SoylentNews is people
SoylentNews
Illinois prosecutors have charged a 13-year-old student with felony eavesdropping for recording his conversation with two school administrators. Should he be found guilty and sentenced, a conviction could land him a minimum of one year in prison. According to TechDirt:
The [Illinois] law forbids recordings without all parties' consent. It would seem that the school officials' refusal to discuss anything further once they were informed they were being recorded should have been enough. The conversation was ended, along with the recording. If they were concerned they said something they shouldn't have during the previous ten minutes, maybe should have restrained themselves during the argument, rather than ruin a 13-year-old's life with a bad law Illinois legislators refuse to rewrite. Given how often this law is used to protect the powerful, it's hardly surprising legislators haven't expressed a serious interest in fixing it.
Everyone from the administrators to the prosecutors and those in between had a lot of discretion available to stop the chain of events, but all chose not to stop it.
(Score: 2) by tfried on Tuesday July 03 2018, @05:27AM (3 children)
I do agree with you (and the majority of other commenters) that they (school, police, prosecutors, arguably lawmakers) are clearly over-reacting in allowing this to be a escalate to a 13 year old charged with a felony.
But on the other hand: If you go nothing to hide, then you got nothing to fear from being recorded? Really?
We all don't know, what the discussion was all about except "not showing up to detentions". But to help imagination, let's just suppose the original reason for detentions was some kind of bullying another student. Suppose during the conversation things get said like "you know what? I actually agree that student X is one big asshole, but that still does not make it right to [do whatever you did]." Maybe that would not be the most professional thing to say, but you don't have to be an evil lizard person to say such a thing in a confidential conversation and to really, really, not want an audio recording of you saying those words.
Or perhaps that kid got detention for chanting "evolution is just a theory", obnoxiously, and refusing to shut up during class. Then during his talk with school administrators, he tried to drag them into a discussion on creationism. Then, either he succeeded in dragging them to his level, or they downright refused to even talk about it. In either way, the recording - possibly with a bit of editing - would probably make some really good flamebait among the usual suspects.
Probably the student should be allowed to bring an adult witness / counsel to a conversation like this, if they wish to. But I do not think, audio recordings - secret or not - are something that should generally be allowed in this setting, as it would actually limit what can be said.
(Score: 1, Insightful) by Anonymous Coward on Tuesday July 03 2018, @01:49PM
That's why superiors should always record their conversations with subordinates, in order to always be aware that everything they say stays on the record, and to behave in accordance with responsibility of their position.
As one over many, they must adhere to a stricter moral code then just any random person.
(Score: 3, Insightful) by Anonymous Coward on Tuesday July 03 2018, @01:56PM
I disagree, I feel that all interactions with authority should be recorded precisely because it limits what can be said. There are few checks on authority, and recording them is one of the few that actually works at all.
(Score: 2) by tangomargarine on Tuesday July 03 2018, @03:14PM
When you're in a public position of authority, sure. Seems like naming and shaming is about all we have left of accountability these days.
"Is that really true?" "I just spent the last hour telling you to think for yourself! Didn't you hear anything I said?"