Home / Miami-Dade School Officials Force Student to Delete Footage of Security Guard Abuse

Miami-Dade School Officials Force Student to Delete Footage of Security Guard Abuse

Joel Franco posing with the camera he earned from his Youtube earnings

Joel Franco, the 17-year-old aspiring journalist from Miami who’s been written about on PINAC before, was threatened with a ten-day suspension today if he didn’t delete a video showing a school security guard body slamming another student to the ground.

The high school junior said that up until then, he was steadfastly refusing to delete the video, even after a security guard grabbed him from behind and shoved him against the wall.

But a ten-day suspension could cause “major setbacks” for him at American High School in Hialeah, a working class suburb in Miami-Dade County, so he reluctantly obliged.

“When they told me I would be suspended, I started panicking,” he said in a telephone interview with Photography is Not a Crime.

“I didn’t want to ruin everything for a video, so I deleted it.”

But he’s not happy about it and now he is trying to recover the video from his Samsung Galaxy phone.

I advised him not to record anything else on it until he recovered the video before providing him with a link to PhotoRec, a free program which was very efficient in recovering the video that was deleted by Miami-Dade police after my January arrest.

But I’m not sure if it would work on a smart phone, so if anybody has any suggestions, please list them in the comments.

The incident began during lunchtime outside the school cafeteria when Franco noticed a couple of his friends, a boy and a girl, getting into an argument.

Franco wasn’t sure why they were arguing about, but it had something to do with something that was said on Twitter.

“I saw that it was escalating, so I pulled out my phone to start filming,” he said.

A crowd quickly gathered and as the boy got more confrontational, several students grabbed the boy from behind before the altercation became physical.

Then a hulking security guard, who Franco describes as being the size of a football lineman, grabbed the boy from behind.

When the student tried to pull away from the security guard, the guard spun him around and slammed him to the ground.

“It was pretty hard because his glasses fell off,” Franco said. “I picked up his glasses and gave it them back to him.”

Once the chaos had subsided, a crowd of students gathered around Franco, wanting to see the video.

That drew the attention of another security guard, who demanded he hand his phone over.

“I said, ‘no, I have the right to film,’ but he kept asking for it and I just kept repeating that I have the right to film,” he said.

“I started to walk away because it was already time to go back to class and the security guard grabbed the strap of my camera back and shoved me against a wall.”

That security guard was joined by another security guard and a schoolteacher who kept demanding he hand over his phone, but Franco kept refusing.

“I was pretty mad at this point,” he said. “The teacher had to calm me down.”

So they marched him to the assistant principal’s office where he encountered the first security guard, the one he had recorded body slamming his friend.

“I kept reminding him that I’m not going to give him my phone and he said something like, ‘I will see you in court,’” Franco said.

The assistant principal, a man named P. Torres, finally walked in and threatened him with suspension, which is when he agreed to delete it.

“But they wanted to see the video first,” he said.

“They kept playing it over and over. They seemed to enjoy it. They laughed at one part, but I don’t know which.”

Then they handed him the phone back, ordering him to delete it in front of them.

And then they gave him a hall pass back to class.

But Franco is not happy.

“It is public property and I feel I have the right to film stuff, especially something that could jeopardize the guy’s job.

“I was looking out for my friend and I wanted people to see the video.”


To email the writer, click here.

Or to send a donation to help maintain Photography is Not a Crime, click here.

About Carlos Miller

Carlos Miller is founder and publisher of Photography is Not a Crime, which began as a one-man blog in 2007 to document his trial after he was arrested for photographing police during a journalistic assignment. He is also the author of The Citizen Journalist's Photography Handbook, which can be purchased through Amazon.
  • http://excoplawstudent.wordpress.com/ ExCop-LawStudent

    easeus.com also works on android phones, and has trial versions for both macs and pcs.

  • steveo

    That’s why they call them SD cards. SD stands for secure data, it’s nearly impossible to delete anything from the card unless you write over it or use a scrubbing program. I’ve experimented with deleting photos and scrubbing with cc cleaner and I still was able to recover the photo. Also leos can recover just about anything like texts, emails, contacts, missed calls, made calls, anything you’ve done on the phone even though you’ve deleted it.

    If you want something to be secure from someone else’s eyes you need to use an encryption program.

    You can either connect the phone to a pc and the sd card will show up as a drive letter and all the data is available for use or editing. You can also take the sd card out of the phone and connect to a pc via a sd card slot on a newer pc or laptop or a separate drive bay that connects via usb. I’ve recovered deleted photos and vids with different programs available from different online sources.

    • kc2idf

      Don’t fool yourself. The “secure” in “secure data” hasn’t got to do with hanging onto material. It has to do with the ability to lock the material up (as you alluded to in your second paragraph).

      The technical reason why the material tends to stick around has more to do with the fact that it is flash memory. With flash memory, it is necessary to perform an operation called “wear levelling” because the lifespan is limited in the number of times a given block can be rewritten. Wear levelling will write new data to the block that is, up to now, least-used, and then note where the data was written. This tends to leave old data lying around until that block’s number comes up again. All flash memory either does this, or dies prematurely.

  • jimmarch

    PULL THE MICRO-SD CARD ASAP.

    Then you need a way to read that micro-size card in a computer. That’s fairly easy: if the computer has a slot for SD cards as most do these days, you can get adapters that are SD-sized but have a slot in the back for a micro. Or there’s various adapters that are basically a small box about the size of a zippo lighter or a bit bigger with a bunch of different slots for different memory card types, usually including micro-SD without an adapter needed. The box then goes into the computer’s USB slot.

    Either way, once you do that PhotoRec will cope just fine.

    • Happy_Tinfoil_Cat

      When thing’s get confrontational I drop the thing in my shirt pocket still running. It would be interesting listening to the audio of why they want you to delete the footage (evidence).

  • richard

    A PINAC reader deleting his video? Someone who should know about Qik,TuneIn, etc? Password protect your phone and learn from this mistake.

    • Difdi

      Password protection won’t help if the owner is coerced into deleting things. The owner knows the password, after all.

  • discarted

    It’s obvious the rentagoons at this school as well as the school officials believe they can behave however they please and force someone to destroy their property under duress. So what’s stopping them from suspending the kid for going public with his story? Looking forward to seeing how these school thugs respond the public exposure. Also hope the kid is able to recover the deleted file so we can see the alleged abuse that occurred.

    • Difdi

      Well, 18USC241 for one thing. A school principal is not a judge, and therefore cannot issue a gag order. Even a judge is sharply limited in how and when such an order can be made.

      Without such an order, it’s simply a free speech issue. Using official authority under color of law to punish someone for exercising a constitutionally protected right is a federal crime. Since very few principals personally enforce a suspension, it becomes a conspiracy against rights when someone obeys the principal’s illegal order(s).

      • http://excoplawstudent.wordpress.com/ ExCop-LawStudent

        That’s not how something becomes a conspiracy.

        • Difdi

          Really? People have been convicted of conspiracy charges with even flimsier connections before.
          Telling a court that you did not know the law and were only following orders when you broke the law doesn’t have good results, unless you are a police officer. And it shouldn’t for the police officer.
          Say for example, a group of friends go out to dinner, and at the end of the night, one of them pulls out a gun the others do not know about and robs the restaurant instead of paying his bill. People have been convicted of armed robbery despite not knowing the intentions of one of their friends, not actually helping him rob the place (just looking on in shock) or not having known about the gun. And you say they’re not conspirators? Courts tend to disagree with you.

          • http://excoplawstudent.wordpress.com/ ExCop-LawStudent

            I noticed that you didn’t cite any cases or examples.

          • chase200mph

            Public places do not inherite the protections or right of privacy. In my home state being suspended mandates a hearing.

          • Difdi

            Not everybody is a law student, with endless hours to look up citations in a handy legal library.
            Well, how about this? http://www.galvestondailynews.com/news/article_7e14e6e9-3df8-58d2-8ed6-95bbd688b57c.html

          • http://excoplawstudent.wordpress.com/ ExCop-LawStudent

            That wasn’t a conspiracy conviction, that was a murder conviction under an accomplice liability theory. In Texas, there is no difference in charge or punishment due to the defendant’s status as an accomplice or a principle.

            It wasn’t overturned based on innocence, but on error, because the jury was not allowed to consider lesser included charges.

            Just as an FYI, conspiracy is rarely used in Texas courts, unlike Federal courts. It’s just not necessary to do so here.

  • Bombastic

    http://www.prosofteng.com/products/data_rescue.php
    Used this when I accidentally ran over my Mac laptop and nearly destroyed my hard drive. It took like 3 days but I recovered everything including things i deleted months before the accident. Hope It can help. Never cool to see jerks get away with anything

  • kc2idf

    Obviously too late at this point, but perhaps a strategy to employ in the future is that when the phone is handed back so you can delete, instead dial 911 and report that you are being asked by school officials to perform a criminal act.

    You (referring to Joel here) were commanded, in this case, to destroy evidence of a crime. The Assistant Principal knew there was an assault, because he had seen the video. He also knew that the video was evidence of this crime because he had seen the video. He therefore knew that deleting the video would be destruction of evidence, which is exactly why he commanded you to delete it.

    For the coup de grace, if they suspended you, a lawsuit might be in order, because it was over an unlawful command. For that matter, if you succeed in retrieveing the video, they may still try to suspend you. You might want to lawyer up if you can. Reach out to the ACLU, EFF and Legal Aid Society if you need to.

    Of course, I am not a lawyer, but this seems to me like the way to approach it, given a simple, common-sense understanding of the law.

    • http://www.theretaildetail.us/ Amy Barnes

      Can a warrant for the arrest of the security guard and principal be made?

  • http://www.facebook.com/robert.cline.750 Robert Cline

    I do believe there are some apps that will automatically upload your videos and pictures to photobucket and maybe some other photo sites, it should be on everyone’s smart phone to keep deletions like this from happening.

    • Christopher Henry

      Dropbox has a setting for camera uploads. As soon as you are done taking pictures or video it auto loads them to your Dropbox cloud folder. You can delete if you like from the phone but it still exists in Dropbox. It a free app

      • http://twitter.com/secretspartan Loading….

        This is something i’d suggest and to remember to allow it to upload on a mobile internet connection, the default setting is wifi only. then they could make you delete it but you’d still have a copy.

  • Boomer

    There’s a point where you just have to wonder what people think when they act the way Torres and the goons did. Stopping the student from fighting is one thing, slamming Franco against the wall for photography, and threatening him is quite another.

    My late grandfather used to remark that the country went to hell when they outlawed tar and feathers. I’ve lately begun to see the wisdom in that statement.

    • warren peace

      Wrong. The tar and feathers would have gone on the innocent student, not the school officials who deserve it.

  • Forensically Inclined

    How to forensically preserve evidence for further extraction/analysis without extra hardware:
    1. Install a USB write-protect registry entry and restart computer after installation
    http://www.howtogeek.com/howto/windows-vista/registry-hack-to-disable-writing-to-usb-drives/
    2. Use Micro-SD to USB adapter to attach storage device
    3. Use FTK Imager (free) to obtain a physical image of the device (literally copies every bit on the media)
    http://www.accessdata.com/support/product-downloads
    4. You now have an image you can safely work with to provide to others or try to extract the data yourself.

    Source: I am a certified computer forensic examiner.

    • DrLongBear

      Really the only “works every time” solution…

  • Your Facebook Follower;D

    Joel i called the school and they said they dont know nobody under that name and they dont know what happened, and then hung up -.-

  • Jillian Galloway

    Guess they had something to hide.

    • TV Pro Teacher

      do you think he was going to the authorities with the clip, or posting it to his youtube channel called “the world must wake up” sounds like an instigator posing as a journalist

      • http://excoplawstudent.wordpress.com/ ExCop-LawStudent

        Obviously you do not understand that journalist have no rights over those of a private citizen or vice versa.

        Anyone has the right to film anything that is in a public space.

        I sure hope that you aren’t teaching government or political science.

        • Lefim

          Not all public spaces is a public forurm. There are three types of forums:

          Open Forum: A public place, like a park, that is traditionally used as a place of free public discourse.

          Limited forum: Generally a public area, like the common area in a school. It is not open to anyone, but has been made available in limited ways and at limited times for certain speech.

          Closed forum: A private space, not used for an exchange of ideas. In fact, the place’s purpose would be lost if free speech were allowed, such as class time, school plays, or curricular-related activities.

          The goverment has a substantial need of public school teachers to maintain order and control over their classrooms and must demonstrate that the expressive activity would provoke “substantial disruption” of school activities or invade the rights of others (Tinker v. Des Moines Independent Community School District (1969)). “The freedom to advocate unpopular and controversial views in schools and classrooms must be balanced against society’s countervailing interest in teaching students the boundaries of socially appropriate behavior,” (Bethel School District No. 403 v. Fraser (1986))

      • Art clark

        What relevance does what you THINK he was going to do with the video have? What you think is conjecture and hypothesis, and about as valuable as tits on a boar. This case, as in all cases of constitutional law, has to do with what occurred by those involved, not what your imagination and attitude are running away with.

  • TV Pro Teacher

    To say he captured a criminal act based on his description alone is laughable. I teach high school in Miami and what the security guard did is probably being exaggerated. If you people knew what they have to deal with you would change your mind. The question is, why was he filming it and what did he plan on doing with the footage? Guaranteed it was to show his friends and post to his youtube account. All that does is sensationalize a situation that doesnt need it and put his school in a really negative light. You have not even seen the video, and you are already crucifying the security guards and AP.

    But why not, sue the school system, that is a better idea.

    • http://excoplawstudent.wordpress.com/ ExCop-LawStudent

      The question on why he was filming and what he planned on doing with it has no relevance to the incident.

      A student does not lose their rights once they enter the school house door. The Constitution does not state that one has freedom of speech except while in school.

      • Lefim

        First off, I’m not a lawyer and don’t play one on TV.

        While ExCop-LawStudent is right that students do not leave their rights at the schoolhouse door (Tinker v. Des Moines (1969)) and are entitled to certain due process rights (Goss v. Lopez (1975)), they have fewer rights in school than outside of school. School officials, unlike police, may search students without a warrant when they have “reasonable grounds for suspecting that the search will turn up evidence that the student has violated… either the law or rules of the school.” (New Jersey v. T.L.O. (1985))

        Regarding cellphones, the U.S. Supreme Court has consistently held that cellphone searches don’t automatically violate a student’s right to privacy, with the basis for these decisions resting on the substantial need of public school teachers to maintain order and control over their classrooms. And to maintain order, teachers must be able to
        discipline students when they have a reasonable suspicion that the school’s cell phone policy is being violated. “Reasonable suspicion” in this instance means more than a hunch, but less than probable cause, that the student is up to something unlawful or are about to break a school rule, based on a totality of the circumstances.

        Since Franco got brought before the principal, he has the right to say “I’m going to remain silent. I would like to see my parents (or lawyer)” if Franco thinks the principal suspects him of having committed a crime. Remember: don’t explain, don’t lie and don’t confess, because anything you say could be used against you. Also don’t threaten, it’s like waving a red cloth to them to assert even more pressure to make you comply.

        What’s problematic of Franco’s tale is he consented to the search by handing over the cellphone over to the principal instead of having the principal reach in and seize the phone from his pocket while Franco announces “I do NOT consent to any searches” but not physically resisting. Then he compounds the error by doing the principal’s job for him and “voluntary” deleted the footage. By agreeing to a search, Franco have turned what may be an illegal search into a legal one. That means that anything the principal finds can be used against Franco in a disciplinary or criminal proceeding. “10 Rules for Dealing with Police” likely also applies with school officials as well: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=s4nQ_mFJV4I . Since Franco lives in Florida, this ACLU handbook might help: http://www.aclufl.org/issues/students/StudentHandbook_FINAL.pdf .

        Hopefully, Franco can recover the footage and give acopy to the boy’s parents so they, and their lawyer, decide there was excessive force used in subduing the boy. The guard likely is in the right in seizing the boy for the altercation, and then put him on the ground because the boy “tried to pull away from the security guard,” A.K.A. resisting. So the question becomes whether the force used was excessive.

        • http://excoplawstudent.wordpress.com/ ExCop-LawStudent

          Well put.

          I’m not familiar with any SCOTUS cases that deal with cellphones and schools, could it possibly a decision from one of the circuits? As I noted above, I really don’t have time to do a lot of research on it right now.

          • Lefim

            One that comes to mind, while not Supreme, is Klump v. Nazareth Area School District (E.D. Pa. 2006).

            In this case, a teacher confiscated a student’s cell phone because it was visible during class – which was in violation of school policy (it accidentally fell out of the student’s pocket). The teacher and assistant principal then searched through the cell phone’s number directory and attempted to call nine other Nazareth students to determine if they too were in violation of the policy. They also accessed text and voice mail messages and communicated with the student’s brother without indicating to him that they were school staff.

            The Court agreed that the school was justified in seizing the phone, but should not have used the phone to “catch other students’ violations.” In summary, the U.S. District Court in Klump concluded: “Although the meaning of ‘unreasonable searches and seizures’ is different in the school context than elsewhere, it is nonetheless evident that there must be some basis for initiating a search. A reasonable person could not believe otherwise.”
            This decision is used as a guide in many shcool districts on limits on cellphone searches and seizures in schools. The decision hasn’t conflicted with other circuits on similar cases nor is a constitutional issue case. So the Supremes likely don’t need to review it and lets it stand.

          • Mike Ross

            Now that IS interesting. I should have thought there’s a very good chance the school officials in Klump could be criminally prosecuted under ‘hacking’ laws. An unlawful search of a journal or someone’s pockets is a 4th amendment violation; unlawfully accessing – and altering – computer data is a serious criminal matter. Absent explicit permission from the student there is no way they could reasonably believe they were authorised to access the device, and most especially and egregiously, use it to make calls! That sounds a lot like felony hacking to me.

          • http://excoplawstudent.wordpress.com/ ExCop-LawStudent

            I sure hope that those that rely on this case read it carefully. The court did rule that the seizure of the phone was permissible due to school rules.

            The court also ruled that of the 10 claims made by the student, most were valid claims.

            It dismissed the student’s claim as to improperly accessing texts in which he was the recipient for lack of standing.

            It dismissed the claims against the district based on sovereign immunity / torts claim act grounds.

            It dismissed the monetary claims for damages that were based on state law, but upheld the right for injunctive relief.

            It dismissed the punitive damages claim under Sec. 1983 against the district, but upheld the punitive damages claim against the superintendent, assistant principal, and teacher.

            It upheld the wiretapping claim against the assistant principal and teacher for accessing stored voice and text messages.

            It upheld the claims that the superintendent, assistant principal, and teacher issued false statements about the student to the media, and thereby to the community at large.

            It upheld the unlawful search claim against the teacher and assistant principal of the phone’s contents, noting it was unreasonable.

            It upheld the federal unlawful search claim, including monetary damages. Note that the district was not dismissed from the federal claim.

            It upheld the negligence claim against the assistant principal and teacher.

            The defendant’s ending up settling with the student rather than to go to trial.

            Basically, the court said that the district was within it’s rights when it seized the phone, but violated the student’s rights when they searched the phone.

            Other courts appear to have the same view of the case. See J.W. v. Desoto County Sch. Dist., 2:09-CV-00155-MPM, 2010 WL 4394059 (N.D. Miss. Nov. 1, 2010) (stating that the school officials in Klump appeared to use that accident as a pretext to conduct a wholesale fishing expedition into the student’s personal life, in such a manner as to clearly raise valid Fourth Amendment concerns).

      • Rich

        A students speech is limited in a public school. A school has the authority to make rules concerning the safety and conduct of students. Look up the Law and the Supreme court decision on this topic. A school is well within its authority to limit the use of Cell phones and what is filmed on its property. They could not stop him from wearing a Photography is not a crime T shirt. They must prove that they limited his rights for a good purpose. They cant just willy nilly limit any speech. They must show a Cause for doing it.

        • http://excoplawstudent.wordpress.com/ ExCop-LawStudent

          Rich, you are correct, but there has to be a compelling government interest to limit their speech. I don’t have the time right now to do the research, but there are restrictions on what limits the school can impose.

      • Wandering_Bard

        ExcCop has it right. Tinker v. Des Moines School District (1969) – the judge ruled that constitutional protections do not end at the schoolyard gate.

        Edit: Damn… just saw that Lefim beat me to it.

    • Carlos_Miller

      It’s against the law to coerce him into deleting the video regardless of what he intended to do with it.

      They opened themselves up to a lawsuit. Whether Joel wants to pursue that route is another matter.

    • jch9596

      As both a photographer and a security guard, I can see both points of view, but only to an extent. A security guard at a school has to be really careful not to use force that exceeds the situation. We obviously don’t know the whole story and are just getting one side of it, but the guard needs to know when and how to use force. It sure sounds like he went too far in this case.
      Having the kid delete the video is wrong as well. Of course, it’s school property and the school may have rules against photography and cell phones on campus. As a photographer for TV News, I knew I could not just go onto school property and start shooting.

  • revdoug

    LiveStream

  • $12257016

    “But a ten-day suspension could cause “major setbacks”
    Sorry kid. You lost me there. Sadly your 12 year indoctrination camp experience has already ruined your good sense. Drop out. Spend your time at the Kahn academy if you want to actually learn something. You don’t need what these people teach. They teach compliance and submission. You already past that test. Go learn something else now.

  • suzyb

    Are you kidding with me? Did you seriously just recommend on a public page for a 17 year old to go to school with a knife and stab a security guard? Seriously??? I’m pretty sure the kid is bright enough not to listen to you. Thankfully.

  • kc2idf

    No. That is absolutely the most wrong advice you can possibly give.

  • deputydog

    Be careful about what you shoot. Be discreet. You and your camera may be seen as a threat.

  • Carlos_Miller

    Joel is bright enough not to listen to this but I’m deleting this anyway. It’s a stupid comment.

  • Rusty Gunn

    Hey kid, sometimes you just have to suck it up do the right thing regardless of the price you have to pay. Surley you can handle a ten day suspension.

  • Ikari

    “A crowd quickly gathered and as the boy got more confrontational, several students grabbed the boy from behind before the altercation became physical. …

    When the student tried to pull away from the security guard, the guard spun him around and slammed him to the ground.”

    I still don’t see the problem. There was going to be a fight. The student was still fighting the guard. This is even from your perspective. The guard dropped his ass, just like he’s paid to do.

    Still, asking to delete the video was plain wrong, though I can imagine their reasons. People tend to like to make incredibly inflated false abuse claims once they take their story to YouTube. They should have just had the video handed straight over to police.

  • zedge

    SD cards are like any other form of data storage in fat32 format. your computer should recognize it as if it were a hard drive. When you delete something, the table of contents is rewritten to allow for the over writing of the space occupied by the photos. It does not actually delete the photos. If nothing further is written to the sectors containing the photos they will be unharmed.

  • Gordon Freeman

    NO. A camera is never a threat, unless you are doing something wrong. Do you have something to hide? Of course if you are not in public it’s at a minimum rude, and often illegal, to record people w/o their knowledge, but out in public, it’s all fair game.

    Telling people to be discreet just encourages this type of behavior.

  • retrojim

    So an adult can spin a minor around and “slam him to the ground” because he pulled away and that’s not assault? Just because he’s a paid security guard doesn’t mean he can assault the kid.

  • Difdi

    So, say you’ve almost gotten into a fistfight. Your heart is pumping hard, you’re on edge…and then someone unexpectedly grabs you from behind. How do you react?

    Security guards are like bouncers, they’re trained to calm things down, not start riots. This particular guard is either incompetent or unqualified to have the job he does.

  • Art clark

    So, to reiterate what you’ve stated;
    First, you say Joel Franco inflated his eyewitness account of what the guard did to the boy in the altercation, and the guard’s job was to slam the boy to the ground if he tried to pull away.
    Second, you say the reason the guard and the assistant principal demanded that Joel delete the video from his phone was not because they had done anything wrong, but because they were afraid Joel would “make incredibly false abuse claims” and take his story to UTube.
    That is what you just stated, correct? And why are you trolling on the PINAC sight, exactly?

  • MCLepus

    What you miss is this: “A crowd quickly gathered and as the boy got more confrontational, several students grabbed the boy from behind before the altercation became physical.”

    He was already being restrained by other students. Therefore, when this occurred:

    “Then a hulking security guard, who Franco describes as being the size of a football lineman, grabbed the boy from behind.When the student tried to pull away from the security guard, the guard spun him around and slammed him to the ground.”

    The manhandling by the other SG was unneccessary

  • jdm jess

    He got the video already .

  • Difdi

    I like how the new comments system allows us to up-rate your comments, Carlos. I always disliked how Pixiq’s system didn’t allow it.

  • TV Pro Teacher

    first of all, you know nothing about the kid. its high school, what if the kid was an offensive lineman? one of my friends is a security guard and got sucker kicked in his back and needed 3 surgeries to get straight. “assault” huh?

  • Boomer

    Just exactly the same way you don’t know anything about the security guard.

    What if he were a bully with a history of roughing up the kids and Franco just happened to catch him in the act?

    What if he provoked the student into swinging at him and Franco’s video would result in him being fired for not doing his job?

    What if Franco’s recording showed him molesting the student and Franco’s video ended up starting criminal charges?

    What if the footage Franco captured would have completely supported the security guard, and opened up the fight-ready student to criminal charges?.

    Should it have been deleted then?

    If I were the security guard, I’d see a huge payday here, claiming the VP and the other puke had destroyed evidence of a crime. Right alongside Franco’s lawsuit for violation of his civil rights.

    You’re making a huge number of assumptions yourself.

  • Art clark

    Well, TV Pro Teacher (whatever that means), we don’t have a video of the altercation you are describing in order to verify whether or not you are telling the truth or lying through your teeth, do we?
    BUT, in this case there was a video that would not only reveal the physiology of the kid, but also reveal the sequence of the attack by the guard. Now that the video was deleted by the coertion of the guard and administrator, its easy for an armchair apologist such as yourself to make vaccuous assumptions and back them up with anecdotal, unrelated analogies.
    Go troll somewhere else.

  • Patrick Sicher

    If it captured all off that, and he really cared about changing the world, why would he show his friends? and look at his history, he has 3 incidents where he has been filming and has been asked to stop by police. And i have been there, i have seen fights and i have seen the crowd of phones. You dont know how damaging these videos on youtube can be.

  • Brownbuttstain

    Dumb kid, grow balls and take the suspension! Stop living in fear! Is high school more important then your freedom!

  • Fotaugrafee

    The shame of this is that kids his age don’t really think of the stuff we think of in our 30’s and 40’s.

    Personally, you can threaten suspension to me all you wish, it doesn’t mean a damn thing until you actually suspend me. Unfortunately, age groups are what they are, and some people fall victim to threats. Personally, it’s reminiscent of the threat I received last week citing that if I pressed charges against a coworker (who assaulted me on the clock), that I too would lose my job. Fortunately for “us”, we have whistleblower laws to fall back upon.

    I hope for the sake of argument you’re able to retrieve the footage & put this jackass in his place. Not only that, but go after the school TOO, for their duress as a means of protecting their liability (since they employ the rent-a-cop, it’s possible they are liable for their actions).

    The dimwit rent-a-cop really is asking to not only lose his job, but an assault on a minor like that could cost him future gigs as well.

    Even if the video doesn’t pan out, I would get the young man who was body-slammed to press charges against the rogue security officer, then get ANY & ALL students who witnessed the event to attend court & testify against the rent-a-cop. Video is a nice lock & load, but the end result is that this simple SOB needs to lose his job.

    Last but not least, sanctions ought to be placed against the school administrators for even suggesting that you delete footage would displayed something removing their liability from hiring unruly security personnel. I’d be all up in the school board’s shit at their next meeting over this one.

    Power to ya, kid. Kick some ass, take some names!! :D

  • Jon Quimbly

    What about the boy’s parents? Shouldn’t the school have called them? Why didn’t the boy get them involved? Seems like a violation of his rights, coercion to get him to do what they knew they couldn’t do legally.

  • ESB

    From now on, I would suggest that you (or any others that might run into a similar situation) immediately upload it to your cloud or QIK @ http://qik.com/info/overview – As it will immediately be available in multiple locations and even if deleted by force, you’ll still have possession of the original video. Just FYI.

  • Who cares

    what a pussy. getting suspended from highschool is nothing man. you could have got a serious lawsuit and possibly won some money. You’re an idiot. stay in school

  • the sage

    It would have been best for you to state that you would not be deleting the footage under any circumstances as you believe you were witness to a crime of assault and battery and the video is evidence.

    Then declare that you are now telephoning the police to report what you deem may be a crime of assault and battery against a minor and to allow the police to determine if that is truly the case as that is their job and under their authority…no one else’s.

    Inform the principle that you will gladly accept whatever suspension he has in mind for you as a result and you could then later attempt to appeal that threat.

    Should they still force you to delete the footage or assault you, then you could just include the destruction of evidence (as you have already informed them that you feel a crime has been committed and that the video may be evidence the police would need to see) and assault against yourself in your testimony and the report when the police showed up. That handles the criminal aspect. Then, if you were assaulted one can consider the civil aspect.

    Probability is quite good that any threat of suspension would not be followed through with that kind of criminal behavior and legal leverage behind you.

  • Ian Battles

    THIS IS WHY YOU LIVESTREAM!

    Bambuser is the best app on my phone, I press record, and it’s instantly online and the video can’t be accessed from the phone, much less deleted.

    You don’t need to worry about MY video “ending up” on Youtube Officer, it’s ALREADY THERE.

  • realtomsawyer

    Best thing to do is add the Dropbox app (or any cloud app) to your phone, and hit it right after shooting something that you think someone else will try to delete. So if you show them it is deleted from the phone, it will be sitting in your dropbox waiting for you later.

  • Wandering_Bard

    Multiple recording devices is my preferred method of recording.

    If a cop or security guard threatens me to turn of my big video camera, I have my phone recording in my pocket. If they take my phone, I still have a mini, HD video camera in the frame of my glasses.

    Always be prepared.

  • Weismonger

    You on the Left wanted this Socialist Obama Police State, how do you like it? Ayn Rand was prophetic when she wrote that you on the Left would lead us right into being slaves. Ayn Rand was right, maybe you all should read some Ayn Rand before you vote for socialists again.

PINAC

PINAC Logo cutout copy
Be the Media