A Loundon County Assistant Principal had a lengthy feature article published in Sunday's Washington Post Outlook section. His piece chronicles and details the "abuses" he suffered at the hands of the Loudon County justice system. Evidently this sexual deviant had stored child pornography on his cellphone and got caught; red-handed. Yet despite the CLEARLY written rules and laws prohibiting possesion of child pornoraphy, this whiny pervert complains incessasntly about the "injustices" perpetrated by the zero-tolerance system. Remember now, under "zero-tolerance" there are no exceptions, no excuses, no explanations; just the inexorable rigors of the system carried out to the absolute fullest extent of the law.

Nevertheless, and quite astonishingly, this menacing sexual predator repeatedly protests and passionately objects to the cruelties and hardships he experienced during his ordeal. Waaa, waaa, waaa, my legal defense cost money, boo-hoo, boo-hoo, people treated me differently, waa, waaa, waa, my career is ruined. Jesus, you get the impression this guy is gonna suck his thumb, take his ball and go home.

Live by the sword, die by the sword.....




http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2009/04/17/AR2009041702663.html

i think your comment confuses the differences between administrative rules (such as those imposed by FCPS) and criminal laws (imposed by the local/state/fed gvt)

while administrative rules/regulations may be zero tolerance this simply does not exist in the criminal system. mitigating factors are ALWAYS considered in criminal cases.

the best example of this is in a jury trial when the defendant admits to the crime but has a defense such as self defense......as in "yes i shot the victim, but he was holding a knife to my throat and i was in fear of my life".

so while zero tolerance maybe be practiced by administrators and even sometimes police officers (by not giving warnings for seatbelt/cell phone laws and just writing tickets) it is NEVER done in criminal court.

in this particular case since the criminal charge was such BS it was dismissed and the suspect did not even have to appear to the hearing.

Kinda like the BS charges supported by the Loudon County nazis in this case:

"Brandon MacLean v. Loudoun County Schools (VA)
Fourth-grader Brandon MacLean was suspended for two days and recommended for an expulsion (resulting in a total of six school days missed) due to alleged violation of the school's zero tolerance policy against possession of any instrument which could induce fear in another person. MacLean had been reported to school officials by a classmate who had observed him taking a "nerf-like" gun out of his bookbag on his way home from school. School officials formally suspended MacLean for in-school possession of what they cited was a BB gun. A Rutherford Institute attorney appealed the suspension to the Superintendent's designee, arguing that the school officials deliberately suspended MacLean when they had knowledge that the toy was not a BB gun as they alleged and reported MacLean to the Sheriff's Department for a criminal violation. The Superintendent's Office affirmed the two-day suspension without comment. A state circuit court reversed the school board hearing officer's decision, throwing out the suspension on the grounds that it violated MacLean's due process rights. This case was one of the first zero tolerance cases in Virginia."


The charges were such BS that the Court slapped them down. The school system nazis supported them though. It's delicious to see one of these zero-tolerance nazis get a little taste of their own medicine. Delicious.

i think your comment confuses the differences between administrative rules (such as those imposed by FCPS) and criminal laws (imposed by the local/state/fed gvt)


I think that's the whole point. The administration of "zero-tolerance" policies are somehow independent of, instead of subordinate to,the standards and requirements of the justice system. Outrageous abuses result, almost ineveitably, when unsubstantiated allegations and flimsy evidence are used by indifferent or mean-spirited administrators to inflict severe punishments for trivial offenses. This case perfectly illustrates the hypocrisy of the system and those whoo administer it.

Farnsworth Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> A Loundon County Assistant Principal had a lengthy
> feature article published in Sunday's Washington
> Post Outlook section. His piece chronicles and
> details the "abuses" he suffered at the hands of
> the Loudon County justice system. Evidently this
> sexual deviant had stored child pornography on his
> cellphone and got caught; red-handed. Yet despite
> the CLEARLY written rules and laws prohibiting
> possesion of child pornoraphy, this whiny pervert
> complains incessasntly about the "injustices"
> perpetrated by the zero-tolerance system. Remember
> now, under "zero-tolerance" there are no
> exceptions, no excuses, no explanations; just the
> inexorable rigors of the system carried out to the
> absolute fullest extent of the law.
>
> Nevertheless, and quite astonishingly, this
> menacing sexual predator repeatedly protests and
> passionately objects to the cruelties and
> hardships he experienced during his ordeal. Waaa,
> waaa, waaa, my legal defense cost money, boo-hoo,
> boo-hoo, people treated me differently, waa, waaa,
> waa, my career is ruined. Jesus, you get the
> impression this guy is gonna suck his thumb, take
> his ball and go home.
>
> Live by the sword, die by the sword.....
>
>
>
>
> http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/artic
> le/2009/04/17/AR2009041702663.html


Are you retarded? Did you even read the article?
"a woman wearing underpants, with her arms crossed over her breasts"
Thats not even pornography. The law may classify it as such, but it isnt.

Menacing sexual predator? WTF? he was doing his job. Did he beat off to the picture or show it around? No.

Now, I'm not defending this guy, I mean, he should have just put the picture on his work computer and deleted it from his phone, but obviously he's a dumbass with technology, and the justice system clearly failed here.

The picture is jailbait, not CP...

Truckin wrote:

"Are you retarded? Did you even read the article?
"a woman wearing underpants, with her arms crossed over her breasts"
Thats not even pornography. The law may classify it as such, but it isnt"



What the hell, are you a retard. What about "zero-tolerance" don't you understand? No one is interested in explanations, circumstances, details, context, or any other type of mitigating circumstances which would constitute a defense. The allegation was made and that's that.

Truckin On wrote:

"What the hell, are you a retard. What about "zero-tolerance" don't you understand? No one is interested in explanations, circumstances, details, context, or any other type of mitigating circumstances which would constitute a defense. The allegation was made and that's that."




Amen baby. We have an allegation of misconduct; appeal rejected. Guilty and expelled.

Guilty. And don't bother us with any pesky details like mitigating and exculpating evidence; it only annoys us.

I couldn't get passed the asshole's stupid name, Ting-Yi Oei? You wonder what's wrong with the education system in this country? Child porn freaks named Ting-Yi Oei teaching the kids may be a good place to start.

Farnsworth Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> A Loundon County ...


Is that anywhere near Loudoun County?

WO CARES, WHYT ARE YOU POSTING THIS CRAP, HE IS GUILTY GUILTY GUILTY. ANYBODY WHO SAYS THIS IS NOT PORNO IS SICK IN THE HEAD.

Anybody who has any kind of porn on a cellphone that they bring into an office environment, much less a government office involving kids, is an idiot.

I agree with washingtonian, and more to the point, for any of you people who said this is not porn, what reason would YOU have for having this type of picture?

WashingTone Locian > A Loundon County ...

Is that anywhere near Loudoun County?



> A London County ...


Is that anywhere near Loudon County?

tinfoil Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> I agree with washingtonian, and more to the point,
> for any of you people who said this is not porn,
> what reason would YOU have for having this type of
> picture?


GoDaddy ads have similar pictures all the time.

Here's another charming Loundon County ZT tale. These people are as bad as Fairfax. I wonder how the Assistant Principal feels about it now,

Benjamin Ratner v. Loudoun County School Board (VA)
Loudoun County Public School administrators suspended Ben Ratner, an eighth grader at Blue Ridge Middle School, for taking a knife from a suicidal friend in an effort to prevent her from committing suicide. Ben's friend passed him a note in study hall saying that she had brought a knife to school and was contemplating suicide. Ben persuaded her to give him the knife, and he placed it in his locker for safekeeping until he could take it home and speak to her parents about it. A fellow student informed school officials of the knife in Ben's locker, and they removed Ben from school for violating the school's weapon possession policy. Officials for the Loudoun County Public Schools have said that Ben's actions were "noble" and "admirable" and admit that he posed no threat to himself or others. Nevertheless, they suspended Ben through February 1. The suspension was upheld by the school board at an appeal hearing. A complaint was filed in Federal District Court and dismissed. Rutherford Institute attorneys appealed the case to the Fourth Circuit Court of Appeals, which upheld the district court’s ruling. An appeal to the U.S. Supreme Court was denied.

Now that is fucked up. I suppose they would say he should have given it to a adminstrator, but then they would have said he was assaulting them by giving it to them.

here i found a few more

Hearn v. Muskogee Public Schools (OK)
School officials suspended 11-year-old Nashala Hearn for wearing an Islamic holy head covering to school. The school refuses to allow any exception to its dress code regarding the wearing of caps and, therefore, will not recognize the Muslim student’s request for religious accommodation. Institute attorneys are investigating the matter.


Williams v. Bluefield High School (WV)
A high school student was expelled from school for disarming a fellow student and throwing the gun in the bushes outside the school. After discarding the gun, the student attempted to call his mother, a school board member, for her advice on what to do next. Before he could get his mother’s advice, he was called into the principal’s office and expelled, along with the student who initially brought the gun onto school property. The Rutherford Institute provided local counsel with legal analysis.

Brown v. Lee County School District (FL)
After discovering a table knife on the floor of 18-year-old honor student Lindsey Brown’s car, school officials at Estero High School in Ft. Myers, Florida, suspended her for five days and had her arrested and held in county jail on a felony charge of possessing a weapon on school property. In addition to being suspended without a hearing or an opportunity to explain the presence of the flatware in her car, school officials have refused to allow Lindsey to participate in her senior class graduation ceremony. Attorneys for The Rutherford Institute filed a motion for a temporary restraining order in federal court, in the hopes that Lindsey would be permitted to participate in the graduation exercises with her classmates. The motion was denied.
A freaking table knife?

There are dozens and dozens of these. This is what many here simply refuse to recognize about FCPS. They and their kids are only a Luden's cough drop or paper airplane away from being mercilessly victimized by the very same people they so rigorously defend.

im totally convinced, illegal aliens have more rights than children/students do. There is no constitution in our public schools, just sheep.

Totally outta control system.