Go Back   David Icke's Official Forums > Main Forums > Exposing Child Abuse

Thread Tools
Old 21-02-2010, 08:10 AM   #61
Join Date: May 2008
Location: Multiverse
Posts: 12,982
Likes: 0 (0 Posts)
Thumbs down

Originally Posted by lewi View Post
Ok i must say its fu#!d !!

You get no privacy at all.
lakkimakki is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 21-02-2010, 09:33 AM   #62
Senior Member
Join Date: Aug 2009
Posts: 536
Likes: 0 (0 Posts)
Default UK.gov promises it couldn't happen here...

I know for a fact this is a lie. The school admin team compile a list of eligable pupils, based on geographical area/free meals/tax credit, etc, and the form tutor hands out the letters to the selected children.

The article in full:

US school comes out fighting over webcam spy claim
Alert Print Post commentUK.gov promises it couldn't happen here

By John Ozimek • Get more from this author

Posted in Government, 19th February 2010 15:10 GMT

Free whitepaper – Data quality and cost reduction

The UK agency in charge of IT in UK schools has insisted there is no chance of the government's free laptops program exposing the bedroom activities of British students.

The calming words for British parents comes after a US school district was sued for allegedly spying on a student in his bedroom via the webcam on his school supplied laptop.

The proud boast of Lower Merrion School District in Philadelphia is that it gives every one of their 1,800 high-schoolers laptop computers, to "ensure that all students have 24/7 access to school-based resources."

The catch – which isn’t even mentioned in the small print – is that whilst pupils are watching their laptops, their school may be watching them. This rather sinister twist to the tale came to light when the parents of student Blake Robbins were told by an official of Harriton High School last November that their son had been involved in "improper behavior in his home."

There are no further details of what this improper behaviour might constitute – and readers must draw their own conclusions as to the sort of behaviour a teenage school student might indulge in, if left alone in his bedroom with a PC.

However, what startled and then outraged Blake’s parents was the evidence provided: a photo of their son engaged in the "improper behaviour" cited, taken not on any friend’s camera – but by the webcam on the free school laptop.

Subsequent investigation revealed that this webcam could be – and in this case, was – activated remotely by persons working for the school.

According to the Robbins family, an assistant principal at Harriton High, Lindy Matsko, confirmed that the school district "in fact has the ability to remotely activate the Webcam contained in a student's personal laptop computer issued by the school district at any time it chose, and to view and capture whatever images were in front of the Webcam."

The Robbins family have reacted by talking to their lawyers – and this week they issued suit (pdf) against the school district, its board of governors, and Christopher McGinley, the Superintendent of the district.

They allege a veritable shopping list of wrongdoing, including not only breaches of the Fourth Amendment of the United States Constitution, but also the Electronic Communication Privacy Act, the Computer Fraud Abuse Act, the Stored Communications Act, s1983 of the Civil Rights Act, the Pennsylvania Wiretapping and Electronic Surveillance Act, as well as Pennsylvania common law.

The school district has today responded robustly, claiming that the laptops come with webcam pre-installed and a tracking facility that would be used in case a laptop was stolen. They state: "The tracking-security feature was limited to taking a still image of the operator and the operator's screen. This feature has only been used for the limited purpose of locating a lost, stolen or missing laptop. The District has not used the tracking feature or web cam for any other purpose or in any other manner whatsoever."

However, this feature has now been de-activated and they do not envisage reactivating it without permission from students and parents.

So could this happen in the UK? We asked BECTA - the government agency leading the national drive to spread technology into education for their views. Their response was a categoric no.

According to a spokeswoman for BECTA, families apply for funding for a laptop through the Home Access Initiative. Individual schools do not know which families have obtained PCs – and the initiative is about providing funding for families to go out and obtain their own PC, rather than the provision of PCs through a central state provider.In other words: it couldn’t happen here.

Nonetheless, the story is a salutary warning to all those happily downloading helpful educational packages at home. If you don’t know the provenance of a site, you cannot be 100% sure what you are getting. Even when dealing with officialdom, the message from today’s episode seems to be that you should stay on your guard at all times. ®

Free whitepaper – Data quality and cost reduction

Read more: Laptop Surveillance Philadelphia School Blake Robbins
Share this article57 commentsPost a comment
Close ×Share this article via… Facebook Digg Reddit Google Bookmarks Yahoo! My Web StumbleUpon Twitter Slashdot.
"The problem is not changing people's consciousnesses--or what's in their heads--but the political, economic, institutional regime of the production of truth" (Michel Foucault)
bluefeather is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 21-02-2010, 03:00 PM   #63
Join Date: May 2009
Posts: 1,702
Likes: 0 (0 Posts)

excuse me, but surely the most serious breach wd be child pornography laws...?

never happens in Britain? we have RIPA laws.........dnt need to 'trick' you into taking a camera into your home....
jakemaverick is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 21-02-2010, 04:27 PM   #64
Senior Member
Join Date: May 2009
Location: Paradise in my Mind
Posts: 257
Likes: 2 (1 Post)


Philadelphia Inquirer

Is there any scenario where a school district is justified to monitor students at home?
Yes, if the webcam captures illegal activity.
151 (2.5%)
Yes, if the webcam captures a student suffering physical abuse.
90 (1.5%)
No, there is no scenario where this would be okay.
5730 (94.3%)
Not sure.
106 (1.7%)
Total votes = 6077

Post a comment
More News
Riordan: That smell in the air? It sure isn't spring
L. Merion webcam issue is new legal territory
Old City deals with drinkers turned fighters
GOP's Welch quits race in 6th District, backs Gerlach
Suicide crash highlights air-security 'gap'
Melting snow and hearts
Hercules: Master of cuisine, slave of Washington
N.J. schools brace for possible aid cuts
Posted on Sun, Feb. 21, 2010

L. Merion webcam issue is new legal territory
By Larry King, Dan Hardy, and John Shiffman

Inquirer Staff Writers

Even today, relatively few students can imagine their schools giving them a computer to take home.

Fewer still can envision their schools using those devices to spy on them.

Yet that was the charge leveled in an explosive federal lawsuit filed last week against the Lower Merion School District in its use of remote-control cameras on those laptop computers.

Now federal prosecutors have subpoenaed the district, The Inquirer has learned. The grand-jury subpoena, delivered Friday, sought records related to the cameras and the system that district officials used to activate them, said a person who had been briefed about the matter. He spoke on the condition of anonymity.

School district spokesman Douglas Young, while declining to say if a subpoena was received, said yesterday that the district would cooperate with any investigation.

U.S. Attorney Michael Levy, who previously headed the office's computer crimes unit, declined to comment. But one federal official offered a rough outline of what investigators might be looking for.

"Among the allegations we would look at are whether any wiretap or computer intrusion laws were broken," said the official, who spoke on condition of anonymity. "We're just getting started. And at the end of the day, we may not find any federal violations."

The wiretap law applies to audio, not video or still images. The intrusion law bars unauthorized access to a computer with the intent to defraud, cause harm, or invade privacy.

The case has riveted not only students and parents, but also privacy experts who called it unprecedented - and perhaps a harbinger of the future as the reach of technology expands beyond school walls.

"This is the first one where we've seen this scenario," said Lillie Coney, associate director of the Electronic Privacy Information Center in Washington. "This is definitely a new one."

The lawsuit, filed Tuesday, accuses district officials of using a webcam on the school-issued laptop of a Harriton High School sophomore to spy on the boy in his home, and to snoop on other students at home.

Blake Robbins, 15, was confronted Nov. 11 by an assistant principal who used a photo from the webcam to accuse the teen of engaging in "improper behavior" at home, says the lawsuit, brought by Robbins' parents.

On Friday, the youth told TV crews that the photo showed him eating his favorite candy at home."They were trying to allege that when Blake was holding two Mike & Ikes in his hand . . . that somehow he was involved in selling drugs," the family's lawyer, Mark S. Haltzman, told TV reporters.

The school district said Harriton's assistant principal had merely tried "to be supportive of a student and his family," and that the school would never have used such a photo as a basis for discipline.

The suit says the family was informed of the webcam's ability to monitor its users only after the assistant principal talked to the boy.

The Montgomery County school district said the cameras were activated only on laptops that had been reported missing, lost or stolen. This school year, technicians activated the system 42 times and retrieved 18 missing or stolen laptops - before last week's controversy caused officials to disable the system till further notice.

Young said Friday that parents and students should have been told clearly of the system in advance. "That notice should have been given, and we regret not giving it."

Meanwhile, some Web sites swelled with demands to prosecute school officials for wiretapping as others expressed frustration that more details of the case had not emerged. The word if figured prominently in the reactions of some parents last week.

"If this is true, I am outraged," said Mare Rosenbaum, whose son attends Harriton.

The lawsuit did not say if Blake Robbins' laptop had been reported missing or stolen, and gave no specific evidence that any other students had been monitored at home.

Christopher Wolf, a Washington lawyer who specializes in privacy issues, said answers to such questions - and the extent to which the district informed parents and students of the webcams' use - are critical in determining if school officials erred.

"If, in fact, notice was given, and if the computer was reported lost or stolen, and if, consistent with the notice, the monitoring system was turned on," Wolf said, "it would be hard to see how that would violate the expectation of privacy."

Even so, Wolf said, there was no justification to use Robbins' photo to discipline him at school for anything he had done at home.

"They would use the [webcam] to locate the stolen computer, not as an opportunity to then monitor student behavior," Wolf said. "The issue is, where is the computer, not what is the student doing?"

Coney, of the Electronic Privacy Information Center, took a harder line. Schools should not be installing monitoring equipment on student-issued laptops, period, she said.

"If it's lost, believe me, they are going to hold the parents responsible for replacing it. If it's stolen, they have insurance to replace it," Coney said. "They're not law enforcement. They are not in the business of conducting surveillance or investigative efforts beyond anything that happens within that school."

Coney said she wondered whether computer vendors had promoted the use of monitoring systems to school officials. But once the monitors are in place, she said, they are ripe for abuse.

"It could just as well have been a predator of some type, a criminal who has the same ability to manipulate the technology," she said. "The risks are there, and you can't protect for every type of exploitation that might occur."

The lawsuit contends that the school district violated state and federal privacy laws. But Montgomery County District Attorney Risa Vetri Ferman said Friday that neither the Robbins family nor their lawyer had contacted her office or local police.

Ferman, who said she learned of the matter from news reports, said she had begun a preliminary investigation.

The federal wiretap law applies only to audio, not video images. But the Department of Justice considers a video wiretap such an invasion of privacy that federal prosecutors typically seek a judge's permission before installing hidden video cameras in a home or an office.

The halls of Lower Merion and Harriton High Schools were still buzzing Friday with talk of the story that some students have dubbed "webcamgate."

"It is a bit surreal for my school to be at the center of such a media frenzy," Hannah Goldberg-Morse, an editor at Lower Merion's student newspaper, said in an e-mail.

While exciting, she said, "it's also sad to see my school portrayed in such a negative light, especially over something that has very little to do with the overall quality of our school and educations."

Jeffrey Lindy, a defense lawyer whose son is a Lower Merion senior, said he doubts a federal crime occurred.

"I think the federal case is going to go away pretty quick; it would be a defense attorney's dream because there is certainly no intent to commit a crime here," Lindy said yesterday. "Now, of course, the parents weren't told. That's not illegal, just stupid."


Contact staff writer Larry King

at 215-345-0446 or [email protected].

Contributing to this article were Inquirer staff writers Bonnie L. Cook, Derrick Nunnally, Mari A. Schaefer, Joseph Tanfani, and Lydia Woolever.
kgone is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 21-02-2010, 06:48 PM   #65
Senior Member
Join Date: Apr 2009
Posts: 20,406
Likes: 1,436 (935 Posts)

Originally Posted by lewi

Total fucking bullshit!!

Everyone that has a laptop WITH A CAM should disable it somehow!! (Along with the mic..Put a piece of paper IN FRONT OF THE CAM SAYING "FUCK YOU ASSHOLE")

Fucking assholes!!!!

Last edited by Dude111; 21-02-2010 at 06:49 PM.
Dude111 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 21-02-2010, 07:06 PM   #66
Senior Member
Join Date: Jan 2009
Posts: 6,865
Likes: 23 (14 Posts)

Originally Posted by djhooker View Post
simple solution = put a piece of tape over your webcam when you're not using it, thats what i do.
Well, according to this post:

Originally Posted by snapdragon View Post
Apple have a patent for cameras behind the picture, the reason claimed in the patent is that when a user uses a webcam, they are looking off-camera which is disconcerting.

The way it works is to have tiny cameras behind the LCD picture, and the LCD picture flashes on and off 1000s of times per second which is imperceivable, but the camera grabs frames during some of these gaps of darkness.

You will no longer be able to cover up the camera. It will literally be behind your screen.

metacomet is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 21-02-2010, 07:09 PM   #67
Senior Member
Join Date: Jan 2009
Posts: 6,865
Likes: 23 (14 Posts)

Originally Posted by lewi View Post
Holy fuck.

Look how smarmy he is about this...

he actually gets a kick out of dropping in on the kids and watching them duck out of the cameras way.

The kids think they are being warned that 'we're about to spy on you' and so after the countdown they move out of the way... they don't realize that he is watching them even before the countdown.

metacomet is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 21-02-2010, 07:38 PM   #68
Join Date: May 2008
Location: Multiverse
Posts: 12,982
Likes: 0 (0 Posts)

Lol i like when people are checking me out by webcam , makes me feel so important.

Last edited by lakkimakki; 21-02-2010 at 07:39 PM.
lakkimakki is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 21-02-2010, 08:00 PM   #69
Join Date: May 2009
Posts: 1,702
Likes: 0 (0 Posts)

Originally Posted by metacomet View Post
Well, according to this post:

You will no longer be able to cover up the camera. It will literally be behind your screen.

scary stuff....but how do you know that isn't already here? how can you possibly....? and with RIPA laws you can have cams on you 24 seven and u wudn't even know it.........

the crime has already been legalised and was done a long time ago...
jakemaverick is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 22-02-2010, 02:59 PM   #70
Senior Member
Join Date: Aug 2007
Location: Supraconsciousness
Posts: 7,354
Likes: 190 (101 Posts)
Thumbs down Somebody's Watching

We Are One !!

Last edited by lewi; 22-02-2010 at 03:00 PM.
lewi is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 22-02-2010, 03:47 PM   #71
Senior Member
Join Date: Feb 2010
Posts: 717
Likes: 0 (0 Posts)

Didnt someone suggest last year that there was a hidden camera in Digi-boxes too ?
Enough to make us wonder why government should want to pay out for all the digital, hmm.... I dont believe its because they just want us to be able to receive better tv reception put it that way lol.
America too is going (or gone) digital.
Gotta be a catch in it dont you think.

BTW, Hi Jake !!!
Your story fascinates me. Keep your chin up.
willnotbesilenced is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 21-03-2010, 08:09 PM   #72
Senior Member
Join Date: May 2009
Location: Paradise in my Mind
Posts: 257
Likes: 2 (1 Post)
Default Follow-up article on how it was done

Please see an article that was published today with more details on this case. Tells type software used, police and school board were aware that spy camera's were on the laptops, how this whole thing went down and how they are trying to justify it, etc. Long but interesting.


Posted on Sun, Mar. 21, 2010

How a lawsuit over school laptops evolved
By Joseph Tanfani

Inquirer Staff Writer

Soon after Lower Merion schools started handing out laptops to high school students in 2008, a school board member had a question: Were any being lost or stolen?

The query, from Jerry Novick, drew a small smile from the technology chief, Virginia DeMedio.

"We did have a theft," she said. "And we have a way we can track them. . . .

"There were six that were taken. All but one came back."

Satisfied, the board moved on to other matters. No one mentioned that the district had tracked down those computers with a powerful software program that could secretly snap photos of the user.

That conversation, captured on video, hinted at the roots of the Web cam debacle to come: Lower Merion administrators' near-evangelical faith in the power of computers to remake education - and a corresponding blind spot on the potential hazards of their own use of technology.

Those perils became clear last month with the disclosure that the school had secretly snapped photos of a Harriton High School sophomore in his home - sparking a civil lawsuit, a federal criminal investigation, and an international uproar about privacy in the digital age.

A review shows that Lower Merion administrators blew past warnings of trouble and missed obvious opportunities to disclose the Web cam capability to parents and students.

Instead, as the district tried to keep track of 2,300 expensive Apple computers in the hands of teenagers, the use of the powerful surveillance capabilities seemed to fade into the background, just another part of the school routine.

When Lower Merion police hunted down schools' stolen computers, they sometimes used the Web cam pictures to help build a case.

Network technician Michael Perbix, in computer forums and in a Webcast, would recount how he could hunt down and monitor the laptops without anyone knowing.

"If you're controlling someone's machine," he said, "you don't want them to know what you're doing."

The district finally suspended the practice - and apologized for not disclosing it - after the family of 15-year-old Blake Robbins filed a federal lawsuit saying the Web cam program amounted to a systematic violation of students' civil rights.

Now a law firm and forensics experts are trying to count how many times the software was activated - and figure out if it was ever used to spy on students instead of tracking missing computers.

The district has said it turned on the system 42 times this academic year, but won't say how often it used the tracking device in the previous two years - or how many pictures were collected.

Parents may never know: Those computer files are purged before each school year, according to sources.

School officials have declined to comment in detail while the investigation continues.

The two sides in the lawsuit have signaled a possible settlement, but the controversy is far from over: The FBI is still investigating, and U.S. Sen. Arlen Specter has promised to hold a federal hearing.

In a new twist, sources say administrators decided to talk to Blake Robbins in part because they were worried about a threatening text message to the sophomore captured in their surveillance software.

No matter what, this wealthy Main Line district will retain a worldwide reputation for snooping on students - and is still on the hook for potentially huge legal bills.

Perbix and his boss, information systems coordinator Carol Cafiero, have been placed on paid leave. Their attorneys say that their clients did nothing wrong and that it was the responsibility of the administration to come up with a policy to protect student privacy.

"I don't think there was a whole lot of intelligent debate on how to implement this program," said Marc Neff, attorney for Perbix.

'Mike loves it'
In 2007, as Lower Merion prepared to hand out laptops to each high school student, computer technicians were looking for a better way to manage their growing inventory. They settled on a software program called LANrev.

The big attraction: It allowed them to install software on thousands of laptops at once, remotely, and it worked on both Windows and Apple machines.

Another selling point was a feature known as Theft Tracker.

In September 2007, Cafiero recommended the purchase in a memo to her boss, DeMedio.

"If a computer is stolen, we can mark it stolen on the LANrev server," she wrote. ". . . And then the laptop will take screen shots and pictures of the user with the built-in camera."

Without seeking bids, the district spent $156,357 for the software in 2007, according to district documents.

"Oh, Mike loves it, and I agree it is a great product," Cafiero wrote in an e-mail to DeMedio, who retired last summer.

The One to One laptop program was launched at Harriton in the 2008 school year, aided by $721,000 in state grants. Teachers and administrators immediately declared the program a big success: Students were writing more and making their own videos, board members were told. Lower Merion High would get them the next year.

But there were also problems - some of them of the administration's own making.

First, the school sent the laptops home without requiring parents and students to sign an updated policy that clearly set out the rules and regulations.

Instead, students signed an old policy that set rules for use of the school's Internet network. It said nothing about laptops, let alone the remote Web cam photos.

No one ever came up with formal written rules for using Theft Tracker, either. However, technical staff members did follow some rough guidelines.

Only Perbix and Cafiero could turn it on. They worked at tech department headquarters in an office far from the two high schools, on Rock Hill Road in Bala Cynwyd.

Their lawyers say they used the tracker only after getting a request from the high schools, either from another member of the tech department or from a principal or assistant principal.

When the program was triggered, an icon typically appeared next to the computer being tracked: a Sherlock Holmes-style hat and a magnifying glass.

Once it was on, the feature kept recording information until it was turned off. Every 15 minutes, as long as the computer was on, open, and connected to the Internet, the program did three things. It recorded the computer's Internet address, captured a screen image, and snapped a Web cam photo.

When it took a picture, it immediately sent it to the school's server, then erased the file created on the laptop. There was no easy way for users to figure out that they were being watched, technical experts said.

It's not clear who in the Lower Merion schools had access to the Web cam photos. In a memo explaining LANrev to his fellow techs, Perbix said that, while only he and Cafiero could turn the system on, the information collected was "visible to you if the computer is one you can normally view."

"We also can make these reports available via a Web site to local police who can analyze the information and act upon it," he wrote.

Tracked to Pakistan
That's what happened in the fall of 2008 when six laptops were stolen from the Harriton locker room during a gym class.

Lower Merion police, with an assist from the regional FBI computer lab in Radnor, tracked down five of the computers and arrested the culprit - another student, sources said.

The sixth was tracked to Pakistan.

As time went on, the schools reported thefts to the police nearly two dozen times; three times, juveniles were charged, the sources said. In an additional half-dozen cases, laptops reported stolen turned out to be merely misplaced, the sources said.

Pictures were routinely turned over to police, along with the computer's Internet address.

On his blog, "Best Thing Since Sliced Bread," Perbix recounted an incident in which police recovered a stolen laptop that was sending back its Internet location.

"The police went to the house and were befuddled to find out the people we knew had the laptop was not the family that lived there," Perbix wrote, cautioning people to secure their home wireless network.

"Well, we eventually found out that they were the neighboring house and were borrowing the unsecured WiFi."

Joseph Daly, who retired in 2009 as Lower Merion police superintendent, said he never knew that his department was being furnished with pictures snapped from students' laptops.

"God, no, I don't remember that," he said when told about it. "That's illegal as hell."

Even if no laws were in fact broken, Daly said, it's still a terrible idea.

"A better plan would be: If you lose it, guess what - you owe the school a new computer," said Daly, now police chief in Springfield, Delaware County.

Charles McGrath, current Lower Merion police superintendent, said that, because of the ongoing investigation, he could not comment.

Questioning privacy
Inside the schools, word was getting out. Some students put sticky notes over the Web cams, students said.

During the last school year, two Harriton student council members met with principal Steven R. Kline to ask about the Web cam rumors.

When Kline confirmed it, students told him they were worried about privacy violations and asked about other types of monitoring. But nothing happened - not even after the students returned for a follow-up visit, according to other council members who were briefed afterward.

In a computer forum about how to disable the Apple Web cams, Perbix joked:

"I ask my users to please put on the sticky: 'In the event that you steal this machine, please remove sticky before operation' . . . so that I may get a picture of the person."

Perbix, a Temple University graduate who has worked in the district's IT department for 12 years, became an enthusiastic user of LANrev, even appearing on a promotional Webcast for the company.

"The other big feature which really, really, really, I really liked about this is the . . . theft tracking," he said.

In 2009, the year the program was expanded to Lower Merion High, the district sent a letter to parents of high school students laying out some laptop rules. Downloading of games was prohibited, and families had to pay a $55 insurance fee. "No uninsured laptops are permitted off campus," it said.

Still, the letter said nothing about computer tracking or remote Web cam photos.

Some teachers and administrators did warn students, sporadically. At Lower Merion, an assistant principal told ninth graders about the tracking and remote Web cams during an orientation session in September.

In November, Perbix was asked to turn on the computer assigned to Robbins.

The 15-year-old was hard on the Harriton laptops. He reportedly broke the screens of at least two. In November, he was using a replacement from a pool of loaner laptops. His family, which had struggled with unpaid utility bills and other debts, hadn't paid the required $55 insurance fee.

In Robbins' case, the tracking system wasn't activated to find a missing computer; according to his lawyer, the school knew he had been using the same loaner for a month.

Instead, someone decided to initiate Theft Tracker because it was suspected Robbins was taking the laptop home without permission, sources said.

The tracking program, by logging the laptop's Internet address overnight, would prove it. But, as was routine, Perbix left all three features running. Every 15 minutes, LANrev tried to log the location, snap a picture, and capture an image of what was on Robbins' screen.

What the program found alarmed the technical staff. One image showed him holding what looked like pills. Robbins says it was really Mike & Ike candy.

There was something else: A screen shot captured a text exchange between Robbins and another student. Staff members read the message as a threat to Robbins.

The exact nature of the message could not be learned. The Robbins family attorney, Mark S. Haltzman, said no one at the school had mentioned anything to Robbins about a potential threat.

In the tech offices, staff members debated what to do with the information before agreeing that it was a decision best left to the administration.

"As a practical matter, you don't want to be the guy who inadvertently sees something and says nothing, and, God forbid, something happens to that child," said Neff, Perbix's lawyer.

"Is it not better to come to someone at a higher pay grade and say, 'I inadvertently came across this information. What should I do?' "

Assistant principal Lynn Matsko called the Robbins family and brought Blake in for a talk. Haltzman says Matsko confronted the teen with suspicions that he was dealing drugs.

If there really had been concern for his safety, Haltzman said, Matsko said nothing to Robbins about it.

"The conversation had to do with a perception by the school administration that he was involved with pills, that he had pills," he said.

Even if some technical department employee was worried about Robbins, Haltzman said, it didn't justify the remote surveillance.

Perbix and Cafiero are on leave pending the outcome of the district's investigation. District spokesman Doug Young said there was no indication they had done anything wrong.

After the suit was filed, the company that last year bought out LANrev's owner said trying to track computers through covert Web cam photos didn't make sense. Company officials said they would eliminate that part of the software.

"They're not admissible in court, and it isn't an effective way of finding a stolen laptop," said Stephen Midgley, vice president for marketing at Absolute Software Corp.

"We don't see value in this particular feature."
kgone is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 19-04-2010, 01:55 PM   #73
Senior Member
Join Date: May 2007
Location: From The Rotten Apple. Now Scandinavia
Posts: 9,715
Likes: 35 (19 Posts)


PHILADELPHIA — A suburban Philadelphia school district snapped secret webcam pictures of a high school student when he was partially undressed or sleeping in his bed, and captured instant messages he exchanged with friends, the student charged in court papers this week.

The Lower Merion School District concedes its efforts to find missing school-issued laptops was misguided, and officials vowed anew Friday to release the findings of their internal investigation, "good and bad."

The LANrev software program took screen shots and webcam photos every 15 seconds when activated. The district thereby captured over 400 screen shots and webcam images of Harriton High School sophomore Blake Robbins, according to court filings this week in his lawsuit.

The suit, filed in February, exposed the tracking program and prompted an FBI investigation into possible wiretap violations, along with debate among parents about whether to support the potential class-action lawsuit.

"A substantial number of webcam photos have been recovered in the investigation," school board President David Ebby said in a statement Friday. "As we have made clear since day one, we are committed to providing all of the facts — good and bad — at the conclusion of the investigation."

Lawyers involved in the case were to meet Friday afternoon to discuss a possible settlement.

Mark Haltzman, who filed the lawsuit on behalf of Robbins and his family, said evidence now shows the district used the tracking software for non-authorized reasons — for instance, when students failed to pay the required insurance or return the laptops at year's end. At least once, a name mix-up led the district to activate the wrong student's laptop, he charged.

"Thousands of webcam pictures and screen shots have been taken of numerous other students in their homes, many of which never reported their laptops lost or missing," Haltzman wrote in a motion filed Thursday.

According to Haltzman, technology coordinator Carol Cafiero refused to answer his questions at a recent deposition, citing her Fifth Amendment right against self-incrimination. She and technician Michael Perbix were the only employees authorized to activate the webcams. Perbix did not fight the deposition.

Haltzman called Cafiero a possible "voyeur" and wants access to her personal computer to see if she downloaded any student images. To support the charge, he cited her response to an e-mail from a colleague who said viewing the webcam pictures was like watching "a little LMSD soap opera."

"I know, I love it!" Cafiero allegedly replied.

Her lawyer, Charles Mandracchia, did not immediately return a message Friday, but has said his client did nothing wrong. Cafiero makes $105,000 and Perbix $86,000. Both are on paid leave.

The wealthy suburban district — which spent about $21,600 per student in 2008-2009, nearly twice the amount spent on Philadelphia students — issues $1,000 Macintosh laptops to 2,300 students at two high schools.

Despite widespread concern about the alleged spying, hundreds of parents have signed on to oppose the Robbins family's suit for financial and other reasons.

"While we deeply regret the mistakes and misguided actions that have led us to this situation, at this late stage of the investigation we are not aware of any evidence that district employees used any LANrev webcam photographs or screenshots for such inappropriate purposes," Ebby said in his statement.
"My father may not approve, but I am no longer his disciple, I am a master now, an idea transcended into life. And so this is my new path, which is a lot like the old one - only mine. To stay on that path I need to work harder, explore new rituals, evolve. Am I evil? Am I good? I'm done asking those questions, I dont have the answers - does anyone?"

-Dexter Morgan
real6 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 19-04-2010, 10:25 PM   #74
Senior Member
Join Date: Apr 2009
Posts: 20,406
Likes: 1,436 (935 Posts)

I love how they all lie about it when confronted!!
Dude111 is offline   Reply With Quote


big brother police state, child abuse, government abuse

Thread Tools

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is On

Forum Jump

All times are GMT. The time now is 08:23 PM.

Shoutbox provided by vBShout (Lite) - vBulletin Mods & Addons Copyright © 2019 DragonByte Technologies Ltd.