Pittsylvania County School Board member Wayne Robertson has every right to speak on his schools!

      I would like to thank Wayne Robertson, Pittsylvania County
School Board member,  for exercising his U.S First Amendment right to
speak out on issues of public concern. It serves no legitimate
government interest to have people in position of authority that has
no job experience, nepotism is a controlling factor, and lack of due
diligence to competently discharge their duties in any effective
manner because of these factors is simply inexcusable. We owe the
public and community more in taking care of serious administrative and
policy making initiatives. It is shameful that a superintendent would
scold and try to suppress the truth in regards to the problems that is
occuring in the school system.

      I believe that Wayne Robertson has a fed up attitude that enough
is enough and changes need to be made from the top all the way down to
the bottom. We have problems with the school system because we have
people unqualified to fix those problems. We have teachers more
qualified for the jobs at top levels of the school system that are
being ignored and overlooked.
     I also have heard from different sides on the Twin Springs
Elementary issue.  My opinion is the school board and administration
needs training, supervision, and proper oversight on altercations and
the self defense policy.   I am not taking sides with either child or
parent.  However, the newspaper only addressed one side of the story
and I have had a chance to hear from the other side.  I was not there
nor was I present.  However, I believe some teachers need to be
discipline based off the final outcome in regards to this matter.   I
do not accept or tolerate bullying, provoking or instigating any
altercation, or a adult having knowledge that a dispute may be brewing
and fails to exercise proper dispute resolution skills in making sure
a problem does not brew in their classrooms.  The teachers,
administration and students needs to see and respect authority, and
authority has to demand it by their action and resolve, not by
incidents that dictate responsibility that should have came at the
time that an incident has transpired.   We do not need sheriffs in our
school, but need to stress more commonsense and a zero tolerance for
those that act like administration will always excuse teacher’s lack
of discharge of proper conduct and responsibilities in given
scenarios.  Before a sheriff, a teacher is the first line of defense
and needs to stress the importance of that role.

      Lastly, The superintendent needs to rebuke and re-evalute himself
and bring Wayne Robertson on board in a direct capacity on fixing the
problems that keep being repeated within the school system. I only ask
that Wayne Robertson make sure he brings solutions to the problems
with his ambition to fix the ones that he claims to be cancer to
preparing our children for a higher education. The community should
support Wayne Robertson for taking significant leaps in addressing a
problem that has been silenced by bureaucratic red tape. How can you
effectively have proper oversight when the oversight doesn’t have the
proper experience. I am tired of the teachers having to be prepared
for their students while having to train its superiors. This is
backwards and it’s time to move forward.

by

Merle T. Rutledge Jr
Chatham, Va
National Civil Rights Activist

P.S Pittsylvania County Superintendent only had to respond to the numerous letters which he ignored of Wayne Robertson about the problems with the schools.  

Read Full Post »

North Carolina bra search is a big constitutional test! Mark my words

The Associated Press © February 13, 2012

By Martha Waggoner

RALEIGH, N.C.

A student who had to pull her bra away from her body so school officials could check whether she was hiding drugs must have been humiliated and frightened by the unreasonable search, her lawyer told the North Carolina Supreme Court on Monday. An attorney for the state argued the search was minimally invasive.

The state’s high court heard oral arguments in the case involving a student known only as T.A.S — unidentified in court because she was 15 years old when the “bra-lift search” occurred at the Brunswick County Academy in 2008. The justices will decide whether the search violated the Constitution’s protection against unreasonable searches.

“It is unconstitutional for our daughters to be treated this way by the public schools of North Carolina,” attorney Geeta Kapur told the state’s highest court.

Sandra Robinson, the principal of the alternative school for students with disciplinary and other problems, called for the searches after a general tip from other students that prescription pills were coming into the school. She got no more details on what kind of pills or who was bringing them, but knew students usually would hide drugs and other contraband in their underwear, including bras, and their socks and tongues of their shoes.

During the search, students passed through metal detectors, then waited in the lunchroom before being brought one-by-one to a classroom to be searched. The female students had to pull out their shirts and place their thumb underneath the bra to pull it out, allowing any hidden drugs to fall out. Attorneys said there’s no evidence the boys participated in a similar search.

Only the principal testified at trial, and she didn’t witness the search, which occurred in front of three adults, two of them men.

Assistant Attorney General LaToya Powell said the search was minimally invasive because no skin was shown. “By doing this, absolutely no body parts were exposed,” she said.

During the search, a white powder identified as Percocet and drug paraphernalia were found on the student. The student asked a trial judge to prevent the evidence from being used, but the judge refused. She pleaded guilty in March 2009 to two drug-related misdemeanors.

A divided state Court of Appeals ruled 2-1 in favor of the student, finding the search was “degrading, demeaning and highly intrusive.” The state appealed that decision. The state Supreme Court decision is expected to affect 1.5 million public school students.

Powell said the search was not unreasonable because there was “a compelling governmental need” that outweighed the rights of individual privacy, she said. The school’s primary responsibility “was to promote the health and safety of students,” she said.

Although she said in her brief that students at an alternative school have a lower privacy right than those at other schools, Powell told the justices that wasn’t the case. Under questioning by Justice Mark Martin, she said students at alternative schools have the same rights as those at traditional schools.

Kapur argued that two men should not have watched the search because it that violates the Brunswick County school board policies. “We don’t know what happened in that room,” she said. “We don’t know if the two men saw her breasts or positioned themselves to see her breasts.”

Justice Paul Newby asked if the issue of exposure was contested on appeal. It was not, Kapur said.

But in the end, she said: “Who was looking … whether anyone saw any private parts … is irrelevant to Fourth Amendment rights” against unreasonable searches.

Merle T. Rutledge Jr response – Should adult men and women that are not related or have legal guardianship be allowed to view the private areas of underage teenagers without a warrant.  I believe the answer should be “no” because it would violate public policy.  They would literally have to release sex offenders that was only merely peeping toms back into society because this argument would be used to validate other arguments on the matter.  This is a sensitive issue and beware because we look at the black and white of it as being right for government’s purpose.  Can the public actually use that purpose to further pedophilia agendas.  A warrant needs to be secured under conditions of removal of clothes.  I believe, if they are going to be more intrusive than they need to be more inclusive to more civil rights for children.

Mark my words NC, this can blow up in your face in light of victory.  Some victories are just worth giving up in order to protect the safety and health of the people in which the state serves.  I could see a blistering of legal arguments for adults that have view even pornography because one part of the skin or “sensitive areas” may be considered no different than others.  It is the same reason why pedophiles conviction for videotaping underneath women skirts was overturned.

Children must go to school.  Children are not forced to ride a airplane.  If you want to ride the plane than you must follow those rules.  The schools have a extreme amount of power when it comes down to children civil rights and that is why it must be scrutinize from time to time.  This is a great case, but to say the TSA and FAA is a valid argument for this type of search is hogwash.  Being forced and being compelled are two different subjects.

Read Full Post »

Rick Perry puts foot in mouth at S.C debate 1/16/2012

Rick Perry puts foot in mouth at S.C debate 1/16/2012 (Federal vs State) (Voter ID in S.C vs Virginia Ballot requirements)

Rick Perry stated that he supports the South Carolina voter I.D law in order to get votes from S.C Governor Haley endorsement.  He was against the Obama Administration filing a lawsuit against the South Carolina because the voter i.d law unfairly restricts low income people in the state from voting due to its long standing history of discrimination against other ethnic groups other than white.  However, Governor of Texas Rick Perry failed to state that he is personally going up against the Commonwealth of Virginia ballot voting requirements, which is a state rights law, with a lawsuit, which is a state in America, whom has state ballot requirement for candidates and voters, and all those trying to be listed on the Virginia ballot.  Rick Perry accuses the federal government for getting involved in state affairs, but does not use the same harsh criticism, in his own pursuit, already being pushed in State of Virginia to have his name on the ballot.  Does the Texas Governor think that the laws of Virginia and South Carolina, depending on which side of the issue that benefits himself personally is on, is allowed to have him intrude and infringe on state law since he is not a member of Federal Government.  The problem really is that he is part of state Government and trying to intrude on another state government.  Governor Perry should dismiss his lawsuit immediately against the Republican party and the Commonwealth of Virginia because his action is a direct attempt to restrict a state’s voting rights.  Maybe Governor Perry should take his own advice at the South Carolina debate and practice what he preach.  Governor Perry should just drop out of the race because he got a round of applause by being a hyprocrit or maybe some in the audience forgot Governor Perry pursuit against state rights in Virginia. Also Rick Perry isn’t the only one filing a lawsuit against another State at this level than shouldn’t states be worried about their intrusion at a Federal level.

Merle Rutledge

Norfolk, Chatham, Virginia

 

<a href=”http://bloggers.com/merletrutledge” rel=”dofollow” ><img src=”http://bloggers.com/b/49312/p/img_01.png” title=”Merle Rutledge – Find me on Bloggers.com” alt=”Merle Rutledge – Find me on Bloggers.com” /></a>

Read Full Post »