Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
The thing is with using counterfeit tender, places don't know if you are using it for bad means or got it by accident and it would be easy to lie about it if you used it. Like if I used a counterfeit $20 myself, all I had to do is lie and say"Oh I got that from the last cashier I went to" and I could get off. For a school to allow lying to get a student off is asking for trouble.
You can apply this notion to a lot of things in life. And usually what happens is because they don't have evidence the person actually knew, they will drop it.
My coworker once received a counterfeit from an ATM. She didn't realize it and when she went to use it, they told her it was fake. Her only consequence was getting screwed out of $20.
I bet if a teacher in the school had accidentally done the same thing the person wouldn't have been suspended.
that's what i said...if you actually read my post. I simply pointed out that some posters were portraying it as regular out-of-school suspension.
It's just irrelevant to the topic. So in-school suspensions are a picnic and a boon... they're also a punishment, which is completely unwarranted. Like getting an innocent person to cop to a lesser charge.
Status:
"I don't understand. But I don't care, so it works out."
(set 19 days ago)
35,670 posts, read 18,040,478 times
Reputation: 50724
Quote:
Originally Posted by TaxPhd
The kid did indeed pass the bill, that's not even questionable. He's absolutely "guilty" of that act.
Does that thinking hold for a lunch lady who serves a child food containing botulism bacteria, unknowingly, although all the safety protocols she was a witness to were followed? She's guilty of attempted murder?
Your thinking is completely inflexible, and unworkable.
Someone who does not know a bill they've gotten from a legitimate source is counterfeit, is absolutely not guilty of a crime.
The law runs on the concept of "a reasonable person". Would a "reasonable person" think this bill was real?
The "rest of the story" is of no significance where the school is concerned, because of the statement they made twice--that he has to "pay" for merely being in possession of the counterfeit bill.
This nonsense is the natural result of zero tolerance policies, which obviate the need for judgment on the part of those within whose purvue it should be to exercise it.
Those in authority feel good about being able to eschew their responsibility, and kids [possibly] with no malicious intent, are summarily punished.
Does that thinking hold for a lunch lady who serves a child food containing botulism bacteria, unknowingly, although all the safety protocols she was a witness to were followed? She's guilty of attempted murder?
Your thinking is completely inflexible, and unworkable.
Someone who does not know a bill they've gotten from a legitimate source is counterfeit, is absolutely not guilty of a crime.
The law runs on the concept of "a reasonable person". Would a "reasonable person" think this bill was real?
Note the "guilty" in quotes.
He did it. No question about it, and has admitted as such. Since the discussion is about actions that the school is taking rather than actions taken by the justice system, a discussion about "guilt" is simply about whether he in fact did it. Note as well that I've said nothing about whether any punishment should be handed out.
However, to address the issue of knowing vs. unknowing, are you OK with someone knowingly passing counterfeit bills, and facing no consequences simply by stating that they didn't know the bill was counterfeit?
The "rest of the story" is of no significance where the school is concerned, because of the statement they made twice--that he has to "pay" for merely being in possession of the counterfeit bill.
This nonsense is the natural result of zero tolerance policies, which obviate the need for judgment on the part of those within whose purvue it should be to exercise it.
Now, now, it gets better. When the kid gets out in the real world, he'll have three strikes instead of one.
A Georgia middle school honor student received a 10 day in-school suspension for using a counterfeit $20 bill to pay for his lunch. His dad gave him the money and was not aware that it was counterfeit. Though the parents filed a police report and stated that they received the bill in a transaction at a fast-food restaurant, the school says that because the child was in possession of the counterfeit bill it is a violation of their honor code.
Perhaps there is more to this story (though I don't think there is), but this seems like an unduly harsh punishment for an unknowing mistake.
the school administration confiscated the fake $20 bill so now they are in possession of counterfeit money. i think the principal should serve his 10-day suspension sitting next to this kid.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
