Phone call from soldier Mom lands student in trouble
Mother’s call gets son in hot water
Student suspended over call from mom in Iraq
Updated 09 May 2005: Student’s penalty reduced to 3 day suspension. Details at bottom of post.
17 year-old Kevin Francois, a student at Spencer High School in the Muscogee County School District, was suspended for disorderly conduct after refusing to hang up on his overseas mother. Kevin’s mother only gets the opportunity to call him about once a month and the times are very irregular.
The incident happened when Francois received a call from his mother at 12:30 p.m., which he said was his lunch break. Francois said he went outside the school building to get a better reception when his mother called. A teacher who saw Francois on his phone told him to get off the phone. But he didn’t.
…
Francois said he told the teacher, “This is my mom in Iraq. I’m not about to hang up on my mom.”Francois said the teacher tried to take the phone, causing it to hang up.
The student said he then went with the teacher to the school’s office where he surrendered his phone. His mother called again at 12:37 p.m. and left a message scolding her son about hanging up and telling him to answer the phone when she calls.
Assistant principal Alfred Parham said the suspension was not for breaking the rule on cell phone use but for being defiant when instructed to hang up and again later while in the school’s office.
“Kevin got defiant and disorderly with [assistant principal Wendell] Turner and another assistant principal,” Parham said Thursday. “He got defiant with me. He refused to leave Mr. Turner’s office. When a kid becomes out of control like that they can either be arrested or suspended for 10 days. Now being that his mother is in Iraq, we’re not trying to cause her any undue hardship; he was suspended for 10 days.”
Do these people have any understanding or compassion? This kid isn’t going to see his mother for a year. He only gets to talk to her once a month. A teacher disconnects his call with his mother and then they make him sit there while she calls back and not let him answer the phone. How in the world can they expect him to be anything BUT defiant and belligerent?
There are good reasons for banning cell phone use in school. Preventing a student from talking to a parent while outside of the school during his lunch break. The fact that his mother is serving overseas and this was his one chance to talk to her in a month makes this enforcement cruel as well as unnecessary.
Additional contact Information:
Principal Olivia Rutledge
Superintendent Dr. John A. Phillips, Jr.
Assistant Superintendent Karen P. Jones
(Tip credit to Cathy Weeks, Mike Sabo, Rudolph Lampi and J Grimaldi)
UPDATE 09 May 2005
Penalty reduced for student who took call from mom in Iraq
Kevin Francois’ suspension has been reduced from ten days to three. The reduction follows a media firestorm and public outcry that went international.
Muscogee County School District Superintendent John Phillips Jr. said Friday the suspension was not because of the phone call, but the result of Francois’ reaction to the teacher interrupting it.
“The suspension was really incidental to the telephone. It was the behavior of the student, using profanity, screaming at the teacher,” Phillips said.
…
Francois disputed the school’s version of the story.“I was just talking to them and they wouldn’t listen to me about talking to my mom,” he said. “I didn’t curse at them.”
…
Phillips said the teacher was not aware at the time Francois had been speaking with his mother.“I’m sure if she was aware of that, she would have acted much differently in dealing with the matter,” Phillips said.
Phillips said the school, which is located near Fort Benning, often arranges for students to receive calls from parents who are deployed. More than 3,700 students in the district come from military families.
I guess I’d never make it as a teacher at that school. Knowing the circumstances, if he had gotten a call from his mother even during my class, I probably would have allowed him to go outside to talk.
Of course, I’m not a teacher, so what do I know?
Stupid. That teacher and the principals all need a woopin
In school, teachers need to excercise commen sense instead of using an “iron fist” which leads students to behave in a rebellious manner. A teacher’s power is basically absolute. Given the situation, teachers need to excercise commen sense, and humble themselves to the point of being able to feel emotion, realizing that they aren’t superior because of their jobs, or because of their age. The reason so many students hate their teachers is because of situations like this. Teachers and administrators need to learn to admit that they are wrong, and they also need to learn that some rules should be bent in situations like this.
I’ve always thought it utterly ridiculous that students aren’t allowed to use their cells, walkmans, etc. during lunch. I can understand in the class room, but why are they prohibited at lunch as well?
If I were Francois, I’d go out for lunch from now on so I wouldn’t have to take that crap.
While I agree with the other postings about lack of teacher empathy, most troops stationed overseas know what time it is where their wife and kids are. When I was in Saudi Arabia, I only called my wife in Colorado when I knew she’d be awake and able to take the call.
It’s hard to believe our troops in Iraq are so committed to their activities and so limited in access to phones to the States, that they can’t make their calls when the calls are likely to be convenient in the States. (For this mother, say, on Saturdays and Sundays, between 3pm and 10pm in Iraq for her son in Georgia to get the call the same day between 7am and 2pm. In the instant case, she called at 12:37pm in Georgia which was 8:37pm in Iraq. Unless she had an early curfew, she could have called three hours later when her son was probably out of school.)
If she’s in the field 24/7, take her calls whenever she can make them. But if, as is more likely, she has some flexibility about when she can call, she should try to make her calls convenient to her son.
This isn’t a situation with troops in steady contact with the enemy. Sometimes they’re out on patrol, sure, but a lot of the time they’re in garrison and can choose when to use the phone and whom to call.
The Teacher and the Assistant principal’s caused this situation. No, cell Phones basicly should not be used in School, but lets use common sence and when the student is on his/her lunch and it is a situation like this use a little common sense and allow an exception!
His mother must wonder if someday the Iraqi’s will have to come and liberate US school children from the petty Saadams.
Not that they’ll read it, but I just sent the following e-mail to the superintendant and principal.
Dear God, What have we come to when a a student can be suspended for trying to talk to his mother? He’s 17 years old, soon to graduate and leave your school system. Is there no room for compassion of any kind?
My mother died a year ago after a long illness; had anyone tried to keep me from talking to her, let alone physically restrain me, I fear I would have become violent. This young man did what any normal person would have done. If you don’t have the same reaction, I pity you.
Harry Pool wrote:
[…]
> It’s hard to believe our troops in Iraq
> are so committed to their activities and
> so limited in access to phones to the
> States, that they can’t make their calls
> when the calls are likely to be convenient
> in the States.
[…]
I thought she did call at a time she knew to be convenient — her son’s lunch hour.
Call three hours later when he’s out of school? Who knows what he’s doing. He may be driving somewhere, or otherwise engaged in something that he might not easily be able to answer the phone.
I always thought when they said no cell phones in school they meant dont even bring them to school. If he had followed the simple rules there wouldn’t have been a problem.
Cell phones aren’t prohibited, only using them is. They allow cell phones so kids can contact their parents/rides after school or school activities.
Cell Phone use is prohibited at my HS (and most others) during school hours.
The thing I want to see is what will happen to the admin. when the kid’s mother returns
I just told my daughter that if anyone ever instructs her to hang up on me she is to feel free to become belligerent. I’ll be happy to come bail her out of jail. Then, I’m not in Iraq so bailing her out won’t be as big a problem.
How sad. Public school is a menace.
Last I checked, a teacher has no authority to lay hands on any student for any reason, except in self defense against a physical attack or in defense of another. Separating people who are fighting, yes. Stopping someone from hitting someone else, of course. Wrestling a “dangerous” object like a cellphone away from a 17 year old kid who is talking to his mother? Hell no. If I were the boy, I’d be trying to file criminal charges against the teacher; If the story presented here is true, that teacher would be guilty of fourth degree assault, and probably third degree theft as well. Neither is a felony, but either one is serious enough to be arrested for.
I’ll bet that the only reason they were so hard on him is his mom was in the military.
I Would Have Turned A Blind Eye
Every rule has to admit that there are situations that are exceptions. Such exceptions often are tacit rather than written down. Shouldn�t common sense have let there be one here? A high school student was suspended for 10 days for…
I thought it was insane to read the punishments that they can enact against a student.
”He got defiant with me. He refused to leave Mr. Turner’s office. When a kid becomes out of control like that they can either be arrested or suspended for 10 days.”
ARRESTED?! For refusing to leave an office? When did arrest become acceptable as a disciplinary method in schools? NO parent would ever arrest their child for being defiant. Of course, we are not talking about compassionate, caring, or concerned parents; we are talking about authoritarians whose only concern is the rules, not the students under their care.
Bergman Oswell’s attitude is part of the problem. These people need to be taught compassion and common sense, not sued into oblivion.
What really gets me is that Columbus, GA is a military town. It is the home of Ft. Benning, home of the 3rd Infantry Division (in which Mrs. Spencer serves) and the U.S. Army Infantry School. Probably half the kids in that school are army brats. You’d think of all the public schools in America, this one would understand what kids go through when their parents are deployed overseas. Apparently not.
Methinks a curt letter or two from the Post Commander will set things straight…
I’ll bet that the only reason they were so hard on him is his mom was in the military.
You mean to say somebody in the public school system might be biased AGAINST someone in the military?… Shocking… Positivly Shocking….
Actually, from reading some of the articles, it’s obvious someone’s lying. He says he told them it’s his mom calling from Iraq. The principal says the school has actually made provisions for parents to call their kids there before and that he never told the teacher who he was talking to.
They were allowed to have cell phones AT school, but not to use them.
Yes he overreacted. So did the school. They were planning to suspend him for 3 days over the first incident, regardless of how he acted in the office.
http://www.cnn.com/2005/EDUCATION/05/06/phone.iraq/index.html
http://www.ledger-enquirer.com/mld/ledgerenquirer/news/11575912.htm
The superintendent changed the school’s story. The assistant principal is quoted as saying, “When a kid becomes out of control like that they can either be arrested or suspended for 10 days. Now being that his mother is in Iraq, we’re not trying to cause her any undue hardship; he was suspended for 10 days.”
No mention of a possible 3 day suspension. They claim to have been nice to him by not having him arrested.
The kid says to have told the teacher, “This is my mom in Iraq. I’m not about to hang up on my mom.”
http://www.accessnorthga.com/news/ap_newfullstory.asp?ID=60365
http://www.usatoday.com/news/nation/2005-05-06-iraq-suspended_x.htm
Bergman — you are wrong.
A teacher is permitted to lay hands on a student at any time as a part of disciplining or redirecting a student, provided that the actions are proportionate to the situation and do not involve an act of violence.
Thus the attempt to take the cellular phone was well-within the scope of the teacher’s power and duties — and pressing for assault charges would likely result in criminal charges of filing a false police report, as well as disciplianry action by the school for retaliation against a staff member.
Speaking of phone calls… A coworker of mine recieved a call today from Jim, asking for me. The coworker called me and asked what zerointelligence.net is, and told me that a Jim Peacock was asking for me.
If this is true, that is a little disturbing, since I did not give Jim the number to my office.
That’s exceptionally disturbing as it wasn’t me. It’s a gorgeous day here in Atlanta and I’m avoiding the phone like a plague.
While not licensed to practice law in GA I will tell you that in NY what that teacher did would be assualt. It was an unwanted touching and regardless of what Rhymes thinks - it is an actionable offense. Whether a DA would file charges or not is another story (folks keep forgetting that it is the STATE that brings criminal charge - NOT individuals. No individual can “press charges” against anyone else. Please keep that in mind). The student does have recourse in the civil realm - and the loss of money is something that would “teach” that school district, more specifically the teacher, a lesson in compassion.
Before the we don’t need lawsuits/attnys are scum comments start think about this - if schools had to pay each time an abuse of power occurred, this board would have end up the way of the dinosaur - extinct (or washed away in the flood a few thousand years ago if you live in Kansas)
Unlike Rhymes, I live in a civilized State, if not nation. Here, what the teacher did to that boy WOULD be assault. Whether or not it’s unarmed robbery is a gray area; It would probably depend on whether the boy was disrupting class with his cellphone, and even if he was, the teacher would not have the right to assault him for the phone, unless he was actively engaged in assaulting someone else at the time.
Coversating Capers
Mother’s call gets son in hot water
If there were EVER a time for an exception to a cell phone ban, this has to be it. Honestly, if you’re one remaining parent is several thousand miles away in a war zone, would YOU take the call, regardless of the…
Defiance seems to be what landed this young man in hot water. Had he said, “I know that cell phones are not allowed in school. But this is my mom calling me from Iraq and would you please let me take this call?” I think it’s likely that we would not have this ridiculous story. Telling a teacher off is not a plan for success. Maybe he needs to learn that.
According to Neil:
In school, teachers need to excercise commen sense instead of using an “iron fist” which leads students to behave in a rebellious manner. A teacher’s power is basically absolute. Given the situation, teachers need to excercise commen sense, and humble themselves to the point of being able to feel emotion, realizing that they aren’t superior because of their jobs, or because of their age. The reason so many students hate their teachers is because of situations like this. Teachers and administrators need to learn to admit that they are wrong, and they also need to learn that some rules should be bent in situations like this.
Yes, Neil! All teachers are bad! They are not human and can feel no emotion. Let’s all agree that many students hate their teachers not because of maturity issues, but instead because teachers are evil. Way to take a story about one person (that is hearsay at this point) and generalize about every member of an entire profession. Do you have any Polish jokes to tell while you’re at it?
According to Bergman:
Last I checked, a teacher has no authority to lay hands on any student for any reason, except in self defense against a physical attack or in defense of another. Separating people who are fighting, yes. Stopping someone from hitting someone else, of course. Wrestling a “dangerous” object like a cellphone away from a 17 year old kid who is talking to his mother? Hell no. If I were the boy, I’d be trying to file criminal charges against the teacher; If the story presented here is true, that teacher would be guilty of fourth degree assault, and probably third degree theft as well. Neither is a felony, but either one is serious enough to be arrested for.
So… if the teacher shouldn’t touch anybody, even if they are being a menace, let’s call the cops, who are beholden to handcuff them. Then you’ll bitch about that. Anyone wonder why this kind of stuff happens? Here’s the answer, people.
I’m not passing judgement on the Iraq thing. Understand that. Of course the kid should talk to his mother. There was a misunderstanding and someone was heavy handed and he was probably way too belligerant. Bad moves on both parts. Some of the comments here are simply ludicrous.
Around the Blogosphere
Here comes the Christians!! (…satire) Right Wing News The Crusades and Liberal Revisionism Jawa Report, Beautiful Atrocities Stop Feeding the…
I find it hard to believe that the mother could not have called her son outside of school hours. As a former Marine who was stationed overseas, I know that dealing with timezones is not always convenient. However, I would like to know how many other kids across the country have a parent deployed overseas. I would also like to know how many of them are calling their kids during school hours. I don’t think that a teacher trying to take a kids cellphone away from him constitutes assault, unless she kicked him in the nuts and took it as he doubled over and grabbed his groin. If you think the boy should be available to take phone calls at any time, no matter where he is or what he is doing, then just let him stay home until his mother returns from Iraq. And since he won’t be going to school, how about getting him some counselling, maybe some anger management.
Joey,
Speaking as a current active duty member I can say that we where given an appointed time to call from the sand box. We would sometimes switch with a fellow military member or in some case give our time to someone. Now when I was just overseas in the UK I could call whenever I wanted.
I personally hope when Kevin’s mother returns, she attends the school board meeting wearing her uniform and let’s those SOB’s have it. If she does, I hope she invites the press and all veterans and active duty personell to show up and support her. This should be removed from Kevin’s record.
Whether you agreed with LTC Ollie North or not, when he testified before Congress in his uniform his moral authority to speak was very clear. Kevin’s mother is fighting in a country that apparently has more tolerance than these elected twits have in the land of the free. It’s hypocrisy that they fly an American flag in front of their schools.
I think the school overreacted and should have let him take the call and I agree — if it was really his mother from Iraq, I would have the student step outside and take the call.
Ah, if things were so simple……
Who else takes phone calls during school hours? Lets see…. Drug dealers do. Uhhhh how about sex abusers? How about gang members? Uh huh. So how does a teacher know the call is from the mother? How would they know even if they asked to talk to the person on the other end and she said she was his mother calling from Iraq? Of course I’m sure anyone on the other end would tell the truth!
How would the mother feel if her son was taking phone calls from drug dealers? You know… “meet me behind the Gym at 11:45 and bring the money for the grass, man”. She would criticize the school for letting him take the phone call, I expect. Does anyone out there in school-hating-without-knowing-what-they-do-there land see the problem here?
The mother shouldn’t have called at that time. The kid didn’t respond appropriately, and the school overreacted, although there was no way the school could know that the phone call was actually from his mother in Iraq.
barry
Bergman — you and your ACLU membership card can stay in whatever uncivilized state you live in. We don’t want you here in Texas.
Or is the problem not that you are a liberal ninny, but instead that you didn’t bother to read what I wrote.
A teacher is permitted to lay hands on a student at any time as a part of disciplining or redirecting a student, provided that the actions are proportionate to the situation and do not involve an act of violence.
Barry:
First off, he was outside, during his own lunch hour when he took the call; he was most likely not disturbing class.
Second, your arguments against cell phone use in school are absurd at best and inflammatory at worst. If he was a drug dealer, why not just tell his prospective customer about the appointment between classes? If he was a gang member, how would a cell phone make his gang duties any easier? What is a “sex abuser,” anyway?
I find it nothing short of disturbing how you seem to think high-school students are capable of nothing other than crime. I can understand why someone would *suspect* a teenager with a gun of planning nefarious deeds (though investigation, not zero-tolerance, is the answer to that); but when you see a teenager with a *cell phone*, you automatically suspect him of dealing drugs?
Your post in the self-defense story a couple of links up the main page implies you’re a teacher or professor of some kind… do you look out at your class and see nothing but rapists, drug dealers, and gang members, all scheming to subvert authority?
Garret wrote:
>So… if the teacher shouldn’t touch anybody, >even if they are being a menace, let’s call the >cops, who are beholden to handcuff them. Then >you’ll bitch about that. Anyone wonder why this >kind of stuff happens? Here’s the answer, >people.
Are you unable to comprehend written English, Garret? I said that teachers DO have the legal ability to stop an assault on themselves or others, but that they DO NOT have a right to attack someone without provocation or reason. You just flamed me, then agreed with every point I made.
Laying hands on someone aggressively and without their consent (and sometimes even with consent), for any reason, is assault under the law. Simple as that. The law makes allowances for self-defense, and defending someone else from an attack. It also allows police to lay hands on you legally in the course of their duties. It does not, by any stretch of the imagination, allow a teacher to grab a phone out of someone’s hands; Legally speaking, if the confiscation requires physical contact, the teacher MUST contact a police officer to do so (many schools these days have a police officer handy for just this reason).
Rhymes with Right wrote:
>Bergman — you and your ACLU membership card >can stay in whatever uncivilized state you live >in. We don’t want you here in Texas.
>Or is the problem not that you are a liberal >ninny, but instead that you didn’t bother to >read what I wrote.
Ah, the last gasp of the desperate, the ad hominem attack. I believe in the law as a tool to achieve justice. I believe that when someone commits a crime, they should be punished for it. And because I am a patriotic American who believes in the rule of law, I have no place in Texas. Thanks for enlightenming me, I’ll be sure to avoid Texas in the future.
Which is the more serious offense: Violating a school regulation (possessing a cellphone on one’s lunch break) or committing a violation of the law (unarmed assault, a gross misdemeanor in most jurisdictions)?
>A teacher is permitted to lay hands on a >student at any time as a part of disciplining >or redirecting a student, provided that the >actions are proportionate to the situation and >do not involve an act of violence.
And what would you call grabbing someone’s property out of their hands? It meets the legal definitions of both unarmed assault (fourth degree) and unarmed robbery (third degree).
You cannot lay hands on someone aggressively without committing an act of violence. That’s the law. The degree of injury and the methods used determine the severity of the offense and the degree of punishment if convicted…but as long as there is physical contact, assault has been committed.
The teacher may have had the right to demand the boy surrender his phone; Whether this falls under the constitional prohibition on unfair seizure of property is a gray area at best. The teacher would certainly have the right to lay hands on him if he had attacked the teacher. But the teacher does not have the right to violently seize the phone. At that point, it’s a fair bet that if the teacher had been injured in the altercation, it would probably have been self defense on the boy’s part…especially in Texas, which has certain interesting laws about what you can do to a would-be robber. He’d still get expelled, but as anyone who reads this site knows, due process and inalienable rights have little to do with a school’s disciplinary process.
but as long as there is physical contact, assault has been committed.
Sorry, Bergman, but I have to correct you on this. Where there is physical contact (the unwanted, offensive kind), BATTERY has been committed. Assault is the threat, Battery is the contact. From the dictionary at law.com: battery
n. the actual intentional striking of someone, with intent to harm, or in a “rude and insolent manner” even if the injury is slight.
Hi, I am one of Kevin’s teachers. I sympathize with Kevin, if that was his mother that called. Unfortunately, nearly every student has a cell phone in class and half of our students here at Spencer have parents in the military. Many of those parents are in Iraq and Afghanistan. I have a hard enough time preparing them for life as an adult without my students answering cell phones in class, lunch or on campus, regardless of who it might be. I would think a reasonable adult could understand this. I support my administration and their decisions. If his mother wants to talk to Kevin during school hours she can call the office so we know it’s a legitimate call. Kevin can be called into the office very quickly and efficiently.
To the best of my knowledge (which is better than the general public’s in this situation), Kevin was disciplined because of his uncontrolled behavior afterwards, not because of his phone call. Kevin was suspended 3 days instead of 10. And, he was back in class today where I agree he is supposed to be. We all have situations from time to time that require special attention. Kevin, along with the rest of us, needs to make sure to keep a calm attitude and be constructive. That’s what we’re hoping to teach our students.
Sincerely, Kevin’s Science Teacher
Hey Bergman — you made the initial ad hominem attack, and then have the audacity to complain when I respond in kind? That is unmitigated arrogance if I have ever seen it.
Kevin, along with the rest of us, needs to make sure to keep a calm attitude and be constructive. The government education system loves kids who are passive drones.
Mike,
Were they calm and constructive at Lexington and Concord? Although this situation may not rise to match that one, it illustrates the fallacy of your implied generalization.
Rhymes, ad hominem is not justified by the other party doing it first. Rise above.
yo yo har har im a pirate!
but this dude needs to talk to his momma because liek, it could be her last, osama bin laden could be liek omg and liek shoot her with a rabbit or something and that kid would never forgive that scool and might do something drastic
According to the White House, Alfred Parham is claiming a non-taxable income for Child Support Records. After this, I would assume that Alfred Parham will reclaim his statement, because everyone can see that he has a State income.
>I always thought when they said no cell phones >in school they meant dont even bring them to >school. If he had followed the simple rules >there wouldn’t have been a problem.
Whoever wrote this obviously dont know what its like to have love ones away from you. The dudes mom is somewhere else and you gonna blame him for wanting to talk to her. I mean come on now what is that about? I think I would of reacted the same way if I was in that position.