JeannaT]

The girls both returned to school with no suspensions. It was the teacher and the administrator who were suspended over the incident, not the student’s.

Which is exactly the way it should be, Because as much as some of the victim blamers in this forum would like to see it, we don’t punish victims. The criminal charges will eventually be dropped against them too, for the same reason.

Students in Spring Valley Incident Allowed to Return to Class

I thought each of the girls had 3 day suspensions, and pending criminal charges?