Slog
News & ArtsWednesday, May 26, 2010
Sex High School Coach Fired After Sending "Lewd Video" to Student
Posted by Dan Savage on Wed, May 26, 2010 at 4:36 PM
But Jason Robinson didn't send the video to one of his students. The 32-year-old football coach sent a lewd video to a college student—a 20-year-old college student who just so happened to be his girlfriend. A girlfriend who, like Robinson, is a consenting adult. Unfortunately for Robinson his girlfriend's mother found the video on her daughter's phone and forwarded it to his boss:
Former Mandarin High School head football coach Jason Robinson's girlfriend's mother e-mailed explicit cell phone video to the school's principal, school board spokeswoman Jill Johnson said. Dr. Donna Richardson, the school's principal, then sent Robinson the following letter informing him that he's been removed from his position: "Effective today you have been reassigned to Bulls Bay for the remainder of this school year. You are not to come back onto our campus, and we will make arrangements to get any of your personal belongings to you. You are also being non-reappointed for the next school year. It is regretful it had to come to this, but I believe you understand the situation."
Before we get to Dr. Donna Richardson's assault on sexual freedom... let's just pause to consider the assault on the English language. Non-reappointed? Regretful? Eesh. Back to the Richardson:
"We hold our teachers to a higher standard. They are in front of our students. They're talking with our students. They're teaching our students how to become good characters."
Apparently no one who has ever made a dirty video or taken a dirty cell-phone picture is fit to teach at Mandarin High School. Because the existence of a single dirty picture or video—images that not only won't any Mandarin High School student ever see, but images no Mandarin High School student even knows exists—might somehow prevent those students from becoming "good characters." And if someone invades the privacy of a Mandarin High School employee—which is exactly what happened in this case—then that school employee can be fired.
Back to the report:
In a phone interview with Channel 4, Robinson said he's seeking legal action against his 20-year-old girlfriend's parents for violating his privacy they retrieved off of a phone.
Mandarin High School's website is here. The contact information for the principal of Mandarin High School is here. Here's Dr. Donna Richardson's contact information:
Dr. Richardson
260-3911, ext. 1009
richardsod@duvalschools.org
Be polite. But let Richardson know that she's very much in the wrong. And let others know to let her know. We've been sticking up for a lot of queer high school students this spring who were victimized by the homophobic bigots who run their schools. It's time to stick up for a straight high school coach who has been victimized by the sex-phobic bigot who runs his. Send Donna a note.
3
Dan Dan.
You tedious one-note bitch.
Coach lost his right to 'privacy' when he sent the lewd images out into the ether.
Girlfriend's parents found it, not much of a leap to imagine anyone and everyone will see it eventually, what with the internet and all, including his students.
The real moral of the story is don't photo or video it unless you don't mind anyone and everyone seeing it, and if you send it into the ether COUNT on it being spread about.
But let's not let that get in the way of a good DISTRACTION!
You tedious one-note bitch.
Coach lost his right to 'privacy' when he sent the lewd images out into the ether.
Girlfriend's parents found it, not much of a leap to imagine anyone and everyone will see it eventually, what with the internet and all, including his students.
The real moral of the story is don't photo or video it unless you don't mind anyone and everyone seeing it, and if you send it into the ether COUNT on it being spread about.
But let's not let that get in the way of a good DISTRACTION!
5
Would you like us to equip you for this fight with a sidearm, Dan? If you bat for DADT being a priority, then we should bat for you being able to set the law in this county, Sheriff.
Also, what's that formula for when you know the partner is too young? Half the age of the elder, and then add 7 to know the minimum dating age? That would mean she'd need to be 23 to date him. :P
Snarkiness aside, people are generally muckraking stupid. And that principal looks like a 45-year-old transgender with colour blindness and no sense of fashion.
[This was a dog's breakfast comment.]
Also, what's that formula for when you know the partner is too young? Half the age of the elder, and then add 7 to know the minimum dating age? That would mean she'd need to be 23 to date him. :P
Snarkiness aside, people are generally muckraking stupid. And that principal looks like a 45-year-old transgender with colour blindness and no sense of fashion.
[This was a dog's breakfast comment.]
7
I suppose employees at Mandarin High School are only allowed biannual (not bi-curious, that gets you non-reappointed in Florida) coitus in the missionary position, with the lights off, to a partner that has never gone to school?
8
first off, 32/2 = 16 + 7 = 23.
secondly, when your job gives you a position of authority over children, basic common sense says don't email pictures of your dick.
secondly, when your job gives you a position of authority over children, basic common sense says don't email pictures of your dick.
9
Making "lewd" (whatever that means in this context) videos = ineffective teacher.
Writing that one down for future reference.
Writing that one down for future reference.
10
Oh yay, news from my old hometown. Shit, I just realized I probably went to school with that guy.
11
Un-fucking-believable. I hope he has good lawyers. (Sadly, the jury will be comprised of Floridians.)
And what the hell is wrong with your fucking server? Yeesh.
And what the hell is wrong with your fucking server? Yeesh.
13
Probably a member of the I (Eye) Makeup For Jesus Club at her local Baptist indoctrination center. Plus, is she in a time warp or what?
14
An earlier story (May 22) makes the statement (true? I have no idea) that he sent the email in question from a school computer which probably would be a quite valid firing offence. Other commentary says he didn't, which would put the school very much in the wrong.
Am I the only one who looks at the principal and thinks that she and the complaining mother are of the same age, mindset and it was a case of backing up somebody just like you?
Am I the only one who looks at the principal and thinks that she and the complaining mother are of the same age, mindset and it was a case of backing up somebody just like you?
15
I agree that the mother stole the photo and it's all terribly unfair, but I could see myself firing someone because their friends/family had started sending me naked pictures of them. Please don't involve me in your family dramas, and that goes doubly for pictures of your hairy butt.
17
I'm more interested in what "Bulls Bay" is--special-ed? rubber room? lesbian-hell-for-priapic-coaches? WHAT COULD IT BE?! I won't be able to sleep tonight until I know!
18
Also, I love e-mail addies of the form (x letters of the last name + first and/or middle initials). Good for the occasional giggle.
19
ams:
Ah, so you want to fire people who are victims of grotesque attacks on their privacy by crazy, vindictive people. (It appears that crazymom sent the pictures to over a hundred people.) Got it.
So, when, say, the psycho ex-bf of a teacher spraypaints "SLUT! WHORE" on the side of her car at school we should immediately terminate the woman in question. After all, she's drama, and we don't want that, now, do we?
Am I the only one wondering whether the mother's target for this isn't just the coach but her own daughter? A psychotic jesus freak who is enraged that her daughter has an independent sexuality and isn't filled with proper Christian self-loathing? There's a whole lot of hatred in this woman's actions.
Oh, btw, the 20 year old gf has a 17 year old sister at the HS; she is going to be catching all the static for her mom's actions. Nice going, mom.
Ah, so you want to fire people who are victims of grotesque attacks on their privacy by crazy, vindictive people. (It appears that crazymom sent the pictures to over a hundred people.) Got it.
So, when, say, the psycho ex-bf of a teacher spraypaints "SLUT! WHORE" on the side of her car at school we should immediately terminate the woman in question. After all, she's drama, and we don't want that, now, do we?
Am I the only one wondering whether the mother's target for this isn't just the coach but her own daughter? A psychotic jesus freak who is enraged that her daughter has an independent sexuality and isn't filled with proper Christian self-loathing? There's a whole lot of hatred in this woman's actions.
Oh, btw, the 20 year old gf has a 17 year old sister at the HS; she is going to be catching all the static for her mom's actions. Nice going, mom.
20
@17:
If the comments section in the linked article is accurate Bulls Bay is a printing centre for this school area, where he will be in no contact with any students.
If the comments section in the linked article is accurate Bulls Bay is a printing centre for this school area, where he will be in no contact with any students.
21
One other thought:
There is a mini-debate going in on that thread about whether or not the coach's action was "inappropriate".
Am I the only one out there who thinks that "inappropriate" is an overused slimyweaselword for "it's not against the law and it's not against the rules but we want to fuck you over for it anyways" ? (Or, if the school is found to have breached its own rules or the law or committed a tort then it will use the word "inappropriate" the other way around, to diminish and excuse their own wrongdoing. I had a problem like that once: a threatened suspension for the acts of another person that the organization in question couldn't be arsed to investigate. When faced with the threat of a formal complaint and messy potential litigation they backed down, saying that they had acted "inappropriately", which was a nice way of saying "we almost fucked up your whole life because we're lazy assholes".
One final thought:
If this had been a teenage boy sending a porny picture to the schoolboard wouldn't he already be in cuffs with the local DA crowing on primetime about what a sex offender he is?
There is a mini-debate going in on that thread about whether or not the coach's action was "inappropriate".
Am I the only one out there who thinks that "inappropriate" is an overused slimyweaselword for "it's not against the law and it's not against the rules but we want to fuck you over for it anyways" ? (Or, if the school is found to have breached its own rules or the law or committed a tort then it will use the word "inappropriate" the other way around, to diminish and excuse their own wrongdoing. I had a problem like that once: a threatened suspension for the acts of another person that the organization in question couldn't be arsed to investigate. When faced with the threat of a formal complaint and messy potential litigation they backed down, saying that they had acted "inappropriately", which was a nice way of saying "we almost fucked up your whole life because we're lazy assholes".
One final thought:
If this had been a teenage boy sending a porny picture to the schoolboard wouldn't he already be in cuffs with the local DA crowing on primetime about what a sex offender he is?
22
Now, now, seeker 6079, don't herniate yourself.
Yes, if you are running with crazy vindictive people who send me inappropriate photos, or call me to yell at me about nothing, etc etc, you could get fired. If you're a valued employee you probably won't get fired, but I've heard of people getting fired for a lot less.
Don't try to equate this with some sort of domestic violence dispute. It's not. It's some teacher who is fooling around with a 20 year old woman (legal, but already risky for a prudent teacher to do) and her parents are involving the employers in their family drama. Yes, the administrator is probably some sex-negative weirdo, and yes it's unfair.
Yes, if you are running with crazy vindictive people who send me inappropriate photos, or call me to yell at me about nothing, etc etc, you could get fired. If you're a valued employee you probably won't get fired, but I've heard of people getting fired for a lot less.
Don't try to equate this with some sort of domestic violence dispute. It's not. It's some teacher who is fooling around with a 20 year old woman (legal, but already risky for a prudent teacher to do) and her parents are involving the employers in their family drama. Yes, the administrator is probably some sex-negative weirdo, and yes it's unfair.
23
@20, thank you! My snooze time is assured (maybe with dreams of hot junior-high coach of days gone by).
24
ams, he wasn't running with a crazy person. He was apparently dating a quite sane young lady who has a crazy person for a mother, a woman who felt that sending stolen porny pictures to a hundred school officials was a rational thing to do.
The correct response for Principal Richardson (who, if the linked-to comments section is to be believed, has a son in the local sheriff's office) was to pick up the phone and say, "some woman is sending pornographic pictures of one of my teachers to everyone in god's creation ... that's a crime, isn't it? If so I'd like to report it, and it not can you send a deputy around to get her to chill out??" I think you're correct in noting that she is "probably some sex-native weirdo"; that would explain why she sided with a lunatic over an employee because, well, the lunatic in hating sex is "normal" and therefore correct.
And god, "prudent" is a such a weasel word, as your use of it involves putting the blame back on the man who has had his privacy violated and his career sidetracked and perhaps ruined. (That's not to say that I don't agree and don't think he was an idiot: anything in digital format should assumed to be vulnerable, period, always, always.) But let's keep the focus where it belongs, on the wrongdoer. (That's leaving aside "fooling around", which is rather condescending and dismissive. It's not up to us to pull out the Worthiness Measurer to determine whether relationship is sufficiently Serious to merit protection from arguably psychotic family members or employers.)
That said, it's really worth taking otherwise valuable time and reading that comments thread in full. Peyton Place has moved to Florida, apparently.
It appears that the Board can terminate for no reason. I'm curious, though, about Florida employment law. Here in Canada if one can terminate for no reason but one picks a reason anyways then you can be on the hook for that reason. Letting Sally go for no damned reason at all because she's in her probation period, for example, is okay. Letting Sally go in that same period because, say, she is living common law with another woman is a legal no-no.
More...
The correct response for Principal Richardson (who, if the linked-to comments section is to be believed, has a son in the local sheriff's office) was to pick up the phone and say, "some woman is sending pornographic pictures of one of my teachers to everyone in god's creation ... that's a crime, isn't it? If so I'd like to report it, and it not can you send a deputy around to get her to chill out??" I think you're correct in noting that she is "probably some sex-native weirdo"; that would explain why she sided with a lunatic over an employee because, well, the lunatic in hating sex is "normal" and therefore correct.
And god, "prudent" is a such a weasel word, as your use of it involves putting the blame back on the man who has had his privacy violated and his career sidetracked and perhaps ruined. (That's not to say that I don't agree and don't think he was an idiot: anything in digital format should assumed to be vulnerable, period, always, always.) But let's keep the focus where it belongs, on the wrongdoer. (That's leaving aside "fooling around", which is rather condescending and dismissive. It's not up to us to pull out the Worthiness Measurer to determine whether relationship is sufficiently Serious to merit protection from arguably psychotic family members or employers.)
That said, it's really worth taking otherwise valuable time and reading that comments thread in full. Peyton Place has moved to Florida, apparently.
It appears that the Board can terminate for no reason. I'm curious, though, about Florida employment law. Here in Canada if one can terminate for no reason but one picks a reason anyways then you can be on the hook for that reason. Letting Sally go for no damned reason at all because she's in her probation period, for example, is okay. Letting Sally go in that same period because, say, she is living common law with another woman is a legal no-no.
25
Oh, and by the by, I'd argue that it is a variant on domestic violence. We should recognize that psychological cruelty is one type of DV. This attack is arguably DV:
Eg1 - "a pattern of physically, sexually, and/or emotionally abusive behaviors used by one individual to assert power or maintain control over another, in the context of an intimate or family relationship", Commonwealth's Attorney, County of Halifax, Virginia, www.halifaxprosecutor.com/definitions.ht….
eg 2 - "refers to any form of physical, sexual, verbal, emotional, or economic abuse inflicted on any person in a household by a family or household member", Supervised Visitation Network, http://www.svnetwork.net/standards-defin…
eg 3 - "The desire to dominate and control the partner or other household member by use of psychological, physical, sexual, and/or social/environmental pressure", Confidential Associates, LLC, www.confidentialassoc.com/Definitions.ht…
Or are you taking the position that psychological DV doesn't apply because, hey, they were just fooling around.
Eg1 - "a pattern of physically, sexually, and/or emotionally abusive behaviors used by one individual to assert power or maintain control over another, in the context of an intimate or family relationship", Commonwealth's Attorney, County of Halifax, Virginia, www.halifaxprosecutor.com/definitions.ht….
eg 2 - "refers to any form of physical, sexual, verbal, emotional, or economic abuse inflicted on any person in a household by a family or household member", Supervised Visitation Network, http://www.svnetwork.net/standards-defin…
eg 3 - "The desire to dominate and control the partner or other household member by use of psychological, physical, sexual, and/or social/environmental pressure", Confidential Associates, LLC, www.confidentialassoc.com/Definitions.ht…
Or are you taking the position that psychological DV doesn't apply because, hey, they were just fooling around.
26
Face it: if we were talking about a dad sending "lewd videos" of his son's gf out to a hundred plus people he would very properly already be in jail. I just wish that psychomom was held to the same standard.
28
He shouldn't be fired for being lewd.
He should be fired for being such a stupid fucking moron.
Once he sends the video out it is gone.
What is the difference in mom sending it to a hundred people
and him sending it to GF?
He put it out there.
stupid
fucking
moron
He should be fired for being such a stupid fucking moron.
Once he sends the video out it is gone.
What is the difference in mom sending it to a hundred people
and him sending it to GF?
He put it out there.
stupid
fucking
moron
29
The second quote is misattributed. It's not from Richardson in the original story; it's from Johnson the school board spokesperson.
Not that it makes it any less stupid.
Not that it makes it any less stupid.
31
Let's hang on here a second, folks. Take a look at the previous article from the 22nd on this story:
IF he was using a school computer, then certainly he should be let go, as I bet, like any other public entity, they have a strict policy on appropriate computer use. Also, he wasn't "fired"; his contract was not renewed, which is an important difference.
Certainly, I'm not defending the mother's actions here, but, like I said, if he was using public resources to send porn, then he's to blame.
Mandarin High School's head football coach is no longer working with students amid allegations that he sent his adult girlfriend inappropriate photos using a school computer.
IF he was using a school computer, then certainly he should be let go, as I bet, like any other public entity, they have a strict policy on appropriate computer use. Also, he wasn't "fired"; his contract was not renewed, which is an important difference.
Certainly, I'm not defending the mother's actions here, but, like I said, if he was using public resources to send porn, then he's to blame.
32
I sent here this letter-
Hi, this letter is regarding your firing of Jason Robinson.
When I read this news I thought it was some kind of Onion spoof, it just didn't make any sense.
You fired a guy who was having a consensual relationship with a 20-year old woman who's parents didn't like him and decided(like some freaky stalkers) to invade his privacy and try to sabotage his life by sending a private video(which they obtained illegally) to you. No one else knows of this video's existence yet here you are saying this-
"We hold our teachers to a higher standard. They are in front of our
students. They're talking with our students. They're teaching our
students how to become good characters."
Assuming that you are a rational person(which you are supposed to be) I think you know you are being extremely dishonest and nonsensical. But I don't know, a rational and decent person would respond to the parent's appalling and illegal stalkery actions by ignoring them or alerting your
employee to their actions.
But I guess, those creepy parents were right, they assumed other people
were as creepy and irrational as them, and sure enough, they found you.
I hope your ex-employee will also sue you, you really need to be made an example of, and I hope this gets much publicity so your students will witness the blatant irrationality, hypocrisy and fallacious morality of authority figures like you. That is a very important lesson to learn.
Hi, this letter is regarding your firing of Jason Robinson.
When I read this news I thought it was some kind of Onion spoof, it just didn't make any sense.
You fired a guy who was having a consensual relationship with a 20-year old woman who's parents didn't like him and decided(like some freaky stalkers) to invade his privacy and try to sabotage his life by sending a private video(which they obtained illegally) to you. No one else knows of this video's existence yet here you are saying this-
"We hold our teachers to a higher standard. They are in front of our
students. They're talking with our students. They're teaching our
students how to become good characters."
Assuming that you are a rational person(which you are supposed to be) I think you know you are being extremely dishonest and nonsensical. But I don't know, a rational and decent person would respond to the parent's appalling and illegal stalkery actions by ignoring them or alerting your
employee to their actions.
But I guess, those creepy parents were right, they assumed other people
were as creepy and irrational as them, and sure enough, they found you.
I hope your ex-employee will also sue you, you really need to be made an example of, and I hope this gets much publicity so your students will witness the blatant irrationality, hypocrisy and fallacious morality of authority figures like you. That is a very important lesson to learn.
33
If he used a school computer, then yeah he needs to be canned. If not the mother of the gf needs to be sued to high heaven. I mean if I was a school administrator and received porno pics of a fellow co-worker from some crazed gf's mother I'd be pissed and not with my coworker. The principal's reactions are completely off the wall, unless it was truly based from a school computer. And why send the photos to so many school employees? What the hell is *that* all about? And why is mother dearest looking at nude pics of her daughter's boyfriend in the first place? You wouldn't see me clicking on private photos of my relative's boyfriend/girlfriends. That's just too damn creepy.
34
OMG. It's obvious from that picture that Dr. Richardson hasn't had sex in years. Maybe not even ever.
35
Savage bait, from the principal's bio on the web site: "She loves people and she especially loves young people, whom she has dedicated her life to serving the past 24 years. Additionally, she taught in the young peoples’ department in her church."
36
The parents pay for the cell phone.
It is theirs.
The GF/daughter is living with them.
Smart to send Xrated images of yourself to a cell owned by your GFs parents who already hate your guts.
Veeeeery Smart.....
It is theirs.
The GF/daughter is living with them.
Smart to send Xrated images of yourself to a cell owned by your GFs parents who already hate your guts.
Veeeeery Smart.....
37
"[The school system was] notified from a parent of some potential inappropriate pictures so right now we're investigating whether or not there was improper use of our equipment or any other violations of school policy," said Duval County Schools spokesperson Jill Johnson.
"The investigation has also cost the two-year Mandarin football coach his job with the school system. Like any new teacher, Robinson was on probation for three years and can be let go during that period for no reason at all."
"The investigation has also cost the two-year Mandarin football coach his job with the school system. Like any new teacher, Robinson was on probation for three years and can be let go during that period for no reason at all."
38
from Action News 47
CBS
"Robinson has hired attorney and plans to fight for his career. He also takes issue with how he was let go saying it was through an email and no one spoke to him face to face. Through a text, he told Action News, "I have done a lot of good things at that school. It was my life. I put more hours in there than anyone there. How I'm being shown the door is total disgrace to teachers everywhere. Teachers are human we all have lives outside of school." Robinson also texted Action News fourteen pictures of his junk."
CBS
"Robinson has hired attorney and plans to fight for his career. He also takes issue with how he was let go saying it was through an email and no one spoke to him face to face. Through a text, he told Action News, "I have done a lot of good things at that school. It was my life. I put more hours in there than anyone there. How I'm being shown the door is total disgrace to teachers everywhere. Teachers are human we all have lives outside of school." Robinson also texted Action News fourteen pictures of his junk."
39
It's funny -- my first question upon reading this was whether or not the 20 year-old used to be a student at the school when he was already the coach there. If her sister goes there, it's likely she also went there, so the question then is of the contract. He's in his second year of a three year contract, so he was there when the girl was 18/19, and it's possible *that* contract was renewed from an earlier one, in which case she was probably a student at his school while he was there.
By itself, that means nothing. Obviously, right now, his relationship is completely legal and non-renewing his contract for something like this is not okay. But if there is a possibility that this relationship began while she was a student at the school, then there should be an investigation of some kind. NOT an automatic non-renewal of contract, but an investigation.
By itself, that means nothing. Obviously, right now, his relationship is completely legal and non-renewing his contract for something like this is not okay. But if there is a possibility that this relationship began while she was a student at the school, then there should be an investigation of some kind. NOT an automatic non-renewal of contract, but an investigation.
42
Here's the e-mail I sent.
Dr. Richardson,
I wanted to let you know that your policy of firing an employee for
engaging in legal and consensual activities is deplorable. A dirty video, that was probably obtained illegaly, is (1) none of your business and (2) not a reason to fire someone. Furthermore, you have most likely exposed your school district to a wrongful termination lawsuit which will only end up costing the taxpayers money because you were unable to realize that an employer has absolutely no right to infringe employees' first amendment rights when they are not at work. I want to reiterate
that final point; this is a first amendment issue, and any decent
attorney will see it as such.
Maybe your teachers don't have the benefit of a union and can be fired without just cause, but that does not grant you immunity to do whatever you want. Employers cannot discriminate or violate the constitution when they fire someone.
Also are you really so naive to believe that no one else employed at your school has ever made a sexually explicit movie? Part of being an educator is preparing students for the real world, but your actions only display an extremely ignorant, unrealistic, and backwards view of reality.
P.S. In your letter you stated, "You are also being non-reappointed" and "It is regretful that the situation..." How on Earth do you expect students to avoid the passive voice when you use it yourself? Also "non-reappointed" is definitely not a word, and if "it" being the situation were "regretful." then the situation would be full of sorrow. You may be regretful, but the situation is more than likely "regrettable" i.e. unfortunate.
Dr. Richardson,
I wanted to let you know that your policy of firing an employee for
engaging in legal and consensual activities is deplorable. A dirty video, that was probably obtained illegaly, is (1) none of your business and (2) not a reason to fire someone. Furthermore, you have most likely exposed your school district to a wrongful termination lawsuit which will only end up costing the taxpayers money because you were unable to realize that an employer has absolutely no right to infringe employees' first amendment rights when they are not at work. I want to reiterate
that final point; this is a first amendment issue, and any decent
attorney will see it as such.
Maybe your teachers don't have the benefit of a union and can be fired without just cause, but that does not grant you immunity to do whatever you want. Employers cannot discriminate or violate the constitution when they fire someone.
Also are you really so naive to believe that no one else employed at your school has ever made a sexually explicit movie? Part of being an educator is preparing students for the real world, but your actions only display an extremely ignorant, unrealistic, and backwards view of reality.
P.S. In your letter you stated, "You are also being non-reappointed" and "It is regretful that the situation..." How on Earth do you expect students to avoid the passive voice when you use it yourself? Also "non-reappointed" is definitely not a word, and if "it" being the situation were "regretful." then the situation would be full of sorrow. You may be regretful, but the situation is more than likely "regrettable" i.e. unfortunate.
43
Look, Dr. Richardson: It's two accessories maximum per square foot--either the necklace and the earrings, earrings and the brooch, brooch and the scarf, *or* earrings and the scarf. But not all fucking four. And if you're wearing a necklace, you don't need a scarf on top of it--unless you think your pearls are gonna get cold.
45
#44-- I'm really not sure whether to address my letter to a Mrs. Richardson, or a Mr. Richardson. It's really hard to tell from the photo.
#8-- You're fucking ridiculous. Who the hell cares about an age difference? I'm assuming you're from Florida too? Fucking republicans.
#8-- You're fucking ridiculous. Who the hell cares about an age difference? I'm assuming you're from Florida too? Fucking republicans.
46
#44-- I'm really not sure whether to address my letter to a Mrs. Richardson, or a Mr. Richardson. It's really hard to tell from the photo.
#8-- You're fucking ridiculous. Who the hell cares about an age difference? I'm assuming you're from Florida too? Fucking republicans.
#8-- You're fucking ridiculous. Who the hell cares about an age difference? I'm assuming you're from Florida too? Fucking republicans.
47
Oh ye gods! >roll eyes<
You know, being from Europe I should probably be surprised that a case like this can happen, but since this has happened in "God's own country", sadly enough I'm not :-(
If the teacher has used a school computer to send a nude picture/movie to his girlfriend, who happens to be 20 years old, then he's forgotten to think, and should hit himself over the head for being stupid, and probably reprimanded for inproper use of the school's equipment. But that being said, he should NOT be let go and reassigned in his job.
The pictures in question was sent to a current girlfriend, and I doubt that it was his intention to have the mother of his girlfriend (or anyone else) see them. The fact that the mother is "lifting" the pics off of her 20 year old daughter's mobile, is (IMO) quite frankly reprehensible. She has no business going through the content of her daughter's mobile. Not even if she should happen to be paying for it. It's private property IMO, and I'd personally equate it to theft.
As far as I can understand, the teacher in question is persuing legal action, and in this case I wish him the best of luck. I seriously hope that the mother and principal will be crucified in the media, and lose said lawsuit with a wide margin.
You know, being from Europe I should probably be surprised that a case like this can happen, but since this has happened in "God's own country", sadly enough I'm not :-(
If the teacher has used a school computer to send a nude picture/movie to his girlfriend, who happens to be 20 years old, then he's forgotten to think, and should hit himself over the head for being stupid, and probably reprimanded for inproper use of the school's equipment. But that being said, he should NOT be let go and reassigned in his job.
The pictures in question was sent to a current girlfriend, and I doubt that it was his intention to have the mother of his girlfriend (or anyone else) see them. The fact that the mother is "lifting" the pics off of her 20 year old daughter's mobile, is (IMO) quite frankly reprehensible. She has no business going through the content of her daughter's mobile. Not even if she should happen to be paying for it. It's private property IMO, and I'd personally equate it to theft.
As far as I can understand, the teacher in question is persuing legal action, and in this case I wish him the best of luck. I seriously hope that the mother and principal will be crucified in the media, and lose said lawsuit with a wide margin.
48
I found this at the end of an editorial from a local news agency, apparently posted by a friend of the poor young girl involved in the story. Call me conservative, but it was important for me to know before sending my protest to this richardson woman, perhaps also for others.
2) The relationship between Coach Robinson and the 20 yr. old DID NOT start while she attended Mandarin. In fact she was seeing another student at that time which actually lasted well into her 1st year of college. She actually did not start "talking" to him until this year and they did not begin actually "dating" up until a few months ago.
http://ww.jacksonville.com/opinion/blog/…
Finally, I tip my cap to you, Dan Savage: Your cunning inclusion of Richardson's photo has exposed her for the backwards and ridiculous bat she is.
2) The relationship between Coach Robinson and the 20 yr. old DID NOT start while she attended Mandarin. In fact she was seeing another student at that time which actually lasted well into her 1st year of college. She actually did not start "talking" to him until this year and they did not begin actually "dating" up until a few months ago.
http://ww.jacksonville.com/opinion/blog/…
Finally, I tip my cap to you, Dan Savage: Your cunning inclusion of Richardson's photo has exposed her for the backwards and ridiculous bat she is.
Advertisement
Most Commented on Slog
-
Hating People Doesn't Make Them Thinner by Jen Graves
-
Los Angeles Gay Bar Bans Bachelorette Parties Until Marriage Equality Is Attained by David Schmader
-
Fill in the Blank by Grant Brissey
-
This Reminds Me of the Great Calculator Scare of the Late '70s/Early '80s by David Schmader
-
Idiot Tries to Defend Bigoted Anti-Gay-Marriage Preacher on Anderson Cooper by Paul Constant
-
Six Moms with Too Much Time on Their Hands and a Shitty Website Decide to Fight Gay Superheroes by Paul Constant
-
Why Mayor McGinn's Wife Canceled Her Family's Seattle Times Subscription by Eli Sanders
-
What the Hell Is Wrong With Seattle's Pride Parade? by Dominic Holden
-
The Saturday Morning News by Unpaid Intern
-
NYC Man Ticketed for Not Riding in the Bike Lane by Jonathan Golob
RSS
Facebook
Twitter
Comments (49) RSS