Pro-2A Parkland survivor Kyle Kashuv questioned by school security for visiting gun range with his f

Pokinfun

The Most Interesting Man in the World
Joined
Feb 15, 2013
Messages
3,758
Reaction score
1,499
Location
Southern
No, their intentions have no bearing on the law. Under the conditions described, and absent an immunity deal (which would require coordination with the DA’s office and preclude any rush to obtain his statement to the exclusion of his parents), his right to remain silent is unassailable. When a sworn officer conducts an interview, it is to support enforcement of criminal law. That is literally their function. They may conclude that no law was broken, but that doesn’t invalidate a subject’s 5th Amendment rights.

And yes I misspoke when I said their 5th Amendment rights are inviolate. If an officer of the court enters into an immunity from prosecution agreement with the subject, they may be compelled to provide a statement. Otherwise, no.
I think their intentions do directly influence the questioning of a student in that school.
 

rawhide

Sharpshooter
Special Hen
Joined
Mar 12, 2008
Messages
3,836
Reaction score
784
Location
Lincoln Co.
A good general reference. While Tinker affirmed that students have rights at school, most cases since Tinker have generally favored the school's authority to maintain an educational environment that is safe and not disruptive. Once law enforcement entered into the equation I have to agree that the situation changed and that the student's rights are the same as they would be outside of school. The fact that the interrogation by LEO took place at school and without notifying parents, in my mind, makes this incident even more egregious.
 

Pokinfun

The Most Interesting Man in the World
Joined
Feb 15, 2013
Messages
3,758
Reaction score
1,499
Location
Southern
A good general reference. While Tinker affirmed that students have rights at school, most cases since Tinker have generally favored the school's authority to maintain an educational environment that is safe and not disruptive. Once law enforcement entered into the equation I have to agree that the situation changed and that the student's rights are the same as they would be outside of school. The fact that the interrogation by LEO took place at school and without notifying parents, in my mind, makes this incident even more egregious.
Our resource officers actually work for the district, I wonder if that changes how the court would see their actions, as part of the school or as the police. We were actually discussing this issue if I became a reserve officer for the school, so I could carry in the school, am I cop or a teacher?
 

rawhide

Sharpshooter
Special Hen
Joined
Mar 12, 2008
Messages
3,836
Reaction score
784
Location
Lincoln Co.
Our resource officers actually work for the district, I wonder if that changes how the court would see their actions, as part of the school or as the police. We were actually discussing this issue if I became a reserve officer for the school, so I could carry in the school, am I cop or a teacher?
Exactly why I don't want to go that route to be able to carry at school. Our chief of police has suggested training some teachers as auxiliary police so they would meet the legal requirement, but I don't want to be a campus cop.

Isn't a Resource Officer a law enforcement officer? If so, does it matter whose paying his/her salary?
 

Dale00

Sharpshooter
Special Hen
Joined
May 28, 2006
Messages
7,124
Reaction score
3,347
Location
Oklahoma
The mistreatment of this student seems to be a manifestation of the old "zero-tolerance" mindset that seems to be what school administrators now use in place of reasoned judgement. Or perhaps the school administration culture now largely lacks the capability to discern anything reasonable when it comes to firearms.
 

rawhide

Sharpshooter
Special Hen
Joined
Mar 12, 2008
Messages
3,836
Reaction score
784
Location
Lincoln Co.
The mistreatment of this student seems to be a manifestation of the old "zero-tolerance" mindset that seems to be what school administrators now use in place of reasoned judgement. Or perhaps the school administration culture now largely lacks the capability to discern anything reasonable when it comes to firearms.
Zero tolerance policies are the work of school boards and bad policy because they tie the hands of good administrators.

They’d probably need a raise lol
If serving in that capacity, yes they would.
 

Dave70968

Sharpshooter
Special Hen
Joined
Aug 17, 2010
Messages
6,678
Reaction score
4,599
Location
Norman
I think you are looking at it wrong, were the police attempting to arrest the student or were they trying to prevent another shooting? I am not saying that the police should ever violate someone's Rights, but you have to question what their end game was.
When they openly acknowledged that he wasn't a threat, but refused to turn him loose, I definitely start questioning their motives.
 

rawhide

Sharpshooter
Special Hen
Joined
Mar 12, 2008
Messages
3,836
Reaction score
784
Location
Lincoln Co.
When they openly acknowledged that he wasn't a threat, but refused to turn him loose, I definitely start questioning their motives.
As I stated earlier, this would indicate a lack of communication between administration and campus cops. The motives of the resource officers appears to be different than that of the principal and likely they acted without the support or knowledge of the principal. Based of course on the very limited knowledge we have of what happened.
 

Dave70968

Sharpshooter
Special Hen
Joined
Aug 17, 2010
Messages
6,678
Reaction score
4,599
Location
Norman
One of the biggest problems is that typically, the only "remedy" for such violations is the suppression of illegally-gathered evidence.

Hold the relevant people accountable for kidnapping and they'll get the message.
 
Top Bottom