Kids Given More Rights Than Adults

Washington Supreme Court Sucks!

Published on December 13, 2004 By JillUser In Current Events

You may have heard about the Washington State Supreme Court's ruling on banning parental telephone eavesdropping. If not, you should look into it and be afraid. What the hell are they thinking?!

A 17yr old kid assaults an old woman and steals her purse. Some parents have an idea of who did it so they are on the look out. A mom listens in on a conversation between this kid and her 14yr old daughter on her phone in her house which she pays for. The kid tells the daughter what he did and where he discarded the purse. The mom tells the authorities and they apprehend the kid. The kid gets a lawyer to convince the court to discard the case because the information was obtained through the mom listening to a private conversation. What the hell?!!

If the girl were in her own home talking on her own phone that she pays for, fine. Even then, she's a minor! It is her mother's responsibility to look out for her well being in any way she can. If this woman overheard the kid in question saying that he was going to suicide bomb the Washington Supreme Court, do you really think they would care that the information was gathered by a parent eavesdropping? I highly doubt it!!

We have seen the horrible things that can happen when teens aren't being watched closely enough (Columbine for instance). Why the hell would any court tie parents hands tighter? I just don't get it! I don't give a flying flop what courts say, my kids don't have the same rights as I do if they are living in my house without all of the responsibilities that warrant the rights. If they are going to use the phone lines I pay for, I have the right to listen in. If they use the computer, I have the right to monitor what they are doing. What is the difference? I am sure courts wouldn't want to discourage parents from monitoring what their teens are doing in chat rooms. How many sickos have tried to hook up with minors via the internet?

I am just totally outraged!

Comments (Page 3)

Dr Guy

on Dec 14, 2004

Telling parents that the judges only interprets the law is not the answer here,

Unfortunately, it is. Based upon how the law is written, the judges really did not have a choice. For a change, they did not make law, they just upheld a bad one.

Every parent have a right to be angry at this outcome.

Agreed. And I hope the parents in Washington make those stupid legislators change the law.

JillUser

on Dec 15, 2004

Agreed. And I hope the parents in Washington make those stupid legislators change the law.

That will be an interesting test. I can imagine them not being outraged but I will be interested to seeing if it actually motivates them to get anything changed.

grins wickedly

on Dec 15, 2004

This is a bunch of crap. Parents have every right to monitor their kids' conversations, phone or computer. When we got our computer at home my parents said that since I am still living in their home that when we get internet access that they want my email address and password so that they can make sure that it is being used in an appropriate manner. I see no problem with this.

If parents can't monitor their children's conversations or activities on the phone or computer, then why can colleges (such as the one I am at right now) monitor the use of their computers?

THIS IS AN OUTRAGE!!!!!!!!!

grins wickedly

on Dec 15, 2004

messybuu

on Dec 15, 2004

Has some one been punished lately?

No, but aren't there laws against spanking others against their will, forcing another to stay in a room against their will, taking away somebody else's property, etc.? Unless they make specific exceptions for parents, the right thing is to make it illegal for parents to ground, spank, or take toys away from their children.

KarmaGirl

on Dec 15, 2004

It's funny, people keep saying that parents should be held accountable for their child's actions. However, they make it impossible to even find out what is going on. What will be next? Will it be illegal to look for drugs in your kids room then punish them when you find it? Will it be illegal to look at cell phone bills and see where your kid called? When will we return to minors being minors and parents being able to have true custody over their children? It's just absurd.

Dr Guy

on Dec 15, 2004

THIS IS AN OUTRAGE!!!!!!!!!

Yep!

Dr Guy

on Dec 15, 2004

No, but aren't there laws against spanking others against their will, forcing another to stay in a room against their will, taking away somebody else's property, etc.? Unless they make specific exceptions for parents, the right thing is to make it illegal for parents to ground, spank, or take toys away from their children.

I see your point now. I guess I missed the sarcasm. And I do agree. The courts have taken this to a new idiocy. So while legal in Washington, it does usurp the parents rights. And that is half way down the slippery slope to total state control.

Great point. Sorry I missed the irony.

Independent1

on Dec 15, 2004

The case has to do with whether the information should be admissable in court. The decision nor laws deny parents the right to evesdrop on their kids. The police asked the mother to gather information and offered the mother a reward to do so after they were denied the ability to wiretap the phone.

JillUser

on Dec 15, 2004

The case has to do with whether the information should be admissable in court. The decision nor laws deny parents the right to evesdrop on their kids.

You're essentially saying they can listen but they can't do anything about what they hear. Sorry, I still think it is absurd. If they can nab a child molester for trying to hook up with minors on the internet, what is the difference? I think parents need to be able to use any tools they have to prevent their kids from getting in harms way or getting themselves involved in things they shouldn't.

Independent1

on Dec 16, 2004

You're essentially saying they can listen but they can't do anything about what they hear.

Not at all. You can do plenty about it. The problem was ultimately about whether the information was admissable in court.
In any case the Washington Supreme Court did not rule on banning parental telephone eavesdropping as you have stated. They upheld both federal and state laws.
Go read the court decision, federal, and state statutes yourself. It's public information and can be found on the web. The court's decision states that the specific evidence should not have been admitted and sent the case back for a new trial. It also states in regards to the state privacy law: "It is, of course, within the province of the legislature to shift this statutory balance should it decide the residents of this state require less privacy protection."

The court simply upheld the laws as written, specifically stating that if the residents want the law otherwise it is well within jurisdiction of the LEGISLATURE to amend the laws as necessary. If you don't like the laws write to your state and/or federal legislators.

messybuu

on Dec 16, 2004

Not at all. You can do plenty about it. The problem was ultimately about whether the information was admissable in court.
In any case the Washington Supreme Court did not rule on banning parental telephone eavesdropping as you have stated. They upheld both federal and state laws.
Go read the court decision, federal, and state statutes yourself. It's public information and can be found on the web. The court's decision states that the specific evidence should not have been admitted and sent the case back for a new trial. It also states in regards to the state privacy law: "It is, of course, within the province of the legislature to shift this statutory balance should it decide the residents of this state require less privacy protection."

The court simply upheld the laws as written, specifically stating that if the residents want the law otherwise it is well within jurisdiction of the LEGISLATURE to amend the laws as necessary. If you don't like the laws write to your state and/or federal legislators.

Independent1

on Dec 16, 2004

If parents can't monitor their children's conversations or activities on the phone or computer, then why can colleges (such as the one I am at right now) monitor the use of their computers?

This may have other laws associated with it federal and/or state statute, however in any case you probably signed something that gave consent to the College to monitor your use of their computers and network.

messybuu

on Dec 16, 2004

If parents can't monitor their children's conversations or activities on the phone or computer, then why can colleges (such as the one I am at right now) monitor the use of their computers?

Because it's against the law unless the other party consents, right? Isn't that what the judge decided? Is eavesdropping on another person's conversation legal?

Independent1

on Dec 16, 2004

What can they do? They clearly can't use recorded conversations as evidence to prosecute any Internet child molesters talking to their children, unless the Internet child molester gives complete consent, which I doubt they'll do.

The authorities certainly can use recorded conversations, however they need authorization for a wiretap. Federal law allows for a wiretap with single party consent. There may also be differences within different states and also for specific felonies in federal laws.

In any case if you don't live in Washington State you might want to look at your own state statutes because MOST of the states have statutes which gives law enforcment more leeway to gather evidence without warrants, etal.

Welcome Guest! Please take the time to register with us.
There are many great features available to you once you register, including:

Richer content, access to many features that are disabled for guests like commenting on the forums.
Access to a great community, with a massive database of many, many areas of interest.
Access to contests & subscription offers like exclusive emails.
It's simple, and FREE!