Illinois Teacher in Hot Water After Informing Students of Fifth Amendment Rights

Status
Not open for further replies.
Aug 20, 2009
12,824
7,899
New Hampshire
Detector(s) used
Garret Master hunter Cx Plus
Primary Interest:
Other
Illinois Teacher in Hot Water After Informing Students of Fifth Amendment Rights


By Susan Sarkauskas
Article posted: 5/25/2013 8:00 AM

A Batavia High School teacher's fans are rallying to support him as he faces possible discipline for advising students of their Constitutional rights before taking a school survey on their behavior.

They've been collecting signatures on an online petition, passing the word on Facebook, sending letters to the school board, and planning to speak at Tuesday's school board meeting.
Advertisement

Students and parents have praised his ability to interest reluctant students in history and current affairs.

But John Dryden said he's not the point. He wants people to focus on the issue he raised: Whether school officials considered that students could incriminate themselves with their answers to the survey that included questions about drug and alcohol use.

Dryden, a social studies teacher, told some of his students April 18 that they had a 5th Amendment right to not incriminate themselves by answering questions on the survey, which had each student's name printed on it.

The survey is part of measuring how students meet the social-emotional learning standards set by the state. It is the first year Batavia has administered such a survey.

School district officials declined to provide a copy of the survey to the Daily Herald, saying the district bought the survey from a private company, Multi-Health Systems Inc., and the contents are proprietary business information.

They did provide the script teachers were to read to students before the test.

It does not tell students whether participation is mandatory or optional.

An April email communication to parents said their children could choose not to take the survey, but they had to notify the district by April 17.

The survey asked about drug, alcohol and tobacco use, and emotions, according to Brad Newkirk, chief academic officer.

The results were to be reviewed by school officials, including social workers, counselors and psychologists.

The survey was not a diagnostic tool, but a "screener" to figure out which students might need specific help, Newkirk said.

Superintendent Jack Barshinger said teacher support for doing a survey grew after several suicides by students in recent years. Students and staff typically said they had no idea those teens were in distress.

"We can't help them if we aren't aware of their needs," Barshinger said.

The results will also be compared from year to year, to see if interventions offered work, he said.

School officials have already reviewed the surveys and have talked to some students about their answers.
Day of the survey

Dryden said it was just "dumb luck" he learned about the contents. He picked up surveys from his mailbox about 10 minutes before his first class. Seeing students' names on them, unlike past surveys, he started reading the 34 questions.

"Oh. Well. Ummm, somebody needs to remind them they have the ability not to incriminate themselves," he recalled thinking. It was particularly on his mind because his classes had recently finished reviewing the Bill of Rights. And the school has a police officer stationed there as a liaison, he pointed out. Barshinger said the results weren't shared with police.

"I made a judgment call. There was no time to ask anyone," Dryden said. If the survey had been handed out a day or two before, he said, he would have talked to an administrator about his concern.

Instead, he gave the warning to his first-, second- and third-block classes. The test was given to all students during third block.

He suspects it was a teacher who told the administration about what Dryden had done, after the other teacher had trouble getting all the students to take the survey.

But he had also spoken afterward with administrators about the questions. "So I was already on the radar," he said.

Dryden faces having a "letter of remedy" placed in his employment file. He said this week he is negotiating the matter with district authorities.

Only a school board can issue a letter of remedy, which informs teachers their conduct was improper and could have consequences up to dismissal, according to state law.

Barshinger declined to speak about Dryden's specific situation. The board will discuss the matter in closed session Tuesday. Any action, however, would have to take place in open session.

Dryden mentioned his situation to a former student, Joe Bertalmio.
The campaign

Bertalmio was outraged. The 2002 graduate, who took one class with Dryden, credits him with teaching him how to examine positions and make logical arguments, no matter where one stands politically.

"Back it up — give me evidence," is what Dryden taught, Bertalmio said.

Bertalmio posted the news on Facebook, where it was noticed by fellow graduates. Parents of current students have also joined in. There are more than 1,000 signatures on the "Defend and Support John Dryden" petition at the petitionsite.com, although many seem to be repeats. He has also urged people to write letters to the Batavia school board, plans to speak at the board's meeting, and may have a rally before the meeting. A Batavia alderman told the city council Monday he plans to attend the meeting in support, and encouraged other people to do so.
Stick to the issue

But Dryden doesn't want this seen as him vs. the administrators. He said he knows they were acting in what they thought was the best interests of the students.

"These are good, professional, smart people on the other side who want to do what is right by kids," he said.

He would rather focus the discussion on the survey.

"I have asked people (the supporters) to talk about the survey. I think I am a sideshow," he said. "This (the survey) was rushed and it wasn't vetted."

"I'm not a martyr," he said. "I'm trying to refocus people's attentions. Calm down."
 

hvacker

Bronze Member
Aug 18, 2012
2,357
1,904
New Mexico USA
Detector(s) used
My Head
Primary Interest:
Other
Children don't have these rights until they are emancipated or come of age. Maybe your not a parent but the last thing anyone needs raising kids is having them read you their rights. Kids are property. Why? because parents are responsible for all they do. I shudder when thinking what the parents of that stupid kid that was arrested for making bombs in his bedroom. Oh wait.... Maybe that was free expression (ie: free speech)
As long as the courts hold parents a level of responsibility the Constitution remains an abstraction.
As a former parent, I really did need to know what the lil buggers were up to. Adults also face self-incrimination every time there employer gives them a mandatory drug test,
 

0121stockpicker

Silver Member
Aug 3, 2012
3,351
685
MA
🏆 Honorable Mentions:
1
Primary Interest:
Metal Detecting
Children don't have these rights until they are emancipated or come of age. Maybe your not a parent but the last thing anyone needs raising kids is having them read you their rights. Kids are property. Why? because parents are responsible for all they do. I shudder when thinking what the parents of that stupid kid that was arrested for making bombs in his bedroom. Oh wait.... Maybe that was free expression (ie: free speech)
As long as the courts hold parents a level of responsibility the Constitution remains an abstraction.
As a former parent, I really did need to know what the lil buggers were up to. Adults also face self-incrimination every time there employer gives them a mandatory drug test,

In sure you can refuse to take the drug test if you want. And the employer of course would likely them have the right to fire you. Frankly in most states you can be fired / let go for no cause at all. Employment at will.
 

austin

Gold Member
Jul 9, 2012
5,360
3,502
San Antonio, Texas
Detector(s) used
Garrett 250
Primary Interest:
Other
We have rights? Thought that ended when King Obama got elected again? Naw, our rights are like our ammo. Going, going, gone...
 

mustangpalmer1911

Sr. Member
Apr 12, 2011
335
159
Hop Bottom, PA
Detector(s) used
Garrett 250
Children don't have these rights until they are emancipated or come of age. Maybe your not a parent but the last thing anyone needs raising kids is having them read you their rights. Kids are property. Why? because parents are responsible for all they do. I shudder when thinking what the parents of that stupid kid that was arrested for making bombs in his bedroom. Oh wait.... Maybe that was free expression (ie: free speech)
As long as the courts hold parents a level of responsibility the Constitution remains an abstraction.
As a former parent, I really did need to know what the lil buggers were up to. Adults also face self-incrimination every time there employer gives them a mandatory drug test,

And where did you get that info? OO that is right each Admendment does have a age limit written into it and the Amendment itself stating that anyone under __ do not have rights under the Constition... now which one was that I cant remember. I guess the mentaly handicaped also do not have any constitional rights .....somone has to have a higher level of responsibility to take care of them.
 

Last edited:

Chadeaux

Gold Member
Sep 13, 2011
5,512
6,408
Southeast Arkansas
Detector(s) used
Ace 250
Primary Interest:
Cache Hunting
Children don't have these rights until they are emancipated or come of age. Maybe your not a parent but the last thing anyone needs raising kids is having them read you their rights. Kids are property. Why? because parents are responsible for all they do. I shudder when thinking what the parents of that stupid kid that was arrested for making bombs in his bedroom. Oh wait.... Maybe that was free expression (ie: free speech)
As long as the courts hold parents a level of responsibility the Constitution remains an abstraction.
As a former parent, I really did need to know what the lil buggers were up to. Adults also face self-incrimination every time there employer gives them a mandatory drug test,

What color is the sky in your world?

The only time my kid gives up her right against self incrimination is when I am the one doing the questioning.

Otherwise, they have no business asking questions like those.

Her doctor recently asked her if I have guns in the house. None of her damned business, and I was at the questioning session so I know it was asked. I also know my daughter told her that it was none of her business whether or not I chose to exercise my constitutional right to keep and bear arms.

Hvacker, YOU HAVE TO BE SMARTER THAN THE TOOLS YOU USE. That grey matter is for reasoning.

Show me the age limits for the constitution, or rethink your statement.

Under your interpretation, seniors would also lose their rights.

Unless what's his name takes over completely, you and I as well as all the children in this country have the right against self incrimination.
 

Last edited:

0121stockpicker

Silver Member
Aug 3, 2012
3,351
685
MA
🏆 Honorable Mentions:
1
Primary Interest:
Metal Detecting
We have rights? Thought that ended when King Obama got elected again? Naw, our rights are like our ammo. Going, going, gone...

Actually it ended the day after 9-11 when bush started thinking up the unpatriotic act. Best to know your history.
 

Treasure_Hunter

Administrator
Staff member
Jul 27, 2006
48,458
54,901
Florida
Detector(s) used
Minelab_Equinox_ 800 Minelab_CTX-3030 Minelab_Excal_1000 Minelab_Sovereign_GT Minelab_Safari Minelab_ETrac Whites_Beach_Hunter_ID Fisher_1235_X
Primary Interest:
All Treasure Hunting

hvacker

Bronze Member
Aug 18, 2012
2,357
1,904
New Mexico USA
Detector(s) used
My Head
Primary Interest:
Other
What color is the sky in your world?

The only time my kid gives up her right against self incrimination is when I am the one doing the questioning.

Otherwise, they have no business asking questions like those.

Her doctor recently asked her if I have guns in the house. None of her damned business, and I was at the questioning session so I know it was asked. I also know my daughter told her that it was none of her business whether or not I chose to exercise my constitutional right to keep and bear arms.

Hvacker, YOU HAVE TO BE SMARTER THAN THE TOOLS YOU USE. That grey matter is for reasoning.

Show me the age limits for the constitution, or rethink your statement.

Under your interpretation, seniors would also lose their rights.

Unless what's his name takes over completely, you and I as well as all the children in this country have the right against self incrimination.

The color of the sky in my world depends on the weather. Actually the Constitution and Bill of Rights were written for free white men. It did not include women, slaves, most minorities and kids. Now it just dismisses kids. They can petition the courts for emancipation and then have the whole package.
I was strictly speaking from a parents point of view. How a parent would deal with their kid interpreting the Bill of Rights. I do strongly agree that it's none of a schools business asking certain questions. Those questions should have gone to the parents. At the same time they feel a responsibility for the kids safety. And out-of-control parents blaming them for problems.
Like you said, at your house, a kids rights end at home. The Bill of Rights it says nothing about kids not pleading the 5th. during your questioning.

They said "The survey is part of measuring how students meet the social-emotional learning standards set by the state." Parents want the schools to teach everything including sex to their kids. There has been a gradual take over of families by the State with the exception of holding parents responsible when things go south. The State trumps parents.
Kids are the property and responsibility of their parents. That could end some day. And sure some seniors do loose their rights when it's decided they have lost the ability to control their lives. Kids too.
Our Constitution is valid only for Normal Stable Free Non-felon Adult Citizens. All others need not apply.
The limits for our Constitution were never written. Like our favorite the 2nd.As written NO RESTRICTIONS! Non the less they have been added bit by bit. Like felons, mental cases and kids. The restrictions came later. So don't look to the wording of the document, look to the laws of interpretation that came later. Self incrimination is a legal term and doesn't necessarily apply outside a court as long as the law isn't involved.

Those questions your kid was asked about if there were guns at home. I was asked a group of questions like that at my last physical. I have no idea why but maybe it has something to do with Obamacare. Strange questions like do I have close friends, guns, am I sad etc. All of the questions had nothing to do with my physical. There was no compulsion to answer them. Just a bit strange. I'd be interested if others have been asked ?.
Anyway, take care.
 

Last edited:

0121stockpicker

Silver Member
Aug 3, 2012
3,351
685
MA
🏆 Honorable Mentions:
1
Primary Interest:
Metal Detecting
Is that the same Patriot Act that you said you had no problem with?

That's right and bush was the president who pushed the pat act through. So what is incorrect about my statement that if you want to look at when fascism started in this country it started the day after 9-11. I would think there would not be a lot of disagreement with this statement??
 

mustangpalmer1911

Sr. Member
Apr 12, 2011
335
159
Hop Bottom, PA
Detector(s) used
Garrett 250
Actually the Constitution and Bill of Rights were written for free white men. It did not include women, slaves, most minorities and kids.
WHAT! Where does it say that any where any place. Show me the wording, the amendment, the anything that says except Black, Asians, Mexicans women ect. The 13th, 14th, 19th are there becasue narrow minded racist, sexist scum could not resit the urge to be ignorant. Those Amendments are racist and sexiest themselves saying that you have to treat someone in some special way becasue they are ________. If everyone could just see a human and not a color, sex, beliefs, ect that is the end of racism. EEO, Affirmative action, anything protecting or giving someone special treatment because of their race is a VERY prejudice. It is saying because you are a woman or because you are black what ever you are incapable of competing on level ground with the white man. It is a warped mind that thinks the Bill of Rights and the Constitution were not written for everyone. There are no Amendments protecting Asians or Hispanics so they have not Constitutional rights?
 

Last edited:

Treasure_Hunter

Administrator
Staff member
Jul 27, 2006
48,458
54,901
Florida
Detector(s) used
Minelab_Equinox_ 800 Minelab_CTX-3030 Minelab_Excal_1000 Minelab_Sovereign_GT Minelab_Safari Minelab_ETrac Whites_Beach_Hunter_ID Fisher_1235_X
Primary Interest:
All Treasure Hunting
First you say you support the Patriot act, then you say you don’t, then you do, then you don’t… Which is it?
*
Who is flip flopping?? After 9-11 I had no problem with the patriot act. If you believe that the country is "becoming fascist" than I believe you would look to the creation of the patriot act as the beginning - not the Obama administration?? How have I flip flopped etc?? Seems like I am stating fact here? Please explain??
*
*
believed the same thing under bush. I had no problem with gitmo, waterboarding, patriot act etc
*
Not at all. When bush passed the pat act I was up in arms against it and still am.
*
Actually it ended the day after 9-11 when bush started thinking up the unpatriotic act. Best to know your history.
Sent from my Galaxy Nexus using Tapatalk 2
 

Treasure_Hunter

Administrator
Staff member
Jul 27, 2006
48,458
54,901
Florida
Detector(s) used
Minelab_Equinox_ 800 Minelab_CTX-3030 Minelab_Excal_1000 Minelab_Sovereign_GT Minelab_Safari Minelab_ETrac Whites_Beach_Hunter_ID Fisher_1235_X
Primary Interest:
All Treasure Hunting
First you say you support the Patriot act, then you say you don’t, then you do, then you don’t… Which is it?
*
Who is flip flopping?? After 9-11 I had no problem with the patriot act. If you believe that the country is "becoming fascist" than I believe you would look to the creation of the patriot act as the beginning - not the Obama administration?? How have I flip flopped etc?? Seems like I am stating fact here? Please explain??
*
*
believed the same thing under bush. I had no problem with gitmo, waterboarding, patriot act etc
*
Not at all. When bush passed the pat act I was up in arms against it and still am.
*
Actually it ended the day after 9-11 when bush started thinking up the unpatriotic act. Best to know your history.

Sent from my Galaxy Nexus using Tapatalk 2
 

hvacker

Bronze Member
Aug 18, 2012
2,357
1,904
New Mexico USA
Detector(s) used
My Head
Primary Interest:
Other
WHAT! Where does it say that any where any place. Show me the wording, the amendment, the anything that says except Black, Asians, Mexicans women ect. The 13th, 14th, 19th are there becasue narrow minded racist, sexist scum could not resit the urge to be ignorant. Those Amendments are racist and sexiest themselves saying that you have to treat someone in some special way becasue they are ________. If everyone could just see a human and not a color, sex, beliefs, ect that is the end of racism. EEO, Affirmative action, anything protecting or giving someone special treatment because of their race is a VERY prejudice. It is saying because you are a woman or because you are black what ever you are incapable of competing on level ground with the white man. It is a warped mind that thinks the Bill of Rights and the Constitution were not written for everyone. There are no Amendments protecting Asians or Hispanics so they have not Constitutional rights?

I'll go through this again. It's the EXCLUSION of wording that should make you suspect. The Constitution was written when slavery was legal and women were considered property with out rights like voting and others. It was a white mans manifesto. Much was poorly written by exclusion and has needed interpretation ever since. Just look at the 2nd. Taking it word for word there are no exceptions to bearing arms. "Shall not be infringed". But we had to make exceptions for the crazies, felons. The amendment was poorly written and that's why the courts are still trying to figure what it means today. The 5th. Does that mean your kid doesn't have to tell you if they did something wrong?
You obviously didn't go through the time of the Civil Rights Movement or you would know much of the Constitution didn't apply to minorities in this country, especially blacks as they were more visible, but others too. Native Americans, Jews, Mexicans.
If the Constitution was so all encompassing why did we need to pass the Civil Rights Act in 1965 (I think it was 65). It was because many were excluded mostly because the document didn't say in plain language everyone within these borders are FREE. Of course history wouldn't have allowed anything like that at the time. It took almost another 200 years. Again a document for white men.
By all the negative comments about Obama it's still like that for many white men. And don't tell me it's not racist because it sticks out like a wart on a nose.

If the document were perfect there would have been no need for any amendments. It has evolved to be more inclusive over time. I think if you were to take the founding fathers into this time all they would see is chaos. It was all ethnocentric European mentality that never really considered the inclusion of minorities. It was their "Manifest Destiny".

But I have to ask a question. How did your town get it's name. Hop Bottom?
 

mustangpalmer1911

Sr. Member
Apr 12, 2011
335
159
Hop Bottom, PA
Detector(s) used
Garrett 250
I'll go through this again. It's the EXCLUSION of wording that should make you suspect. The Constitution was written when slavery was legal and women were considered property with out rights like voting and others. It was a white mans manifesto. Much was poorly written by exclusion and has needed interpretation ever since. Just look at the 2nd. Taking it word for word there are no exceptions to bearing arms. "Shall not be infringed". But we had to make exceptions for the crazies, felons. The amendment was poorly written and that's why the courts are still trying to figure what it means today. The 5th. Does that mean your kid doesn't have to tell you if they did something wrong?
You obviously didn't go through the time of the Civil Rights Movement or you would know much of the Constitution didn't apply to minorities in this country, especially blacks as they were more visible, but others too. Native Americans, Jews, Mexicans.
If the Constitution was so all encompassing why did we need to pass the Civil Rights Act in 1965 (I think it was 65). It was because many were excluded mostly because the document didn't say in plain language everyone within these borders are FREE. Of course history wouldn't have allowed anything like that at the time. It took almost another 200 years. Again a document for white men.
By all the negative comments about Obama it's still like that for many white men. And don't tell me it's not racist because it sticks out like a wart on a nose.

If the document were perfect there would have been no need for any amendments. It has evolved to be more inclusive over time. I think if you were to take the founding fathers into this time all they would see is chaos. It was all ethnocentric European mentality that never really considered the inclusion of minorities. It was their "Manifest Destiny".

But I have to ask a question. How did your town get it's name. Hop Bottom?

I see it as narrow mindedness not the lack of wording. If there are no word excluding them then there is no reason to. Like I said since there are no amendments protecting Asians, Hispanics, Native Americans, Pacific Islanders ect under the mind set they have no constitional rights.

They use to grow hops for beer back in the late 1800s early 1900s. You can still find a ton of native hops growing in the hills around the town.
 

Last edited:

Treasure_Hunter

Administrator
Staff member
Jul 27, 2006
48,458
54,901
Florida
Detector(s) used
Minelab_Equinox_ 800 Minelab_CTX-3030 Minelab_Excal_1000 Minelab_Sovereign_GT Minelab_Safari Minelab_ETrac Whites_Beach_Hunter_ID Fisher_1235_X
Primary Interest:
All Treasure Hunting
Look it up, before constitution was written they are writings by our forefathers that criminals did not have gun rights...

Sent from my Galaxy Nexus using Tapatalk 2
 

0121stockpicker

Silver Member
Aug 3, 2012
3,351
685
MA
🏆 Honorable Mentions:
1
Primary Interest:
Metal Detecting
I'll go through this again. It's the EXCLUSION of wording that should make you suspect. The Constitution was written when slavery was legal and women were considered property with out rights like voting and others. It was a white mans manifesto. Much was poorly written by exclusion and has needed interpretation ever since. Just look at the 2nd. Taking it word for word there are no exceptions to bearing arms. "Shall not be infringed". But we had to make exceptions for the crazies, felons. The amendment was poorly written and that's why the courts are still trying to figure what it means today. The 5th. Does that mean your kid doesn't have to tell you if they did something wrong?
You obviously didn't go through the time of the Civil Rights Movement or you would know much of the Constitution didn't apply to minorities in this country, especially blacks as they were more visible, but others too. Native Americans, Jews, Mexicans.
If the Constitution was so all encompassing why did we need to pass the Civil Rights Act in 1965 (I think it was 65). It was because many were excluded mostly because the document didn't say in plain language everyone within these borders are FREE. Of course history wouldn't have allowed anything like that at the time. It took almost another 200 years. Again a document for white men.
By all the negative comments about Obama it's still like that for many white men. And don't tell me it's not racist because it sticks out like a wart on a nose.

If the document were perfect there would have been no need for any amendments. It has evolved to be more inclusive over time. I think if you were to take the founding fathers into this time all they would see is chaos. It was all ethnocentric European mentality that never really considered the inclusion of minorities. It was their "Manifest Destiny".

But I have to ask a question. How did your town get it's name. Hop Bottom?

Very well written.
 

Status
Not open for further replies.

Top Member Reactions

Users who are viewing this thread

Top