« Previous | Main | Next »
June 17, 2011
Comments
You can follow this conversation by subscribing to the comment feed for this post.
Verify your Comment
Previewing your Comment
This is only a preview. Your comment has not yet been posted.
Your comment could not be posted. Error type:
Your comment has been posted. Post another comment
As a final step before posting your comment, enter the letters and numbers you see in the image below. This prevents automated programs from posting comments.
Having trouble reading this image? View an alternate.
The photo involving a student and a teacher however was deemed acceptable.
Posted by: Martini Shark | June 17, 2011 at 11:16 AM
we had a case in the area this year - someone doctored a girl's photo to make it look like she had a gold grille, and they had to pull back the year books. first they issued them by blanking out her picture... she was actually very gracious, but someone else was just mean. why would anybody do that!
Posted by: queensbee | June 17, 2011 at 11:24 AM
Perfect post, judi!
Posted by: MOTW | June 17, 2011 at 11:34 AM
suspect and victim are not the focus of the photo
Ummm Suspect? Victim? Really?
Why not just describe them as an 'amorous couple'?
Posted by: wiredog | June 17, 2011 at 11:49 AM
Because we have solved all our other problems, right?
I hope someone includes or edits in new "photo-shopped" photos of the authorities who made
this "determination"....and photo-shopped with circus clowns, of course.
I mean, if you are gonna go for truth (and sanitized) in publication, go for it ALL THE WAY!!!
Posted by: funny man | June 17, 2011 at 11:55 AM
what i don't get is how the students who keep their yearbooks, produced and distributed BY THE SCHOOL, could be accused of possessing child porn. wouldn't that make the school liable? and seriously, a guy with his hand up a girl's skirt is hardly child porn; just look at any video featuring teen girls.
Posted by: judi the barberho | June 17, 2011 at 11:58 AM
Ah, very attentive and effective shaperones..The
dumbestmost difficult thing I ever did was volunteer to put on junior high school dances for my kids. Had shaperones in the bathrooms, halls, under the bleachers. Still didn't stop all the activity.Posted by: EyeGore | June 17, 2011 at 11:58 AM
Wanna stop kids from doing that at dances? Put a couple of old people out there gettin busy. It will turn them right off.
Siouxie told me.
Posted by: Annie Where-but-here | June 17, 2011 at 12:28 PM
judi, I'm actually pretty sure they could. It's no different than the students charged after receiving suggestive text messages.
Posted by: Elon | June 17, 2011 at 12:39 PM
so were the suspects fingered?
Posted by: sandy | June 17, 2011 at 12:40 PM
And yet they have no problem with encouraging cheerleaders to kick up their skirts.
Posted by: oneblankspace | June 17, 2011 at 01:01 PM
Detectives were contacting students who haven't turned in yearbooks with a warning they could face a charge of possessing child porn.
If this is true couldn't the school be charged with selling and distributing child pornography? Watch out obs, I was a cheerleader in high school. A darn good one in fact.
Posted by: nursecindy | June 17, 2011 at 01:27 PM
wiredog hit my comment exactly... I don't think anything is served by loaded comments like 'suspect' and 'victim' when the odds are good that whatever was going on was consensual.
*pictures cindy in cheerleader outfit - slaps self*
Posted by: Jeff Meyerson | June 17, 2011 at 01:38 PM
Dear God. My alma mater (class of 1980). I'm so proud...
Posted by: Spiny Norman | June 17, 2011 at 02:27 PM
My youngest was a cheerleader at her high school. I went a game one night to watch her cheer. The Dance Team put on a show that was quite a show.
I felt like it verged on porn. And I am not a prude.
This was the same school where actual dances were prohibited because the administration thought dancing was too much like sex standing up.
Posted by: Steve | June 17, 2011 at 02:52 PM
Jeff: it couldn't have been consensual, legally, if one of them was under the age of consent.
Posted by: Curtis E Flush | June 17, 2011 at 04:06 PM
Big Bare...Yogi sure picked a fine time to peek in Booboo's pic-a-nic basket.
Posted by: Annie Where-but-here | June 17, 2011 at 04:34 PM
I have to question the statement in the headline "possibly engaged in a sex act" if the school is not sure maybe they are not doing a very good job of teaching?
Posted by: oldfatguy | June 17, 2011 at 06:05 PM
Guy hits a triple and they call in the feds? That's not right.
Posted by: Anthony's weiner | June 17, 2011 at 06:10 PM
Agreed, if they were having sex and if one was underage that's another story, but they don't even seem sure something happened, let alone what.
Posted by: Jeff Meyerson | June 17, 2011 at 06:34 PM
Getting geezerish, but I remember the National Lampoon Yearbook edition.
Posted by: Loudmouth | June 17, 2011 at 11:20 PM
They had the same problem in 2000 BC. Had to break ALL the yearbooks into pebbles and start again. Rotten teenagers.
Posted by: hogsatemysister | June 18, 2011 at 05:56 AM
I tried to turn my yearbook in after I saw some of the senior pictures.
Posted by: Clankazoid | June 18, 2011 at 10:38 AM
In my jr. high yearbook, there was a column featuring what kids submitted as phrases that teachers were known for uttering repeatedly. Someone submitted that one particular gym teacher was known for saying "Jacket off." They printed it then physically cut out the offending line with a razor knife.
(The person who submitted it is now a prominent L.A politician and has been so for years.)
Posted by: SW | June 18, 2011 at 12:49 PM