Blog

Much of our work to teach adults about what teens are doing online is directed toward educators or parents, but increasingly we are working with law enforcement officers – especially those assigned to a school setting (school resource or liaison officers). Like the others, police officers often find themselves in a difficult situation when confronted with a cyberbullying incident because of unfamiliarity with the technology or ambiguity in currently laws not designed to address such behaviors. Despite deficiencies in the law, most officers recognize that their role goes beyond simply enforcement. This is especially true for school-based officers who are mentors, educators, investigators, first responders, and so much more. Even when it comes to responding to cyberbullying or other teen technology misuse, law enforcement officers should be encouraged to use their discretion to “handle” the particular situation in an informal and creative way, when appropriate. Threats of arrest or detention don’t usually deter students from misbehaving, because they often feel invincible or able to elude the law. But the student who develops a strong bond to an officer will no doubt follow the law voluntarily in order to avoid disappointing their mentor. This is related to the broader issue of the importance of developing a caring and respectful climate at school—one in which the school law enforcement officer is a contributing part.

Over the last couple of years, we have formally surveyed approximately 1,000 law enforcement officers (including over 300 school resource officers) to better understand their unique perspectives concerning cyberbullying and other online behavioral problems. I will be presenting some of this research at the annual meeting of the Midwestern Criminal Justice Association later this week in Chicago. In general, over 85% of the officers surveyed said that cyberbullying was a serious concern that warrants the response of law enforcement. Almost 90% of the school resource officers had dealt with a cyberbullying case “sometimes” or “often.” Interestingly, though, about 25% of the school resource officers and over 40% of the traditional law enforcement officers didn’t know if their state had a law specific to cyberbullying. If you are one of those people, see our summary here.

So what we have learned in our preliminary research and discussions with law enforcement officers is that they realize they have a role to play, but they need more training. More and more states are passing laws on bullying and cyberbullying and while most of the legislation focuses on the responsibilities of educators, many school administrators are turning to their law enforcement partner for assistance. If you are a school-based officer, then you are in the right place to learn about these issues. If you are an educator or parent, you might want to pass our site on to them so they have a resource to turn to.

If we want to stop cyberbullying, all of the adults who interact with students need to recognize it as something worth stopping. That means we should talk with adolescents about online responsibility and integrity and intervene when we see or hear something inappropriate. Again, that doesn’t mean we should arrest and formally sanction those who engage in bullying. We have long argued that most cyberbullying cases should be handled informally. I believe that law enforcement officers should be in on these efforts as well. We need to remember that the primary goal is to get the bullying, no matter where it is happening, to stop. The more we accept that as our underlying mission, the easier it will become to see what needs to be done.

New Jersey’s updated bullying law took effect today amid controversy and confusion.  The New York Times recently reported on the law and I have received numerous calls from folks interested in my take on certain provisions.  Bullying and cyberbullying legislation has been the topic of much discussion on this blog, and regular readers know that we see a place for evidence-based, fiscally supported state legislation that helps clarify school responsibilities and provides them with the tools to better manage bullying and cyberbullying incidents.  We haven’t seen the perfect law yet, and New Jersey’s iteration is not it either.

New Jersey’s law seems to focus much attention on accountability – not on holding the bully accountable, but making sure school officials take certain actions expeditiously.  There are a series of requirements in the law that designate a very tight timeline for school actions:

• Principal must investigate incidents within one school day of witnessing or receiving a report of bullying
• Investigation must be completed within ten school days
• Results of the investigation must be sent to superintendent within two school days of completion
• Results must be reported to the board of education at the next scheduled meeting
• Parents need to be informed of investigation within five school days of board notification
• Parents may request a hearing of the board, which must be held within 10 days

The impetus for providing a detailed paper-trail and strict timeline for dealing with each incident likely comes from parents or student targets who feel as though their reports of harassment have been ignored, but holding schools to such a firm schedule will prove challenging.  And depending on how each school interprets the definition of “bullying,” staff could quickly become mired in a bureaucracy and be forced to spend more time on paperwork than actually problem solving.

In fact, an interesting aspect of the language in this law is that it explicitly includes single incidents which traditionally would not have been considered bullying:  “‘Harassment, intimidation or bullying’ means any gesture, any written, verbal or physical act, or any electronic communication, whether it be a single incident or a series of incidents…”  Clearly it is important to address all forms of harassment, even one-time incidents, no matter how minor, but to require schools to formally document every single case could easily overwhelm them with paperwork.

The law follows the pattern of other recent state legislation (see our analysis of New Hampshire’s law) in adding language that incorporates off-campus behaviors that substantially disrupt the learning environment at school.  This seems to be one of the most controversial aspects of the law even though nothing has really changed with this.  For decades the standard has been that any behavior, whether on campus or off, that substantially or materially disrupts the learning environment at school is subject to the school’s authority.  This was originally articulated in Tinker v. Des Moines in 1969 and several subsequent Supreme Court cases have applied this precedent to numerous incidents where schools disciplined students for off-campus speech or behavior.  States have simply tried to codify this so that the standard is more widely understood.  This law does not require teachers to police the Internet, but it does insist that they respond when reports of cyberbullying that are disruptive to students at school are made.  Since most schools are already doing that, the only significant change is the amount of documentation that is required within a very short period of time.

In general, much of the provisions in the law are actually positive, and again most schools are already doing many of the elements included.  The major problem is that no money has been allocated to pull any of this together.  For example, each school needs to designate an “anti-bullying specialist” and each district needs to name a “bullying coordinator” (contact information for these folks must be listed on the school’s web page).  Since no resources have been provided to schools to hire actual specialists, these duties will no doubt fall on staff who may or may not have expertise in bullying prevention and response.  Moreover, schools are now required to provide training to staff and volunteers, but information is lacking regarding evidence-based training programs or curricular enhancements.  Therefore, many schools will be forced to create an ad-hoc program or pay for someone to provide programming that might not be effective or informed by research. These mandates are coming at time when schools in New Jersey and across the United States are laying off teachers and essential support staff left and right.  If New Jersey and other states really wanted to send a strong message that bullying prevention and response is a priority, then they would provide resources for schools to implement these policies and practices effectively.   Until then, the new law is only a bunch of words on paper.  Complete details of the law are available here.

Justin and I have been trying to figure out a way to help inform school administrators as to when they can go ahead and search the contents of student cell phones. Week after week after week, this is one of the primary questions we receive from them. We want to help guide them in a meaningful way without getting enmeshed in a large number of due process and consent issues. As such, I’d like to present this checklist as a flowchart of sorts to assist with the decision-making process whenever student cell phones are displayed and used in school environments where that display and use is prohibited. To note, this is a work-in-progress, and we would love to dialogue with you more about what is missing. As always, please consult your school district attorney before engaging in an action where you are unsure of the legal implications.

Cell Phone Search Checklist for School Administrators

Has the student consented to the search?

Yes or No (circle one)

If student will not consent, has the student’s parent consented?

Yes or No (circle one)

If no consent from student or parent, is it an emergency (an actual or imminent threat to public health or safety, which may result in loss of life, injury or property damage)?

Yes or No (circle one)

If no consent from student or parent, and no emergency is indicated, is it reasonable for you to believe a school policy violation has occurred and evidence that proves that violation is possibly on the device? Would you be able to articulate the reasoning before a court of law if necessary?

Yes or No (circle one)

Do you understand the scope of your cell phone search can go no further than the data locations (such as call logs, text records, photos) that specifically relate to the suspected policy violation?

Yes or No (circle one)

Have you spoken to other School District officials AND Legal Counsel to determine if it is to discuss the proposed search and surrounding
circumstances and ensure their appropriateness?

Yes or No (circle one)

Are you sure that this is not a law enforcement matter that then would require probable cause for a law enforcement officer to search the phone?

Yes or No (circle one)

Do you have an agreement with local law enforcement (including a stationed school resource officer at your school), that outlines a specific process, supported by state and federal search and seizure law, for conducting cell phone searches by police officers?

AT TIME OF INCIDENT:

Describe the circumstances under which the student’s cell phone was seized:

Describe the circumstances that you think give rise to a reasonable suspicion that the cell phone was used in violation of the law or a district policy:

—–

What do you, our readers, think – based on your own experiences? Our ultimate goal with this is to more concretly ensure that the school administration has thought things through, and have received informed input from legal counsel and law enforcement as needed.

Thanks to all for their comments on my recent blog about how teens should respond when they receive a “sext.” Here are some of my follow-up thoughts, based on comments and emails received, as well as an email exchange among members of the Youth Risk Online Google Group which includes some of the brightest “teens and tech minds” in the world. (You can read fellow member Larry Magid’s comments here.)

Being a criminologist who regularly works with police officers and who is currently working with the FBI to train officers about issues relating to cyberbullying, I certainly can appreciate the interest expressed by the law enforcement folks who responded saying that the evidence needs to be kept. The problem is that if they follow this advice, they risk prosecution for possession of child porn if a district attorney is trying to make a name for him/herself. Plus if a friend gets a hold of their phone, finds the image, and distributes it to others, there will be huge problems.

I also appreciate the concerns of those who maintain that an adult must be consulted. This is sage advice for many adolescent problems (including those that originate or escalate online), but frankly it just won’t work in a sexting incident. As I pointed out in my post, it is my contention that the vast majority of the time teens receive sexting images from those they consider close friends. As such, there is absolutely NO WAY they will tell an adult about this because they do not want to get that friend into so much trouble. If my best friend sends me a topless picture of his girlfriend, am I going to rat him out? Of course not. Adults, it seems, are forced to respond to sexting incidents in extreme ways – ways that have long-term, irreversible consequences. Until we can develop reasonable responses that do not potentially foreclose on the futures of all involved, we are wise to advise that students do not contact adults, unless the incident is appearing to get out of control. And I think teens know when it is out of control.

Moreover, whenever educators ask me what to do about sexting incidents they are made aware of, I generally advise them to contact a law enforcement partner. Unfortunately, this too is bad advice, but the only advice that is safe. Teachers who confide in other teachers risk prosecution for distribution of child porn. Educators simply aren’t trained to deal with these problems and if they try to do the right thing, it will likely come back to haunt them. The problem here is that cops and district attorneys do not have a good history when it comes to dealing with sexting. But they are not the only ones to blame for this. They are applying and enforcing outdated laws that weren’t written to deal with this problem. Police and prosecutors are generally black/white types of people, and there is a whole lot of gray when it comes to dealing with sexting. Until we sort these issues out, it is risky to involve them in responding to the problem. But it is also risky (perhaps even more so) for adults who are confronted with a sexting incident to not contact the police. That’s because they too are potentially subject to long-term, irreversible consequences if they mishandle the incident (that’s especially true for educators).

So, while I appreciate everyone’s feedback, nobody has said anything that leads me to change my advice. Keeping the best interest of teens in the forefront, we must insist that students who receive sext images immediately delete them and hope that the incident ends there. If it doesn’t, then we have to re-evaluate.

If you are a teen and receive a sexually-explicit image of a classmate via your cell phone (or email, or instant message, or via a Nintendo Dsi, or any other type of electronic communication), what should you do? This can be a challenging situation, to say the least. We know that anywhere from 10-30% (or more) of teens have received such images, and many probably don’t know what to do. You have no doubt seen the examples in the media of teens being cyberbullied, arrested, or even committing suicide as a result of bad decisions involving the circulation of nude personal pictures. My thoughts here are intended to provide you (youth) with a specific and simple strategy to help avoid any of these consequences.

If you do receive such an image, odds are that it was sent by a good friend (or a boyfriend or girlfriend). As a result, you probably don’t want to get this person into too much trouble, but you figure that sending or receiving nude or semi-nude pictures of another teen is probably not going to lead to great things in life (because if you think about it, it is highly inappropriate, morally wrong, and potentially illegal). So what do you do? Well, most adults might advise you to “tell an adult you trust.” This is generally good advice, however in the case of a naked photo of an under-aged youth, this can be devastating for all involved. For example, if you show the image to a teacher, he or she is likely required to report it to the police. Teachers who don’t can lose their teaching license and/or be fired. If they don’t know what to do and seek guidance from a fellow teacher, they could get into even more trouble. For example, if you hand your cell phone with the nude image over to the teacher, and he or she shows another teacher, both teachers (and you) could be charged with “possession” of child pornography since they had possession of your phone. That’s because the police often treat these images as child pornography – irrespective of the intent of the sender or the relationship of those involved. This means that if you take the picture, you can be charged with “creation of child pornography.” If you send or forward the picture, you can be charged with “distribution of child pornography.” If you keep it on your phone, you can be charged with “possession of child pornography.” In some cases you could even end up on state sex offender registries.

My advice to teens who receive a nude or semi-nude image of a classmate is simple: immediately delete it. Don’t tell anyone about it. If there is an investigation and someone asks if you received the image, you should tell them yes, but that you immediately deleted it. If necessary, they can get your cell phone records from your service provider which will show that you deleted it within seconds of receiving it. This is the best situation for you. Of course, some adults aren’t going to like this advice because they want to be in the “know” to attempt to deal with the problem, but I think it is the only safe advice I can offer youth at this point.

The primary goal in sexting incidents is to limit the victimization of the person portrayed in the image. If the individual(s) who initially received the image immediately delete it, there would be no distribution and victimization would be minimized. Be sure to tell your friends that it is in their best interest not to hold onto or send these kinds of images. It just isn’t worth the potential long-term and irreversible consequences to your (and their) reputation.

If you find out that your friends are continuing to distribute naked pictures of themselves or others, you would be wise to let them know how such behavior can seriously mess up their future. Strongly encourage them to stop and to delete the images. If you are concerned about the well-being of the person depicted in the images, you may want to anonymously report the behavior to your school (if there is a way to do this).

We have said it many times on this blog, but it bears repeating here that neither Sameer nor I are attorneys, so you should not interpret this blog as formal legal counsel. We are simply looking out for the best interests of teens and those who interact with them. Stay tuned for a follow-up post in the near future on what teachers should do if a student tells them (or shows them) a sexting image involving a student.