Cheating at Hanover High, NH

Parents Forum
21

<p>I think if this thread was posted outside of parents forum, you would get a very different response from kids. I read a thread a while ago where kids said it was no big deal, everyone does it, so get used to it.</p>

<p>Two years at my kids school, 2 straight A Juniors made copies of an examin. One student's counscious bothered her, so she turned herself in. Both of them were asked to leave (one was voluntary withdrawal, and another one was expelled). Last year, another Junior stole a test and sold it to his classmates. The school only found out because one kid complained - it changed the grading curve. The kid was expelled even though there was no concrete evidence against him, but everyone knew. The student's parents hired a lawyer to sue the school. It was a mess, but the school stood firm. I wonder which fool will try it this year.</p>

22

<p>Totally agree with marite's post #17. </p>

<p>I was taken aback by this quote
[quote]
"They are charged with watching their friends commit stupidity," said John Arbogast, whose son is charged with serving as a lookout.

[/quote]
These kids (the lookouts) were, IMO, active participants and colluders. They were hardly innocent bystanders who just "happened" to be on the scene as a crime was committed. </p>

<p>How much in denial can parents be??!??</p>

<p>I respect how the school has handled it. </p>

<p>P.S. Googling the name indicates that the quoted parent is a physician.</p>

23

<p>Let me turn around to ask some posters here: What if it's one of your kids that was one of the lookouts? Would you report it, or would you keep quiet?</p>

24

<p>To the above question - assuming the school didn't know who the lookouts were.</p>

25

<p>While what they did was clearly planned in advance, and not some kind of minor, innocent mistake, I think a felony charge is wildly excessive. But maybe that's just me.</p>

26

<p>
[quote]
Last week, the prosecutor notified the nine students' parents that if they chose to take the cases to trial, he could raise misdemeanor charges to felonies,

[/quote]
</p>

<p>I agree that these kids were acting stupid - and need to face the music - but........................</p>

<p>This comment bothers me - the kids have already been charged - will face consequences - but the prosecutor is ''threatening'' worse charges against if they utilize their legal ''right'' to a trial - that is outragous to me - they should be tried on the charges that have been presented - to me - their and their families rights are certainly being impinged upon.</p>

27

<p>I'm not a legal person, but could it be that the prosecutor is letting them off easier by going the misdemeanor route, but if they choose to go to court, feels that he will have no "choice" but to press charges that would be considered SOP in cases where there is a burglary?</p>

28

<p>To me - the prosecutor is denying them their rights period - take the misdemeanor or it will get worse - no trial - take it or leave it - JMHO</p>

<p>How old were these kids when this happened?? 17 or 18?</p>

29

<p>Would the parents feel the same way about the charges if the children of people employed at Walmart or McDonalds were arrested for being lookouts at the burglary of one of their homes or local small businesses ?</p>

30

<p>
[quote]
but the prosecutor is ''threatening'' worse charges against if they utilize their legal ''right'' to a trial

[/quote]
</p>

<p>That's what charge bargaining is all about. If you are completely innocent, you don't fear this. If you did acts that constitute a felony, you might feel lucky to only be charged with a misdemeanor. </p>

<p>(Any lawyer who had a decent criminal law course will understand the policy reasons for giving prosecutors discretion in setting charges, and the reasons for prosecutors to communicate to suspects the consequences of that discretion.)</p>

31

<p>Why is the prosecutor doing something worng? It happens everyday. Cop a plea to a lesser amount, and your sentence is lessened. Just because it's cheating and high school doesn't mean burglary isn't a felony. It just means that they can take the offer, or go to trial on the greater charge. If the prosecutor had refused to give them an offer of a lesser offense plea, these same parents would be screaming because he/she was being too hardnosed with these little darlings who somehow felt entitled to take what they wanted in spite of breaking and entering. What has happened that these kids feel such a sense of entitlement to something for nothing that they will spend their time in trying to figure out how to defeat the system, rather than just doing the work? I see it at school all the time. The parent phone calls about Johnny cheating. Do youknow I have never heard a parent say, "I am so sorry. I know this is a problem, but we are working on it.?" No, I hear "I can't believe it! My Johnny has NEVER done anything like this!" (Of course, 3 other teachers have called in the past.) As long as parents keep bailing their kids out and letting them get away with everything, these kids will alwyas fell as though they can do anything, and it won't matter. That's their role model.</p>

32

<p>JeepMOM is right on many levels, of course, despite her naivete. (JeepMOM -- if you don't like this, there is a whole lot about the criminal justice system you won't like. This is relatively benign; the prosecutor is giving them a break.)</p>

<p>tokenadult is probably right, too, although not as clearly as he suggests. Even the completely innocent have to fear something like this -- being completely innocent, and being confident in your ability to get a judge or jury to agree are two different things. There are lots of situations where I would advise an "innocent" client to take a deal like this.</p>

<p>As for policy and decent law school courses, here's what my Criminal Procedure professor -- a former Assistant Attorney General (i.e., one of the top 10 officials in the Justice Department) -- taught my class about this very question: "Power corrupts, absolute power corrupts absolutely, and no one has more absolute power than a prosecutor deciding what to charge."</p>

33

<p>Well, I hope that this situation is being discussed by teachers and students across this country. Kids need to realize that there are (possibly very long term) consequences to bad behavior.</p>

<p>This reminds me of the following: Two weeks ago, a brand new teacher at our son's school was fired because he had been arrested for a DUI and the police found pot in the car. This new teacher is in his mid 20's and working on his PhD in physics. In many ways, his future will be permanently harmed because no company in the area will now hire him (security clearances are needed). He probably could work in academia (college level) because I don't think "his record" will necessarily prevent him from being hired. However, much of his future is now narrowed because of some short-sighted thinking.</p>

<p>Instead of using this teacher's situation as a warning to the students, the school swept it under the rug - refusing to even mention the reason for the arrest, etc (we found out because arrests are public info and a parent looked into it.) Since arrests are public info, "confidentiality" shouldn't be a reason for no discussion. It's too bad didn't use the situation as an example of what can happen if one makes an immature decision.</p>

34

<br>


<br>

<p>If Law & Order is any indication, this is a standard plea bargaining tactic.</p>

35

<p>Another naive poster here. I thought that breaking and entering was a felony. So the prosecutor is offering to let them to go to trial but being charged with a felony and taking their chance that the jury will be lenient, or pleading to a lesser charge of misdemeanor. No one seems to be pleading total innocence, by the way, just trying to convince others that breaking and entering is an act of stupidity. And they hope to be admitted to top colleges??? Which will be willing to admit self-described idiots?</p>

36

<p>Mike Nifong learned the limits of a prosecutor's discretion. </p>

<p><a href="http://abcnews.go.com/TheLaw/story?id=3295106&page=1%5B/url%5D"&gt;http://abcnews.go.com/TheLaw/story?id=3295106&page=1&lt;/a> </p>

<p>I agree with JHS that, yes, it's scary all the time to be charged with a crime, even if the facts are on your side. But anyway the students who were lookouts could have declined the invitation to participate in a crime--you never know who will turn state's evidence. It's best to make sure that your own circle of friends are people who can testify to your honesty and resistance to temptation.</p>

37

<p>Well - I guess in my naivity - they should have been ''charged'' with the felonies - and would have their rights preserved to allow them to go to trial - vs - being charged with misdemeanor and being 'threatened' if they do want to go to trial - guess it is all in the wording of the piece.</p>

38

<p>Getting charged with a felony, even if you plea-bargain down to a misdemeanor, is something that you might have to report in a number of circumstances.</p>

<p>Also, some prosecutors' offices have rules against plea-bargaining, and the way that people get around that is to "charge bargain" just like this.</p>

<p>And, to be clear: Trials are enormously expensive -- dozens of people (judge, jury, witnesses, lawyers, guards, court reporter, etc.) spend, at a minimum days of time on them. The most simple criminal trial probably represents a month of person-hours; a more complex one can represent years and years. If every defendant, or even as many as 20% of defendants, availed him- or herself of the right to trial, the system would come to a juddering halt very quickly. And if there were no incentive to waive the right to trial, why wouldn't each and every defendant demand one? If the worst that can happen is you get convicted of the crime you would have to plead guilty to, and the judge doesn't have a lot of sentencing discretion, even a 1% chance of acquittal might be worth it (as long as you are getting free legal representation).</p>

<p>So . . . it's hard to avoid systems that give defendants a powerful incentive to plead guilty and waive a trial. But from the standpoint of Truth and Justice, it's not such a great thing.</p>

<p>And, by the way, the "lookout" characterization doubtless comes from the prosecutor. What if your kid told you: "Sure, I was there. I told the other guys it was a horrible idea, a crime, and I wasn't going to go along with them. I didn't call the police, which was wrong, I guess, but I didn't know what to do. I didn't think they were really going to go through with it. So I hung around like a jerk, waiting for them to come to their senses. I wasn't a lookout or anything. I didn't want them to steal the tests, and I didn't want anybody to get in trouble. I was furious at them. I never even looked at the tests or anything." That could easily be the "lookout's" story.</p>

39

<p>
[quote]
What if your kid told you: "Sure, I was there. I told the other guys it was a horrible idea, a crime, and I wasn't going to go along with them. I didn't call the police, which was wrong, I guess, but I didn't know what to do. I didn't think they were really going to go through with it. So I hung around like a jerk, waiting for them to come to their senses. I wasn't a lookout or anything. I didn't want them to steal the tests, and I didn't want anybody to get in trouble. I was furious at them. I never even looked at the tests or anything." That could easily be the "lookout's" story.

[/quote]
</p>

<p>JHS:
You need to come up with a better narrative than that if you're hoping to get the kids off.
Sure, it could be the looout's story, and I know a bridge I could sell to the jurors. The breaking and entering was a premeditated crime. The lookout did not "happen to be there by chance." He was told it would take place--that's how he came to be there;if he thought i was a horrible idea, he could have stayed away. If he went along but still had qualms, he could tell the other guys he wanted not part of it and then walk away. He did none of these things. Was he nervous? You bet. But being nervous is not the same as being conscience-stricken. Was he guilty of conspiring in breaking and entering, or at least of aiding and abetting? Seems to me he was.</p>

40

<p>As a high school teacher it has been my observation that cheaters almost invariably cheat because they didn't do the work. In 17 years I can think of no time that any student at my high school has been "...forced into...having to cheat." </p>

<p>I'd be curious what these student's teachers have to say...are the notorious 9 kids who typically do their work or have they in the past been spotted copying someone else's work in the quad before school? Are these student whose in-class analysis is significantly weaker than what they can come up with when they take it home? My guess is that these are largely lazy but bright students who have never had to work hard and didn't want to start working hard when they got into the advanced math classes. My gut tells me that there is no way these kids were new to bending the rules when it came to making their academic lives easier.</p>