Money? Stupidity? Somebody covering his ass?
Except the first and third would make no sense, as the lie would become obvious during discovery. The second also seems unlikely, as I doubt an entire school board with competent legal counsel is unable to figure this out.
I think getting damages out of this is probably a remote possibility.
And you're basing this on...? Even if we assume that there will be no compensatory or punitive damages (which I'm sure the plaintiff and his lawyer are not assuming), one of the plaintiff's claims explicitly includes statutory damages.
Getting the school to end its policy and shaming them into not doing something this stupid again--that's more likely. In fact, it already happened.
What, exactly, was the school's "stupid policy"?
You said the school's position was obviously the right one. That's prejudging the case.
Link me to where I said anything was obvious or a settled fact. I've been pretty clear throughout that I think it's quite likely that the school will prevail on the merits, but that there are still plenty of other possibilities. I've "prejudged" the case in the sense that I find one side more credible, but you've clearly done the same.
It is bad. I'm sorry you take the privacy of students so lightly but appear to fawn before the authority of big entities like banks and government.
Again, where on earth are you getting this? I take privacy quite seriously. The reason I'm not up in arms about this case is because
I think it's highly likely that the student's privacy was not invaded. If it comes out that the school was actually sneaking around and watching students via webcams in order to punish them, then I'll be as outraged as anyone.
You offered it as proof. Why ven provide the link otherwise?
There's a difference between proof and evidence.
It may SOUND like a lot of things, but it's just an anonymous reprinted in a blog. It's as likely to be disinformation as anything. It certainly can't be interrogated, and it brings up ideas (pictures of the kid smoking pot?) that have not been mentioned in any other forum.
Did you actually go to the link? I ask, because if you had, you would have seen that the tipster
included a link to the student's facebook profile which corroborated the bulk of the tipster's claims. I looked at the kids profile myself and saw that he had his privacy set to public, was a member of those groups that were named, and had posted a plethora of pictures taken via his webcam.