Reply #119: Is there some reason you're so obsessed with convicting before trial on the basis of "evidence"

[Hannah Bell]

released by one side?

It's hysterical to see you write "what further proof do you need"?


The case hasn't even been certified as a class action yet.

The preliminary investigation isn't even complete.

No judge or jury has ruled on any evidence.

I haven't defended the security devices; in fact, I've said the arrangements were stupid & asking for trouble. However, that's not what the majority of posters are discussing, & that's not the main thrust of the case.

For example, in the most recent filing, plantiffs allege the tech supervisor was possibly "a voyeur".

The "evidence" for this is some emails which they apparently quote out of context (per this latest article in the Inquirer, to whom the full text of the emails was supposedly provided):


"Cafiero's lawyer, Charles Mandracchia, said Friday his client was eager to cooperate but first wanted to meet with the criminal investigators. An FBI agent plans to interview her Tuesday, he said.

Mandracchia also said Cafiero, who is on paid leave from her school post, never looked at or tried to look at any pictures of Robbins.

"Carol Cafiero did not look at any Blake Robbins pictures - not one," Mandracchia said in an interview. "The only time she would ever go in was if someone asked her to or directed her to - and it was only two or three times."

In each case, he said, Cafiero was asked to help find a missing laptop. None of the photos she saw were inappropriate, he said.

Mandracchia also took issue with Haltzman's use of district e-mail excerpts in the motion filed Thursday. The motion said another Lower Merion schools employee, after viewing photos from the Web cameras, had written to Cafiero: "It's like a little LMSD soap opera."

According to the motion, Cafiero e-mailed back: "I know, I love it!"

Mandracchia said the e-mail exchange between Cafiero and the employee, Amanda Wuest, took place more than a year before the district activated the tracking system on Blake Robbins' computer. The attorney gave The Inquirer a copy of what he said was the entire exchange, dated Sept. 19, 2008.

The copy appears to show that the two women were responding to a report from four students that a laptop was missing from a Harriton High gym. Officials first checked surveillance cameras in the building but saw nothing suspicious, according to the e-mail.

Referring to the tracking program's tools, Wuest wrote back to Cafiero: "Hopefully, if they were taken, we'll get some screen captures/pictures over the weekend."

http://www.philly.com/inquirer/front_page/20100417_L__Merion_to_let_parents_see_secretly_snapped_photos.html



On the basis of the two excerpted quotes in the filing, I've seen DUers decide/allege:

1. That many school staff must have had access to any photos
2. That Cafiero is a pervert who should be jailed
3. That the quoted material "proves" the school was engaged in widespread spying
4. etc.


However, the latest article leaves a different impression; that Cafiero & Wuest were actually discussing surveillance cameras inside the school.


But I don't know, because I'm not privy to the full text & context of the emails.

And neither are you, & neither are all the witchhunters at DU.