<p>
</p>
<p>Might not be so easy 4 months later. Depends upon how much activity was on the phone, and whether the files were overwritten.</p>
<p>mini, ever heard of The Innocence Project? :)</p>
<p>Sure have! But from the little we know, it would be useless in this case. The Honor Code probably says if you have a cellphone on your person and it is not on the table, you are guilty of cheating. A very sensible rule in my view - so that the school doesn’t have to deal with confiscating phones, and then going through them for evidence, dealing with erasures, etc., etc. In fact, it likely isn’t legal for them to confiscate phones, or even look at phones. So they made a rule that is sensible, understood by all, and is pretty black-and-white. Wish all laws were like that.</p>
<p>Yeah, and if you are a passenger in my car and the cops find a joint in your pocket, they can charge me with constructive possession. Even though it is total BS. </p>
<p>Even if the kid is “guilty” of breaking the rule, that doesn’t mean that, in reality, he cheated. </p>
<p>I hate stupid rules. This sounds like one of those misguided zero-tolerance policies that end up suspending little kids for possession of a plastic butter knife or drawing a picture of a gun.</p>
<p>I’m always surprised when you support the authorities, mini. I thought you were more of a rebel. :D</p>
<p>No, I am in favor of commonsense rules. 125 people at my High School were just found to have cheated on a Regents exam, using cellphones. The principal was forced to resign. Had they had a commonsense rule like this one, it wouldn’t have happened. </p>
<p>He knew the rules. He knew the reason for the rules. He knew that the school defined this as cheating, in advance. And, from what we can tell, he chose to violate them. </p>
<p>Of course, I learned to cheat in school. ;)</p>
<p><a href=“http://www.homeeducator.com/FamilyTimes/articles/8-4article6.htm[/url]”>http://www.homeeducator.com/FamilyTimes/articles/8-4article6.htm</a></p>
<p>But it isn’t fair to turn this into a debate on:
if this is a silly rule,
if this is an unfair rule,
whether someone found guilty can be called guilty
whether anyone in prison is falsely convicted.</p>
<p>This thread is all about what can this young student do now, now that he has been found guilty of cheating. If left unchanged, his transcript will prob say- found guilty of cheating.
I do not recommend the student tell his next prospective school that “not all found guilty are really guilty, and that some in prison are really innocent”.</p>
<p>Good point, younghoss.</p>
<p>Whether the phone would show evidence of actual cheating MIGHT have some effect on the steps his school is willing to take. Whether someone actually saw him consulting the phone would matter also. To me, whether or not he is actually guilty of cheating does make a big difference as to what to do.</p>
<p>But probably they need to consult a lawyer if the goal is to get it off his transcript.</p>
<p>OperaDad is right -what you want to accomplish is keeping it off the transcript.</p>
<p>You should get a lawyer in the town the university is located (ideally an alum) and have him peruse the case to that end. Undoubtedly the University inadvertently violated some of their own procedures in handling this, which the lawyer can point out. Seeing as they cashed your check for the Spring semester when they knew they were going to cashier the the poor lad they dont have the moral high ground. Having him withdraw without a notation on his transcript sound be a settlement it is possible to arrive at. </p>
<p>In the long run I think hiring the lawyer will save you considerable expense.</p>