Maybe Not “Vicious,” but Still Stupid
Are school administrators getting stupider by the day?
Kids catch the principal syping on them in the bathroom, and remove the camera. One of the kids, Mac Bedo, tells his mother, Cindy Chamipion, about the camera. So who’s in trouble?
The camera’s ostensible purpose was to catch vandals. Whether that’s true or not is immaterial; there are too many other questions that need answers:
- How were parents notified of the camera?
- How much could the camera see? Could it see urinals? Could it see into the toilet stalls?
- What about the camera’s audio capability?
- How were the archives stored?
- Who had keys to the storage?
- Who could vouch for access to the archives?
- What was the time limit on archive retention?
- How were the archives to be destroyed when the time limit had expired?
This is why you don’t let amateurs implement security. It also shows why schools should not have the "power of the parent."
(Hat tip: Drudge.)
I wonder if they’d actually been having a problem with vandals. That’s really disturbing. I would be furious if I were one of the parents. Sounds to me like the principal is a chickenhawk.
Yes! You get it! (Except maybe the “chickenhawk” part.)
It’s one thing to protect the property from vandals. It’s another to protect information about the innocent from those who would abuse that information. That’s the focus of questions 2 and 6.
Oh, well, I was just kidding about the chickenhawk part.
Well, wait, on second thought, I was mostly kidding about the chickenhawk part.
I think there’s something perverse about a person who thinks he has the right to control the privacy of others. I think the fact that parents weren’t aware of the camera makes it seem intentionally underhanded.
In some contexts, privacy is negotiable, especially in job-related situations (contract law). However, when dealing with minors, it’s a totally different story. Minors, by definition, cannot negotiate a contractual agreement. In this case, that’s probably a good thing.
I wouldn’t be so quick to assume that parents were never notified. This might be a case of “the dog ate the letter I was supposed to give to Mom,” or the mother might be one for the Professional Victim Watch. However, both of these together do not excuse the school district from the responsibility involved in handling surveillance archives.