M>> By Tyler B. Reed/ Daily News Staff
>> FRAMINGHAM -- High school administrators under a new policy are
>> claiming the right to snatch information stored in students' cell
>> phones when they search for drugs or stolen property at school.
>> The change clarifies the school's search and seizure policy, adding
>> cell phones to the list of places school officials can snoop if they
>> suspect a student has contraband.
>> Federal law says school officials need only "reasonable suspicion" of
>> the presence of drugs or stolen goods to conduct searches.
>> "We reserve the right to look through the cell phone," Principal
>> Michael Welch said. "It would be no different than if a student were
>> to have a notebook. We've had instances of graffiti. We've looked
>> through a notebook and found identical instances of graffiti."
> That's very interesting: it implies that the searchers already know the
> phone number of the dealers, or student dealers.
Or students are dumb enough (wanna bet that they're not that dumb? you _will_ lose! :) to stick 'notes' about prices, availability,etc. next to a number. OR that there's a name with the number, and the searchers know _names_ of dealers. Or the 'text message' offers.
Without going into the rights issue, how do they know that the
> "identical" grafitti in a notebook wasn't something the student copied
> off of the real grafitti because he thought it was cool. I mean,
> sure, it's gives them some probable cause to further question, but
> it's hardly damning evidence by itself.
> Bill Ranck
> Blacksburg, Va.
MOST graffiti has elements that are as unique as a (traditional) artist's brush-strokes.
It's really not terribly difficult to match up the 'artist' behind several pieces of 'street' art.