Archive for October, 2010 »

President Obama addresses bullying | VIDEO

President Obama addresses bullying and says that we must dis-spell the myth that bullying is a normal course of nature.  He truly cares and feels sad about what has happened in this country.  He speaks out specifically following the suicides of gay students in recent months.

The president in a video after a series of suicide among gay teens: “I know what it means to grow up feeling out of place”

“We must break this myth that bullying is just a normal rite of passage.” Cosi ‘Barack Obama has expressed “shock and sadness” in front of the number of suicides among gay teenagers in a video produced as part of “It Gets Better Project” launched by the writer Dan Savage, who in recent days, always with a video, he joined Hillary Clinton.

“I appeal to every young person who listens, you should know that if you have problems there are adults who care about you that can listen,” said Obama, who then made, and as’ used to do, referring to his personal experience, explaining that know “what it means to grow up feeling out of place.”

“You are not alone – he continued staring into the camera– you did nothing wrong, nothing to deserve to be victims of bullies. There ’s a whole world that awaits you, full of possibilities.’ There are people ready to love you for who you are. “

When this video posted on YouTube, many people are saying that the United States is the biggest bully of them all.  Some feel that it is ironic that the U.S.A. president would release a video about bullying.

What do you think?

1 comment - What do you think?
Posted by admin - October 22, 2010 at 6:46 pm

Categories: Anti-Bullying Laws   Tags: , , , , , , , ,

Hawaii child abuse laws

Code Section 350-1, et seq.
What Constitutes Abuse Acts or omissions that have resulted in harm to child’s physical or psychological health or welfare (or substantial risk of being harmed); specific injuries listed in 350-1
Mandatory Reporting Required By Any licensed, registered professional of the healing arts or any other health-related occupation; school employees; law enforcement employees; child care providers; medical examiners/coroners; employees of public or private social, medical or mental health services agency, recreational/sports employees
Basis of Report of Abuse/neglect Reason to believe that child abuse or neglect has occurred or may occur in reasonably foreseeable future
To Whom Reported Department of Human Services or police department
Penalty for Failure to Report or False Reporting Petty misdemeanor

1 comment - What do you think?
Posted by admin - October 18, 2010 at 4:39 pm

Categories: Child Abuse Laws   Tags: , , ,

CIPA | The Children’s Internet Protection Act

The Children’s Internet Protection Act (CIPA) is a federal law enacted by Congress to address concerns about access to offensive content over the Internet on school and library computers. CIPA imposes certain types of requirements on any school or library that receives funding for Internet access or internal connections from the E-rate program – a program that makes certain communications technology more affordable for eligible schools and libraries. In early 2001, the FCC issued rules implementing CIPA.


What CIPA Requires

  • Schools and libraries subject to CIPA may not receive the discounts offered by the E-rate program unless they certify that they have an Internet safety policy that includes technology protection measures. The protection measures must block or filter Internet access to pictures that are: (a) obscene, (b) child pornography, or (c) harmful to minors (for computers that are accessed by minors). Before adopting this Internet safety policy, schools and libraries must provide reasonable notice and hold at least one public hearing or meeting to address the proposal.
  • Schools subject to CIPA are required to adopt and enforce a policy to monitor online activities of minors.
  • Schools and libraries subject to CIPA are required to adopt and implement an Internet safety policy addressing: (a) access by minors to inappropriate matter on the Internet; (b) the safety and security of minors when using electronic mail, chat rooms, and other forms of direct electronic communications; (c) unauthorized access, including so-called “hacking,” and other unlawful activities by minors online; (d) unauthorized disclosure, use, and dissemination of personal information regarding minors; and (e) measures restricting minors’ access to materials harmful to them.

Schools and libraries are required to certify that they have their safety policies and technology in place before receiving E-rate funding.

  • CIPA does not affect E-rate funding for schools and libraries receiving discounts only for telecommunications, such as telephone service.
  • An authorized person may disable the blocking or filtering measure during any use by an adult to enable access for bona fide research or other lawful purposes.
  • CIPA does not require the tracking of Internet use by minors or adults.

You can find out more about CIPA or apply for E-rate funding by contacting the Universal Service Administrative Company’s (USAC) Schools and Libraries Division (SLD) at www.sl.universalservice.org. SLD also operates a client service bureau to answer questions at 1-888-203-8100 or via e-mail through the SLD Web site.

CHILDREN’S INTERNET PROTECTION ACT (Pub. L. 106-554)

TITLE XVII–CHILDREN’S INTERNET PROTECTION

SEC. 1701. SHORT TITLE.

This title may be cited as the “Children’s Internet Protection Act”.

SEC. 1702. DISCLAIMERS.

DISCLAIMER REGARDING CONTENT.–Nothing in this title or the amendments made by this title shall be construed to prohibit a local educational agency, elementary or secondary school, or library from blocking access on the Internet on computers owned or operated by that agency, school, or library to any content other than content covered by this title or the amendments made by this title.

(b) DISCLAIMER REGARDING PRIVACY.–Nothing in this title or the amendments made by this title shall be construed to require the tracking of Internet use by any identifiable minor or adult user.

SEC. 1703. STUDY OF TECHNOLOGY PROTECTION MEASURES.

IN GENERAL.–Not later than 18 months after the date of the enactment of this Act, the National Telecommunications and Information Administration shall initiate a notice and comment proceeding for purposes of&endash;

(1) evaluating whether or not currently available technology protection measures, including commercial Internet blocking and filtering software, adequately addresses the needs of educational institutions;

(2) making recommendations on how to foster the development of measures that meet such needs; and

(3) evaluating the development and effectiveness of local Internet safety policies that are currently in operation after community input.

DEFINITIONS.–In this section:

TECHNOLOGY PROTECTION MEASURE.–The term “technology protection measure” means a specific technology that blocks or filters Internet access to visual depictions that are&endash;

(A) obscene, as that term is defined in section 1460 of title 18, United States Code;

(B) child pornography, as that term is defined in section 2256 of title 18, United States Code; or

(C) harmful to minors.

(2) HARMFUL TO MINORS.–The term “harmful to minors” means any picture, image, graphic image file, or other visual depiction that–

(A) taken as a whole and with respect to minors, appeals to a prurient interest in nudity, sex, or excretion;

(B) depicts, describes, or represents, in a patently offensive way with respect to what is suitable for minors, an actual or simulated sexual act or sexual contact, actual or simulated normal or perverted sexual acts, or a lewd exhibition of the genitals; and

(C) taken as a whole, lacks serious literary, artistic, political, or scientific value as to minors.

(3) SEXUAL ACT; SEXUAL CONTACT.–The terms “sexual act” and “sexual contact” have the meanings given such terms in section 2246 of title 18, United States Code.

Subtitle A–Federal Funding for Educational Institution Computers

SEC. 1711. LIMITATION ON AVAILABILITY OF CERTAIN FUNDS FOR SCHOOLS.

Title III of the Elementary and Secondary Education Act of 1965 (20 U.S.C. 6801 et seq.) is amended by adding at the end the following:

“PART F–LIMITATION ON AVAILABILITY OF CERTAIN FUNDS FOR SCHOOLS

“SEC. 3601. LIMITATION ON AVAILABILITY OF CERTAIN FUNDS FOR SCHOOLS.

“(a) INTERNET SAFETY.&endash;

“(1) IN GENERAL.–No funds made available under this title to a local educational agency for an elementary or secondary school that does not receive services at discount rates under section 254(h)(5) of the Communications Act of 1934, as added by section 1721 of Children’s Internet Protection Act, may be used to purchase computers used to access the Internet, or to pay for direct costs associated with accessing the Internet, for such school unless the school, school board, local educational agency, or other authority with responsibility for administration of such school both&endash;

“(A)(i) has in place a policy of Internet safety for minors that includes the operation of a technology protection measure with respect to any of its computers with Internet access that protects against access through such computers to visual depictions that are&endash;

“(I) obscene;“(II) child pornography; or

“(III) harmful to minors; and

“(ii) is enforcing the operation of such technology protection measure during any use of such computers by minors; and

“(B)(i) has in place a policy of Internet safety that includes the operation of a technology protection measure with respect to any of its computers with Internet access that protects against access through such computers to visual depictions that are&endash;

“(I) obscene; or“(II) child pornography; and

“(ii) is enforcing the operation of such technology protection measure during any use of such computers.

“(2) TIMING AND APPLICABILITY OF IMPLEMENTATION.–

“(A) IN GENERAL.–The local educational agency with responsibility for a school covered by paragraph (1) shall certify the compliance of such school with the requirements of paragraph (1) as part of the application process for the next program funding year under this Act following the effective date of this section, and for each subsequent program funding year thereafter.

“(B) PROCESS.&endash;

“(i) SCHOOLS WITH INTERNET SAFETY POLICIES AND TECHNOLOGY PROTECTION MEASURES IN PLACE.–A local educational agency with responsibility for a school covered by paragraph (1) that has in place an Internet safety policy meeting the requirements of paragraph (1) shall certify its compliance with paragraph (1) during each annual program application cycle under this Act.

“(ii) SCHOOLS WITHOUT INTERNET SAFETY POLICIES AND TECHNOLOGY PROTECTION MEASURES IN PLACE.–A local educational agency with responsibility for a school covered by paragraph (1) that does not have in place an Internet safety policy meeting the requirements of paragraph (1)&endash;

“(I) for the first program year after the effective date of this section in which the local educational agency is applying for funds for such school under this Act, shall certify that it is undertaking such actions, including any necessary procurement procedures, to put in place an Internet safety policy that meets such requirements; and

“(II) for the second program year after the effective date of this section in which the local educational agency is applying for funds for such school under this Act, shall certify that such school is in compliance with such requirements.

Any school covered by paragraph (1) for which the local educational agency concerned is unable to certify compliance with such requirements in such second program year shall be ineligible for all funding under this title for such second program year and all subsequent program years until such time as such school comes into compliance with such requirements.

“(iii) WAIVERS.–Any school subject to a certification under clause (ii)(II) for which the local educational agency concerned cannot make the certification otherwise required by that clause may seek a waiver of that clause if State or local procurement rules or regulations or competitive bidding requirements prevent the making of the certification otherwise required by that clause. The local educational agency concerned shall notify the Secretary of the applicability of that clause to the school. Such notice shall certify that the school will be brought into compliance with the requirements in paragraph (1) before the start of the third program year after the effective date of this section in which the school is applying for funds under this title.

“(3) DISABLING DURING CERTAIN USE.–An administrator, supervisor, or person authorized by the responsible authority under paragraph (1) may disable the technology protection measure concerned to enable access for bona fide research or other lawful purposes.

“(4) NONCOMPLIANCE.&endash;

“(A) USE OF GENERAL EDUCATION PROVISIONS ACT REMEDIES.–Whenever the Secretary has reason to believe that any recipient of funds under this title is failing to comply substantially with the requirements of this subsection, the Secretary may&endash;

“(i) withhold further payments to the recipient under this title,

“(ii) issue a complaint to compel compliance of the recipient through a cease and desist order, or

“(iii) enter into a compliance agreement with a recipient to bring it into compliance with such requirements, in same manner as the Secretary is authorized to take such actions under sections 455, 456, and 457, respectively, of the General Education Provisions Act (20 U.S.C. 1234d).

“(B) RECOVERY OF FUNDS PROHIBITED.–The actions authorized by subparagraph (A) are the exclusive remedies available with respect to the failure of a school to comply substantially with a provision of this subsection, and the Secretary shall not seek a recovery of funds from the recipient for such failure.

“(C) RECOMMENCEMENT OF PAYMENTS.–Whenever the Secretary determines (whether by certification or other appropriate evidence) that a recipient of funds who is subject to the withholding of payments under subparagraph (A)(i) has cured the failure providing the basis for the withholding of payments, the Secretary shall cease the withholding of payments to the recipient under that subparagraph.

“(5) DEFINITIONS.–In this section:

“(A) COMPUTER.–The term `computer’ includes any hardware, software, or other technology attached or connected to, installed in, or otherwise used in connection with a computer.

“(B) ACCESS TO INTERNET.–A computer shall be considered to have access to the Internet if such computer is equipped with a modem or is connected to a computer network which has access to the Internet.

“(C) ACQUISITION OR OPERATION.–A elementary or secondary school shall be considered to have received funds under this title for the acquisition or operation of any computer if such funds are used in any manner, directly or indirectly&endash;

“(i) to purchase, lease, or otherwise acquire or obtain the use of such computer; or

“(ii) to obtain services, supplies, software, or other actions or materials to support, or in connection with, the operation of such computer.

“(D) MINOR.–The term `minor’ means an individual who has not attained the age of 17.

“(E) CHILD PORNOGRAPHY.–The term `child pornography’ has the meaning given such term in section 2256 of title 18, United States Code.

“(F) HARMFUL TO MINORS.–The term `harmful to minors’ means any picture, image, graphic image file, or other visual depiction that&endash;

“(i) taken as a whole and with respect to minors, appeals to a prurient interest in nudity, sex, or excretion;“(ii) depicts, describes, or represents, in a patently offensive way with respect to what is suitable for minors, an actual or simulated sexual act or sexual contact, actual or simulated normal or perverted sexual acts, or a lewd exhibition of the genitals; and

“(iii) taken as a whole, lacks serious literary, artistic, political, or scientific value as to minors.

“(G) OBSCENE.–The term `obscene’ has the meaning given such term in section 1460 of title 18, United States Code.

“(H) SEXUAL ACT; SEXUAL CONTACT.–The terms `sexual act’ and `sexual contact’ have the meanings given such terms in section 2246 of title 18, United States Code.

“(b) EFFECTIVE DATE.–This section shall take effect 120 days after the date of the enactment of the Children’s Internet Protection Act.

“(c) SEPARABILITY.–If any provision of this section is held invalid, the remainder of this section shall not be affected thereby.”

SEC. 1712. LIMITATION ON AVAILABILITY OF CERTAIN FUNDS FOR LIBRARIES.

AMENDMENT.–Section 224 of the Museum and Library Services Act (20 U.S.C. 9134(b)) is amended&endash;

(1) in subsection (b)–

(A) by redesignating paragraph (6) as paragraph (7); and

(B) by inserting after paragraph (5) the following new paragraph:

“(6) provide assurances that the State will comply with subsection (f); and”; and

by adding at the end the following new subsection:

“(f) INTERNET SAFETY.&endash;

“(1) IN GENERAL.–No funds made available under this Act for a library described in section 213(2)(A) or (B) that does not receive services at discount rates under section 254(h)(6) of the Communications Act of 1934, as added by section 1721 of this Children’s Internet Protection Act, may be used to purchase computers used to access the Internet, or to pay for direct costs associated with accessing the Internet, for such library unless&endash;

“(A) such library&endash;

“(i) has in place a policy of Internet safety for minors that includes the operation of a technology protection measure with respect to any of its computers with Internet access that protects against access through such computers to visual depictions that are&endash;

“(I) obscene;“(II) child pornography; or

“(III) harmful to minors; and

“(ii) is enforcing the operation of such technology protection measure during any use of such computers by minors; and

“(B) such library&endash;

“(i) has in place a policy of Internet safety that includes the operation of a technology protection measure with respect to any of its computers with Internet access that protects against access through such computers to visual depictions that are–

“(I) obscene; or“(II) child pornography; and

“(ii) is enforcing the operation of such technology protection measure during any use of such computers.

“(2) ACCESS TO OTHER MATERIALS.–Nothing in this subsection shall be construed to prohibit a library from limiting Internet access to or otherwise protecting against materials other than those referred to in subclauses (I), (II), and (III) of paragraph (1)(A)(i).

“(3) DISABLING DURING CERTAIN USE.–An administrator, supervisor, or other authority may disable a technology protection measure under paragraph (1) to enable access for bona fide research or other lawful purposes.

“(4) TIMING AND APPLICABILITY OF IMPLEMENTATION.&endash;

“(A) IN GENERAL.–A library covered by paragraph (1) shall certify the compliance of such library with the requirements of paragraph (1) as part of the application process for the next program funding year under this Act following the effective date of this subsection, and for each subsequent program funding year thereafter.

“(B) PROCESS.&endash;

“(i) LIBRARIES WITH INTERNET SAFETY POLICIES AND TECHNOLOGY PROTECTION MEASURES IN PLACE.–A library covered by paragraph (1) that has in place an Internet safety policy meeting the requirements of paragraph (1) shall certify its compliance with paragraph (1) during each annual program application cycle under this Act.

“(ii) LIBRARIES WITHOUT INTERNET SAFETY POLICIES AND TECHNOLOGY PROTECTION MEASURES IN PLACE.–A library covered by paragraph (1) that does not have in place an Internet safety policy meeting the requirements of paragraph (1)&endash;

“(I) for the first program year after the effective date of this subsection in which the library applies for funds under this Act, shall certify that it is undertaking such actions, including any necessary procurement procedures, to put in place an Internet safety policy that meets such requirements; and

“(II) for the second program year after the effective date of this subsection in which the library applies for funds under this Act, shall certify that such library is in compliance with such requirements.

Any library covered by paragraph (1) that is unable to certify compliance with such requirements in such second program year shall be ineligible for all funding under this Act for such second program year and all subsequent program years until such time as such library comes into compliance with such requirements.

“(iii) WAIVERS.–Any library subject to a certification under clause (ii)(II) that cannot make the certification otherwise required by that clause may seek a waiver of that clause if State or local procurement rules or regulations or competitive bidding requirements prevent the making of the certification otherwise required by that clause. The library shall notify the Director of the Institute of Museum and Library Services of the applicability of that clause to the library. Such notice shall certify that the library will comply with the requirements in paragraph (1) before the start of the third program year after the effective date of this subsection for which the library is applying for funds under this Act.

“(5) NONCOMPLIANCE.&endash;

“(A) USE OF GENERAL EDUCATION PROVISIONS ACT REMEDIES.–Whenever the Director of the Institute of Museum and Library Services has reason to believe that any recipient of funds this Act is failing to comply substantially with the requirements of this subsection, the Director may&endash;

“(i) withhold further payments to the recipient under this Act,

“(ii) issue a complaint to compel compliance of the recipient through a cease and desist order, or

“(iii) enter into a compliance agreement with a recipient to bring it into compliance with such requirements.

“(B) RECOVERY OF FUNDS PROHIBITED.–The actions authorized by subparagraph (A) are the exclusive remedies available with respect to the failure of a library to comply substantially with a provision of this subsection, and the Director shall not seek a recovery of funds from the recipient for such failure.

“(C) RECOMMENCEMENT OF PAYMENTS.–Whenever the Director determines (whether by certification or other appropriate evidence) that a recipient of funds who is subject to the withholding of payments under subparagraph (A)(i) has cured the failure providing the basis for the withholding of payments, the Director shall cease the withholding of payments to the recipient under that subparagraph.

“(6) SEPARABILITY.–If any provision of this subsection is held invalid, the remainder of this subsection shall not be affected thereby.

“(7) DEFINITIONS.–In this section:

“(A) CHILD PORNOGRAPHY.–The term `child pornography’ has the meaning given such term in section 2256 of title 18, United States Code.

“(B) HARMFUL TO MINORS.–The term `harmful to minors’ means any picture, image, graphic image file, or other visual depiction that&endash;

“(i) taken as a whole and with respect to minors, appeals to a prurient interest in nudity, sex, or excretion;“(ii) depicts, describes, or represents, in a patently offensive way with respect to what is suitable for minors, an actual or simulated sexual act or sexual contact, actual or simulated normal or perverted sexual acts, or a lewd exhibition of the genitals; and

“(iii) taken as a whole, lacks serious literary, artistic, political, or scientific value as to minors.

“(C) MINOR.–The term `minor’ means an individual who has not attained the age of 17.

“(D) OBSCENE.–The term `obscene’ has the meaning given such term in section 1460 of title 18, United States Code.

“(E) SEXUAL ACT; SEXUAL CONTACT.–The terms `sexual act’ and `sexual contact’ have the meanings given such terms in section 2246 of title 18, United States Code.”

EFFECTIVE DATE.–The amendment made by this section shall take effect 120 days after the date of the enactment of this Act.

Subtitle B–Universal Service Discounts

SEC. 1721. REQUIREMENT FOR SCHOOLS AND LIBRARIES TO ENFORCE INTERNET SAFETY POLICIES WITH TECHNOLOGY PROTECTION MEASURES FOR COMPUTERS WITH INTERNET ACCESS AS CONDITION OF UNIVERSAL SERVICE DISCOUNTS.

SCHOOLS.–Section 254(h) of the Communications Act of 1934 (47 U.S.C. 254(h)) is amended&endash;

(1) by redesignating paragraph (5) as paragraph (7); and

by inserting after paragraph (4) the following new paragraph (5):

“(5) REQUIREMENTS FOR CERTAIN SCHOOLS WITH COMPUTERS HAVING INTERNET ACCESS.&endash;

“(A) INTERNET SAFETY.&endash;

“(i) IN GENERAL.–Except as provided in clause (ii), an elementary or secondary school having computers with Internet access may not receive services at discount rates under paragraph (1)(B) unless the school, school board, local educational agency, or other authority with responsibility for administration of the school&endash;

“(I) submits to the Commission the certifications described in subparagraphs (B) and (C);“(II) submits to the Commission a certification that an Internet safety policy has been adopted and implemented for the school under subsection (l); and

“(III) ensures the use of such computers in accordance with the certifications.

“(ii) APPLICABILITY.–The prohibition in clause (i) shall not apply with respect to a school that rec eives services at discount rates under paragraph (1)(B) only for purposes other than the provision of Internet access, Internet service, or internal connections.

“(iii) PUBLIC NOTICE; HEARING.–An elementary or secondary school described in clause (i), or the school board, local educational agency, or other authority with responsibility for administration of the school, shall provide reasonable public notice and hold at least 1 public hearing or meeting to address the proposed Internet safety policy. In the case of an elementary or secondary school other than an elementary or secondary school as defined in section 14101 of the Elementary and Secondary Education Act of 1965 (20 U.S.C. 8801), the notice and hearing required by this clause may be limited to those members of the public with a relationship to the school.

“(B) CERTIFICATION WITH RESPECT TO MINORS.–A certification under this subparagraph is a certification that the school, school board, local educational agency, or other authority with responsibility for administration of the school&endash;

“(i) is enforcing a policy of Internet safety for minors that includes monitoring the online activities of minors and the operation of a technology protection measure with respect to any of its computers with Internet access that protects against access through such computers to visual depictions that are&endash;

“(I) obscene;“(II) child pornography; or

“(III) harmful to minors; and

“(ii) is enforcing the operation of such technology protection measure during any use of such computers by minors.

“(C) CERTIFICATION WITH RESPECT TO ADULTS.–A certification under this paragraph is a certification that the school, school board, local educational agency, or other authority with responsibility for administration of the school&endash;

“(i) is enforcing a policy of Internet safety that includes the operation of a technology protection measure with respect to any of its computers with Internet access that protects against access through such computers to visual depictions that are&endash;

“(I) obscene; or“(II) child pornography; and

“(ii) is enforcing the operation of such technology protection measure during any use of such computers.

“(D) DISABLING DURING ADULT USE.–An administrator, supervisor, or other person authorized by the certifying authority under subparagraph (A)(i) may disable the technology protection measure concerned, during use by an adult, to enable access for bona fide research or other lawful purpose.

“(E) TIMING OF IMPLEMENTATION.&endash;

“(i) IN GENERAL.–Subject to clause (ii) in the case of any school covered by this paragraph as of the effective date of this paragraph under section 1721(h) of the Children’s Internet Protection Act, the certification under subparagraphs (B) and (C) shall be made&endash;

“(I) with respect to the first program funding year under this subsection following such effective date, not later than 120 days after the beginning of such program funding year; and

“(II) with respect to any subsequent program funding year, as part of the application process for such program funding year.

“(ii) PROCESS.&endash;

“(I) SCHOOLS WITH INTERNET SAFETY POLICY AND TECHNOLOGY PROTECTION MEASURES IN PLACE.–A school covered by clause (i) that has in place an Internet safety policy and technology protection measures meeting the requirements necessary for certification under subparagraphs (B) and (C) shall certify its compliance with subparagraphs (B) and (C) during each annual program application cycle under this subsection, except that with respect to the first program funding year after the effective date of this paragraph under section 1721(h) of the Children’s Internet Protection Act, the certifications shall be made not later than 120 days after the beginning of such first program funding year.

“(II) SCHOOLS WITHOUT INTERNET SAFETY POLICY AND TECHNOLOGY PROTECTION MEASURES IN PLACE.–A school covered by clause (i) that does not have in place an Internet safety policy and technology protection measures meeting the requirements necessary for certification under subparagraphs (B) and (C)–

“(aa) for the first program year after the effective date of this subsection in which it is applying for funds under this subsection, shall certify that it is undertaking such actions, including any necessary procurement procedures, to put in place an Internet safety policy and technology protection measures meeting the requirements necessary for certification under subparagraphs (B) and (C); and

“(bb) for the second program year after the effective date of this subsection in which it is applying for funds under this subsection, shall certify that it is in compliance with subparagraphs (B) and (C).

Any school that is unable to certify compliance with such requirements in such second program year shall be ineligible for services at discount rates or funding in lieu of services at such rates under this subsection for such second year and all subsequent program years under this subsection, until such time as such school comes into compliance with this paragraph.

“(III) WAIVERS.–Any school subject to subclause (II) that cannot come into compliance with subparagraphs (B) and (C) in such second year program may seek a waiver of subclause (II)(bb) if State or local procurement rules or regulations or competitive bidding requirements prevent the making of the certification otherwise required by such subclause. A school, school board, local educational agency, or other authority with responsibility for administration of the school shall notify the Commission of the applicability of such subclause to the school. Such notice shall certify that the school in question will be brought into compliance before the start of the third program year after the effective date of this subsection in which the school is applying for funds under this subsection.

“(F) NONCOMPLIANCE.&endash;

“(i) FAILURE TO SUBMIT CERTIFICATION.–Any school that knowingly fails to comply with the application guidelines regarding the annual submission of certification required by this paragraph shall not be eligible for services at discount rates or funding in lieu of services at such rates under this subsection.

“(ii) FAILURE TO COMPLY WITH CERTIFICATION.–Any school that knowingly fails to ensure the use of its computers in accordance with a certification under subparagraphs (B) and (C) shall reimburse any funds and discounts received under this subsection for the period covered by such certification.

“(iii) REMEDY OF NONCOMPLIANCE.&endash;

“(I) FAILURE TO SUBMIT.–A school that has failed to submit a certification under clause (i) may remedy the failure by submitting the certification to which the failure relates. Upon submittal of such certification, the school shall be eligible for services at discount rates under this subsection.

“(II) FAILURE TO COMPLY.–A school that has failed to comply with a certification as described in clause (ii) may remedy the failure by ensuring the use of its computers in accordance with such certification. Upon submittal to the Commission of a certification or other appropriate evidence of such remedy, the school shall be eligible for services at discount rates under this subsection.”.

LIBRARIES.–Such section 254(h) is further amended by inserting after paragraph (5), as amended by subsection (a) of this section, the following new paragraph:

“(6) REQUIREMENTS FOR CERTAIN LIBRARIES WITH COMPUTERS HAVING INTERNET ACCESS.&endash;

“(A) INTERNET SAFETY.&endash;

“(i) IN GENERAL.–Except as provided in clause (ii), a library having one or more computers with Internet access may not receive services at discount rates under paragraph (1)(B) unless the library&endash;

“(I) submits to the Commission the certifications described in subparagraphs (B) and (C); and“(II) submits to the Commission a certification that an Internet safety policy has been adopted and implemented for the library under subsection (l); and

“(III) ensures the use of such computers in accordance with the certifications.

“(ii) APPLICABILITY.–The prohibition in clause (i) shall not apply with respect to a library that receives services at discount rates under paragraph (1)(B) only for purposes other than the provision of Internet access, Internet service, or internal connections.

“(iii) PUBLIC NOTICE; HEARING.–A library described in clause (i) shall provide reasonable public notice and hold at least 1 public hearing or meeting to address the proposed Internet safety policy.

“(B) CERTIFICATION WITH RESPECT TO MINORS.–A certification under this subparagraph is a certification that the library&endash;

“(i) is enforcing a policy of Internet safety that includes the operation of a technology protection measure with respect to any of its computers with Internet access that protects against access through such computers to visual depictions that are&endash;

“(I) obscene;“(II) child pornography; or

“(III) harmful to minors; and

“(ii) is enforcing the operation of such technology protection measure during any use of such computers by minors.

“(C) CERTIFICATION WITH RESPECT TO ADULTS.–A certification under this paragraph is a certification that the library–

“(i) is enforcing a policy of Internet safety that includes the operation of a technology protection measure with respect to any of its computers with Internet access that protects against access through such computers to visual depictions that are&endash;

“(I) obscene; or“(II) child pornography; and

“(ii) is enforcing the operation of such technology protection measure during any use of such computers.

“(D) DISABLING DURING ADULT USE.–An administrator, supervisor, or other person authorized by the c ertifying authority under subparagraph (A)(i) may disable the technology protection measure concerned, during use by an adult, to enable access for bona fide research or other lawful purpose.

“(E) TIMING OF IMPLEMENTATION.&endash;

“(i) IN GENERAL.–Subject to clause (ii) in the case of any library covered by this paragraph as of the effective date of this paragraph under section 1721(h) of the Children’s Internet Protection Act, the certification under subparagraphs (B) and (C) shall be made&endash;

“(I) with respect to the first program funding year under this subsection following such effective date, not later than 120 days after the beginning of such program funding year; and

“(II) with respect to any subsequent program funding year, as part of the application process for such program funding year.

“(ii) PROCESS.&endash;

“(I) LIBRARIES WITH INTERNET SAFETY POLICY AND TECHNOLOGY PROTECTION MEASURES IN PLACE.–A library covered by clause (i) that has in place an Internet safety policy and technology protection measures meeting the requirements necessary for certification under subparagraphs (B) and (C) shall certify its compliance with subparagraphs (B) and (C) during each annual program application cycle under this subsection, except that with respect to the first program funding year after the effective date of this paragraph under section 1721(h) of the Children’s Internet Protection Act, the certifications shall be made not later than 120 days after the beginning of such first program funding year.

“(II) LIBRARIES WITHOUT INTERNET SAFETY POLICY AND TECHNOLOGY PROTECTION MEASURES IN PLACE.–A library covered by clause (i) that does not have in place an Internet safety policy and technology protection measures meeting the requirements necessary for certification under subparagraphs (B) and (C)&endash;

“(aa) for the first program year after the effective date of this subsection in which it is applying for funds under this subsection, shall certify that it is undertaking such actions, including any necessary procurement procedures, to put in place an Internet safety policy and technology protection measures meeting the requirements necessary for certification under subparagraphs (B) and (C); and

“(bb) for the second program year after the effective date of this subsection in which it is applying for funds under this subsection, shall certify that it is in compliance with subparagraphs (B) and (C).

Any library that is unable to certify compliance with such requirements in such second program year shall be ineligible for services at discount rates or funding in lieu of services at such rates under this subsection for such second year and all subsequent program years under this subsection, until such time as such library comes into compliance with this paragraph.

“(III) WAIVERS.–Any library subject to subclause (II) that cannot come into compliance with subparagraphs (B) and (C) in such second year may seek a waiver of subclause (II)(bb) if State or local procurement rules or regulations or competitive bidding requirements prevent the making of the certification otherwise required by such subclause. A library, library board, or other authority with responsibility for administration of the library shall notify the Commission of the applicability of such subclause to the library. Such notice shall certify that the library in question will be brought into compliance before the start of the third program year after the effective date of this subsection in which the library is applying for funds under this subsection.

“(F) NONCOMPLIANCE.&endash;

“(i) FAILURE TO SUBMIT CERTIFICATION.–Any library that knowingly fails to comply with the application guidelines regarding the annual submission of certification required by this paragraph shall not be eligible for services at discount rates or funding in lieu of services at such rates under this subsection.

“(ii) FAILURE TO COMPLY WITH CERTIFICATION.–Any library that knowingly fails to ensure the use of its computers in accordance with a certification under subparagraphs (B) and (C) shall reimburse all funds and discounts received under this subsection for the period covered by such certification.

“(iii) REMEDY OF NONCOMPLIANCE.&endash;

“(I) FAILURE TO SUBMIT.–A library that has failed to submit a certification under clause (i) may remedy the failure by submitting the certification to which the failure relates. Upon submittal of such certification, the library shall be eligible for services at discount rates under this subsection.

“(II) FAILURE TO COMPLY.–A library that has failed to comply with a certification as described in clause (ii) may remedy the failure by ensuring the use of its computers in accordance with such certification. Upon submittal to the Commission of a certification or other appropriate evidence of such remedy, the library shall be eligible for services at discount rates under this subsection.”.

DEFINITIONS.–Paragraph (7) of such section, as redesignated by subsection (a)(1) of this section, is amended by adding at the end the following:

“(D) MINOR.–The term `minor’ means any individual who has not attained the age of 17 years.

“(E) OBSCENE.–The term `obscene’ has the meaning given such term in section 1460 of title 18, United States Code.

“(F) CHILD PORNOGRAPHY.–The term `child pornography’ has the meaning given such term in section 2256 of title 18, United States Code.

“(G) HARMFUL TO MINORS.–The term `harmful to minors’ means any picture, image, graphic image file, or other visual depiction that&endash;

“(i) taken as a whole and with respect to minors, appeals to a prurient interest in nudity, sex, or excretion;

“(ii) depicts, describes, or represents, in a patently offensive way with respect to what is suitable for minors, an actual or simulated sexual act or sexual contact, actual or simulated normal or perverted sexual acts, or a lewd exhibition of the genitals; and

“(iii) taken as a whole, lacks serious literary, artistic, political, or scientific value as to minors.

“(H) SEXUAL ACT; SEXUAL CONTACT.–The terms `sexual act’ and `sexual contact’ have the meanings given such terms in section 2246 of title 18, United States Code.

“(I) TECHNOLOGY PROTECTION MEASURE.–The term `technology protection measure’ means a specific technology that blocks or filters Internet access to the material covered by a certification under paragraph (5) or (6) to which such certification relates.”.

(d) CONFORMING AMENDMENT.–Paragraph (4) of such section is amended by striking “paragraph (5)(A)” and inserting “paragraph (7)(A)”.

(e) SEPARABILITY.–If any provision of paragraph (5) or (6) of section 254(h) of the Communications Act of 1934, as amended by this section, or the application thereof to any person or circumstance is held invalid, the remainder of such paragraph and the application of such paragraph to other persons or circumstances shall not be affected thereby.

(f) REGULATIONS.&endash;

(1) REQUIREMENT.–The Federal Communications Commission shall prescribe regulations for purposes of administering the provisions of paragraphs (5) and (6) of section 254(h) of the Communications Act of 1934, as amended by this section.

(2) DEADLINE.–Notwithstanding any other provision of law, the Commission shall prescribe regulations under paragraph (1) so as to ensure that such regulations take effect 120 days after the date of the enactment of this Act.

(g) AVAILABILITY OF CERTAIN FUNDS FOR ACQUISITION OF TECHNOLOGY PROTECTION MEASURES.

(1) IN GENERAL.–Notwithstanding any other provision of law, funds available under section 3134 or part A of title VI of the Elementary and Secondary Education Act of 1965, or under section 231 of the Library Services and Technology Act, may be used for the purchase or acquisition of technology protection measures that are necessary to meet the requirements of this title and the amendments made by this title. No other sources of funds for the purchase or acquisition of such measures are authorized by this title, or the amendments made by this title.

(2) TECHNOLOGY PROTECTION MEASURE DEFINED.–In this section, the term “technology protection measure” has the meaning given that term in section 1703.

(h) EFFECTIVE DATE.–The amendments made by this section shall take effect 120 days after the date of the enactment of this Act.

Subtitle C–Neighborhood Children’s Internet Protection

SEC. 1731. SHORT TITLE.

This subtitle may be cited as the “Neighborhood Children’s Internet Protection Act”.

SEC. 1732. INTERNET SAFETY POLICY REQUIRED.

Section 254 of the Communications Act of 1934 (47 U.S.C. 254) is amended by adding at the end the following:

“(l) INTERNET SAFETY POLICY REQUIREMENT FOR SCHOOLS AND LIBRARIES.&endash;

“(1) IN GENERAL.–In carrying out its responsibilities under subsection (h), each school or library to which subsection (h) applies shall&endash;

“(A) adopt and implement an Internet safety policy that addresses&endash;

“(i) access by minors to inappropriate matter on the Internet and World Wide Web;

“(ii) the safety and security of minors when using electronic mail, chat rooms, and other forms of direct electronic communications;

“(iii) unauthorized access, including so-called `hacking’, and other unlawful activities by minors online;

“(iv) unauthorized disclosure, use, and dissemination of personal identification information regarding minors; and

“(v) measures designed to restrict minors’ access to materials harmful to minors; and

“(B) provide reasonable public notice and hold at least one public hearing or meeting to address the proposed Internet safety policy.

“(2) LOCAL DETERMINATION OF CONTENT.–A determination regarding what matter is inappropriate for minors shall be made by the school board, local educational agency, library, or other authority responsible for making the determination. No agency or instrumentality of the United States Government may&endash;

“(A) establish criteria for making such determination;

“(B) review the determination made by the certifying school, school board, local educational agency, library, or other authority; or

“(C) consider the criteria employed by the certifying school, school board, local educational agency, library, or other authority in the administration of subsection (h)(1)(B).

“(3) AVAILABILITY FOR REVIEW.–Each Internet safety policy adopted under this subsection shall be made available to the Commission, upon request of the Commission, by the school, school board, local educational agency, library, or other authority responsible for adopting such Internet safety policy for purposes of the review of such Internet safety policy by the Commission.

“(4) EFFECTIVE DATE.–This subsection shall apply with respect to schools and libraries on or after the date that is 120 days after the date of the enactment of the Children’s Internet Protection Act.”.

SEC. 1733. IMPLEMENTING REGULATIONS.

Not later than 120 days after the date of enactment of this Act, the Federal Communications Commission shall prescribe regulations for purposes of section 254(l) of the Communications Act of 1934, as added by section 1732 of this Act.

Subtitle D–Expedited Review

SEC. 1741. EXPEDITED REVIEW.

(a) THREE-JUDGE DISTRICT COURT HEARING.–Notwithstanding any other provision of law, any civil action challenging the constitutionality, on its face, of this title or any amendment made by this title, or any provision thereof, shall be heard by a district court of 3 judges convened pursuant to the provisions of section 2284 of title 28, United States Code.

(b) APPELLATE REVIEW.–Notwithstanding any other provision of law, an interlocutory or final judgment, decree, or order of the court of 3 judges in an action under subsection (a) holding this title or an amendment made by this title, or any provision thereof, unconstitutional shall be reviewable as a matter of right by direct appeal to the Supreme Court. Any such appeal shall be filed not more than 20 days after entry of such judgment, decree, or order.

This Act may be cited as the ‘Miscellaneous Appropriations Act, 2001

Be the first to comment - What do you think?
Posted by admin - at 4:32 pm

Categories: Internet Safety Laws   Tags: , , , , ,

Internet Safety Laws | COPPA

Internet Safety Laws

A federal law, the Children’s Online Privacy Protection Act (COPPA), was created to help protect kids online. It’s designed to keep anyone from obtaining a child’s personal information without a parent knowing about it and agreeing to it first.

COPPA requires websites to explain their privacy policies on the site and get parental consent before collecting or using a child’s personal information, such as a name, address, phone number, or Social Security number. The law also prohibits a site from requiring a child to provide more personal information than necessary to play a game or participate in a contest.

But even with this law, your kids’ best online protection is you. By talking to them about potential online dangers and monitoring their computer use, you’ll help them surf the Internet safely.

Online Protection Tools

Online tools are available that will let you control your kids’ access to adult material and help protect them from Internet predators. No option is going to guarantee that they’ll be kept away from 100% of the risks on the Internet. So it’s important to be aware of your kids’ computer activities and educate them about online risks.

Many Internet service providers (ISPs) provide parent-control options to block certain material from coming into a computer. You can also get software that helps block access to certain sites based on a “bad site” list that your ISP creates. Filtering programs can block sites from coming in and restrict personal information from being sent online. Other programs can monitor and track online activity. Also, make sure your kids create a screen name to protect their real identity.

Getting Involved in Kids’ Online Activities

Aside from these tools, it’s wise to take an active role in protecting your kids from Internet predators and sexually explicit materials online. To do that:

  • Become computer literate and learn how to block objectionable material.
  • Keep the computer in a common area, not in individual bedrooms, where you can watch and monitor its use.
  • Share an email account with your child so you can monitor messages.
  • Bookmark kids’ favorite sites for easy access.
  • Spend time online together to teach your kids appropriate online behavior.
  • Forbid your child from entering private chat rooms; block them with safety features provided by your Internet service provider or with special filtering software. Be aware that posting messages to chat rooms reveals a user’s email address to others.
  • Monitor your credit card and phone bills for unfamiliar account charges.
  • Find out what, if any, online protection is offered by your child’s school, after-school center, friends’ homes, or anyplace where kids could use a computer without your supervision.
  • Take your child seriously if he or she reports an uncomfortable online exchange.
  • Forward copies of obscene or threatening messages you or your kids get to your Internet service provider.
  • Call the National Center for Missing and Exploited Children at (800) 843-5678 if you’re aware of the transmission, use, or viewing of child pornography online. Contact your local law enforcement agency or the FBI if your child has received child pornography via the Internet.

Many sites use “cookies,” devices that track specific information about the user, such as name, email address, and shopping preferences. Cookies can be disabled. Ask your Internet service provider for more information.

Basic Rules

Set up some simple rules for your kids to follow while they’re using the Internet, such as:

  • Follow the rules you set, as well as those set by your Internet service provider.
  • Never trade personal photographs in the mail or scanned photographs over the Internet.
  • Never reveal personal information, such as address, phone number, or school name or location. Use only a screen name. Never agree to meet anyone from a chat room in person.
  • Never respond to a threatening email or message.
  • Always tell a parent about any communication or conversation that was scary.
  • If your child has a new “friend,” insist on being “introduced” online to that friend.

Chat Room Caution

Chat rooms are virtual online rooms where chat sessions take place. They’re set up according to interest or subject, such as a favorite sport or TV show. Because people can communicate with each other alone or in a group, chat rooms are among the most popular destinations on the Web — especially for kids and teens.

But chat rooms can pose hazards for kids. Some kids have met “friends” in chat rooms who were interested in exploiting them. No one knows how common chat-room predators are, but pedophiles (adults who are sexually interested in children) are known to frequent chat rooms.

These predators sometimes prod their online acquaintances to exchange personal information, such as addresses and phone numbers, thus putting the kids they are chatting with — and their families — at risk.

Pedophiles often pose as teenagers in chat rooms. Because many kids have been told by parents not to give out their home phone numbers, pedophiles may encourage kids to call them; with caller ID the offenders instantly have the kids’ phone numbers.

Warning Signs

Warning signs of a child being targeted by an online predator include spending long hours online, especially at night, phone calls from people you don’t know, or unsolicited gifts arriving in the mail. If your child suddenly turns off the computer when you walk into the room, ask why and monitor computer time more closely. Withdrawal from family life and reluctance to discuss online activities are other signs to watch for.

Contact your local law enforcement agency or the FBI if your child has received pornography via the Internet or has been the target of an online sex offender.

Taking an active role in your kids’ Internet activities will help ensure that they benefit from the wealth of valuable information it offers without being exposed to any potential dangers.

Be the first to comment - What do you think?
Posted by admin - at 4:21 pm

Categories: Internet Safety Laws   Tags: , , , , ,

4 Teens Commit Suicide Because of Bullying at 1 Ohio School

By MEGHAN BARR, Associated Press Writer Meghan Barr, Associated Press Writer – Fri Sladjana Vidovic's mother, Celija, left, her sister, Suzana, and father, Dragan, talk at their Mentor house about their loss.

Amy Sancetta Associated Press photos
Sladjana Vidovic’s mother, Celija, left, her sister, Suzana, and father, Dragan, talk at their Mentor house about their loss.

The grave of Mentor student Eric Mohat is decorated with pink flowers.

The grave of Mentor student Eric Mohat is decorated with pink flowers.

Sladjana Vidovic committed suicide in 2008.

Sladjana Vidovic committed suicide in 2008.

Oct 8, 4:01 pm ET

MENTOR, Ohio – Sladjana Vidovic’s body lay in an open casket, dressed in the sparkly pink dress she had planned to wear to the prom. Days earlier, she had tied one end of a rope around her neck and the other around a bed post before jumping out her bedroom window.

The 16-year-old’s last words, scribbled in English and her native Croatian, told of her daily torment at Mentor High School, where students mocked her accent, taunted her with insults like “Slutty Jana” and threw food at her.

It was the fourth time in little more than two years that a bullied high school student in this small Cleveland suburb on Lake Erie died by his or her own hand — three suicides, one overdose of antidepressants. One was bullied for being gay, another for having a learning disability, another for being a boy who happened to like wearing pink.

Now two families — including the Vidovics — are suing the school district, claiming their children were bullied to death and the school did nothing to stop it. The lawsuits come after a national spate of high-profile suicides by gay teens and others, and during a time of national soul-searching about what can be done to stop it.

[Related: School-yard bullying: A survivor's tale]

If there has been soul-searching among the bullies in Mentor — a pleasant beachfront community that was voted one of the “100 Best Places to Live” by CNN and Money magazine this year — Sladjana’s family saw too little of it at her wake in October 2008.

Suzana Vidovic found her sister’s body hanging over the front lawn. The family watched, she said, as the girls who had tormented Sladjana for months walked up to the casket — and laughed.

“They were laughing at the way she looked,” Suzana says, crying. “Even though she died.”

___

Sladjana Vidovic, whose family had moved to northeast Ohio from Bosnia when she was a little girl, was pretty, vivacious and charming. She loved to dance. She would turn on the stereo and drag her father out of his chair, dance him in circles around the living room.

“Nonstop smile. Nonstop music,” says her father, Dragan, who speaks only a little English.

At school, life was very different. She was ridiculed for her thick accent. Classmates tossed insults like “Slutty Jana” or “Slut-Jana-Vagina.” A boy pushed her down the stairs. A girl smacked her in the face with a water bottle.

Phone callers in the dead of night would tell her to go back to Croatia, that she’d be dead in the morning, that they’d find her after school, says Suzana Vidovic.

“Sladjana did stand up for herself, but toward the end she just kind of stopped,” says her best friend, Jelena Jandric. “Because she couldn’t handle it. She didn’t have enough strength.”

[Related: Cyber-bullying: When enough is enough]

Vidovic’s parents say they begged the school to intervene many times. They say the school promised to take care of her.

She had already withdrawn from Mentor and enrolled in an online school about a week before she killed herself.

When the family tried to retrieve records about their reports of bullying, school officials told them the records were destroyed during a switch to computers. The family sued in August.

Two years after her death, Dragan Vidovic waves his hand over the family living room, where a vase of pink flowers stands next to a photograph of Sladjana.

“Today, no music,” he says sadly. “No smile.”

___

Eric Mohat was flamboyant and loud and preferred to wear pink most of the time. When he didn’t get the lead soprano part in the choir his freshman year, he was indignant, his mother says.

He wore a stuffed animal strapped to his arm, a lemur named Georges that was given its own seat in class.

“It was a gag,” says Mohat’s father, Bill. “And all the girls would come up to pet his monkey. And in his Spanish class they would write stories about Georges.”

Mohat’s family and friends say he wasn’t gay, but people thought he was.

“They called him fag, homo, queer,” says his mother, Jan. “He told us that.”

Bullies once knocked a pile of books out of his hands on the stairs, saying, “‘Pick up your books, faggot,’” says Dan Hughes, a friend of Eric’s.

Kids would flick him in the head or call him names, says 20-year-old Drew Juratovac, a former student. One time, a boy called Mohat a “homo,” and Juratovac told him to leave Mohat alone.

“I got up and said, ‘Listen, you better leave this kid alone. Just walk away,’” he says. “And I just hit him in the face. And I got suspended for it.”

Eric Mohat shot himself on March 29, 2007, two weeks before a choir trip to Hawaii.

His parents asked the coroner to call it “bullicide.” At Eric’s funeral and after his death, other kids told the Mohats that they had seen the teen relentlessly bullied in math class. The Mohats demanded that police investigate, but no criminal activity was found.

[Related: 6 signs of cyber-bullying and what you can do about it]

Two years later, in April 2009, the Mohats sued the school district, the principal, the superintendent and Eric’s math teacher. The federal lawsuit is on hold while the Ohio Supreme Court considers a question of state law regarding the case.

“Did we raise him to be too polite?” Bill Mohat wonders. “Did we leave him defenseless in this school?”

___

Meredith Rezak, 16, shot herself in the head three weeks after the death of Mohat, a good friend of hers. Her cell phone, found next to her body, contained a photograph of Mohat with the caption “R.I.P. Eric a.k.a. Twiggy.”

Rezak was bright, outgoing and a well-liked player on the volleyball team. Shortly before her suicide, she had joined the school’s Gay-Straight Alliance and told friends and family she thought she might be gay.

Juratovac says Rezak endured her own share of bullying — “name-calling, just stupid trivial stuff” — but nobody ever knew it was getting to her.

“Meredith ended up coming out that she was a lesbian,” he says. “I think much of that sparked a lot of the bullying from a lot of the other girls in school, ’cause she didn’t fit in.”

Her best friend, Kevin Simon, doesn’t believe that bullying played a role in Rezak’s death. She had serious issues at home that were unrelated to school, he says.

After Mohat’s death, people saw Rezak crying at school, and friends heard her talk of suicide herself.

A year after Rezak’s death, the older of her two brothers, 22-year-old Justin, also shot and killed himself. His death certificate mentioned “chronic depressive reaction.”

This March, her only other sibling, Matthew, died of a drug overdose at age 21.

Their mother, Nancy Merritt, lives in Colorado now. She doesn’t think Meredith was bullied to death but doesn’t really know what happened. On the phone, her voice drifts off, sounding disconnected, confused.

“So all three of mine are gone,” she says. “I have to keep breathing.”

___

Most mornings before school, Jennifer Eyring would take Pepto-Bismol to calm her stomach and plead with her mother to let her stay home.

“She used to sob to me in the morning that she did not want to go,” says her mother, Janet. “And this is going to bring tears to my eyes. Because I made her go to school.”

Eyring, 16, was an accomplished equestrian who had a learning disability. She was developmentally delayed and had a hearing problem, so she received tutoring during the school day. For that, her mother says, she was bullied constantly.

By the end of her sophomore year in 2006, Eyring’s mother had decided to pull her out of Mentor High School and enroll her in an online school the following autumn. But one night that summer, Jennifer walked into her parents’ bedroom and told them she had taken some of her mother’s antidepressant pills to make herself feel better. Hours later, she died of an overdose.

[Related: Stop bullying by complaining – in writing]

The Eyrings do not hold Mentor High accountable, but they believe she would be alive today had she not been bullied. Her parents are speaking out in hopes of preventing more tragedies.

“It’s too late for my daughter,” Janet Eyring says, “but it may not be too late for someone else.”

___

No official from Mentor public schools would comment for this story. The school also refused to provide details on its anti-bullying program.

Some students say the problem is the culture of conformity in this city of about 50,000 people: If you’re not an athlete or cheerleader, you’re not cool. And if you’re not cool, you’re a prime target for the bullies.

But that’s not so different from most high schools. Senior Matt Super, who’s 17, says the suicides unfairly paint his school in a bad light.

“Not everybody’s a good person,” he says. “And in a group of 3,000 people, there are going to be bad people.”

StopCyberbulling.org founder Parry Aftab says this is the first time she’s heard of two sets of parents suing a school at the same time for two independent cases of bullying or cyberbullying. No one has been accused of bullying more than one of the teens who died.

Barbara Coloroso, a national anti-bullying expert, says the school is allowing a “culture of mean” to thrive, and school officials should be held responsible for the suicides — along with the bullies.

“Bullying doesn’t start as criminal. They need to be held accountable the very first time they call somebody a gross term,” Coloroso says. “That is the beginning of dehumanization.”

2 comments - What do you think?
Posted by admin - October 11, 2010 at 6:35 pm

Categories: General Abuse Laws   Tags: , , , , , , ,

Chris Grant Dog Beating Video: Man Arrested For Attacking Girlfriend’s Dog (ABUSE VIDEO)

21-year-old, Chris Grant, viciously kicks and tortures his girlfriend’s little 12-lb dog in an elevator at Grant Houses in Morningside Heights. Chris is from Manhattan, NY and the little dog is Chuvie-Duvi, his girlfriend’s Pom/Chi mix.

The video below, if you can stand to watch, shows Grant kicking the dog across an elevator, then dragging the cowering little dog back toward him, coaxing her into jumping up for him then kicking her again repeatedly. Then he drags the little out of the elevator. He shortly returns and again kicks the dog and continue kicking it around the elevator until it lay still.

Fortunately, Chuvi-Duvi didn’t suffer any broken bones in last Saturday’s attack – which cops from the Viper unit watched from a remote location before arresting Grant two days later.

“I’m not trusting nobody with my dog,” said the pup’s owner, Melvin Rodriguez, 22, who picked the pooch up from the ASPCA last night.

Read more: http://www.nydailynews.com/news/ny_crime/2010/01/06/2010-01-06_man_charged_with_torturing_dog_after_elevator_camera_catches_entire_ugly_inciden.html#ixzz11WOpenI8

Be the first to comment - What do you think?
Posted by admin - October 5, 2010 at 9:24 pm

Categories: Animal Abuse Laws   Tags: , , , , , , , , , , , ,

Jonathon King Sentenced for Snapping Girlfriend’s Dog’s Spine

A man who killed his girlfriend’s dog by snapping its spine — and who was identified from DNA under the animal’s claws — was sentenced Tuesday to a year in prison.

Prosecutors said they had no idea why Jonathan King, 21, killed the 3-year-old Yorkshire terrier-Maltese mix, a female named Libra.

King, of Yorktown, stared at a courtroom wall as a family statement was read to state Supreme Court Justice Albert Lorenzo. King killed Libra “with a premeditated, unprovoked, savage act of horrifying cruelty. … I shudder imagining the fear and pain she suffered,” said the girlfriend’s father, Steven Levine.

King pleaded guilty in March to aggravated animal cruelty, a charge that has been a felony in New York since the passage of “Buster’s Law,” a 1999 measure named for a cat that was killed when a teenager set it on fire.

Prosecutors said King killed the dog “with no justifiable purpose” by yanking its collar hard enough to dislocate its head from its spine on April 6, 2009. They said he had gone to the house at a time when he knew no one would be home.

He then hid the dog’s body behind a clothes dryer, where one of his girlfriend’s family members found it. King also cut away portions of Libra’s pillow and part of a laundry basket that had his blood on it, prosecutors said.

Police found blood under the dead dog’s claws, and DNA analysis performed on it linked King to the crime.

The girlfriend, whose name has not been made public, broke up with King after the dog’s death. Her father said Tuesday the family considers King “a danger to our family, our community and our society.”

King fled to Miami after being charged, and his sentence includes paying $1,500 to defray the costs of bringing him back to New York, the district attorney’s office said.

Under Buster’s Law, aggravated cruelty against a “companion animal” is punishable by up to two years in prison. But many cases similar to King’s are still charged as misdemeanors, or plea-bargained down to lesser sentences.

Among them:

— Two months ago on Staten Island, a man who beat his girlfriend’s Chihuahua to death pleaded guilty to a misdemeanor and was sentenced to three months of weekends in jail.

— A Manhattan man was sentenced two weeks ago to three months for kicking his girlfriend’s lap dog in an attack police witnessed on security cameras.

— In February, another man admitted killing his girlfriend’s cat and pleaded guilty to the felony but was sentenced to therapy rather than prison time.

Ken Ross, chief investigator for the Westchester Society for the Prevention of Cruelty to Animals, said that under Buster’s Law, prosecutors have to prove a suspect intended death or severe physical harm, “and that’s not always easy.”

In King’s case, he said, “This certainly appeared to be premeditated. He knew what he was going to do before he went to the house.”

Ross would not criticize the one-year jail sentence — half the maximum — but said King “will have to be watched” when he gets out of prison. And he suggested the law could be toughened to allow sentences as long as four years.

“Animals are like children, they’re the weakest,” Ross said. “They have no idea that you’re coming at them to hurt them.”

Be the first to comment - What do you think?
Posted by admin - October 2, 2010 at 2:10 am

Categories: Animal Abuse Laws   Tags: , , , , , , , ,

Shocking Video of Dog Beating in Housing Project Elevator

View more news videos at: http://www.nbcnewyork.com/video.

For the second time in two weeks, a dog owner in the Grant Houses in Morningside Heights, one of New York city’s largest public housing projects, has been caught on tape abusing their animal.

Tiara Davis was arrested Monday after surveillance video captured her beating her 4-year-old Pomeranian into an unconscious state. The 31-year-old woman lost it when her dog, Sparky, went to the bathroom in the elevator on Sunday.

The video shows Davis swinging and kicking the small dog on the leash until he blacks out.

“This is no way to treat your pet,” ASPCA spokesman Joseph Pentangelo told the Daily News.

Davis, who works as a vocational counselor for ex-offenders, told the paper she never meant to hurt Sparky, who is recovering from his injuries at an animal hospital. She was charged with torturing and injuring an animal.

“I kept telling him, ‘Sparky! Wait! Wait!” she told the News. “I became a little frustrated. It was never my intention to hurt him.”

Last week, another resident in Davis’ complex, was busted for brutally beating his girlfriend’s 12-pound Pomeranian-Chihuahua named Chuvi-Duvi. That incident was also caught on tape. Chris Grant, 21, was also charged with torturing and injuring an animal.

Be the first to comment - What do you think?
Posted by admin - October 1, 2010 at 11:52 pm

Categories: Animal Abuse Laws   Tags: , , , ,

Paris Lane Commits Suicide | Abuse of Surveillance Camera

The Police Department Internal Affairs Bureau is investigating how a police security video that captured a young man’s suicide ended up on a Web site devoted to violence and pornography, a department spokesman said yesterday.

The young man, Paris Lane, 22, of Harlem, used a 9-millimeter handgun to kill himself on March 16 in a lobby at the Morris Houses project in the Bronx, where he had been visiting his girlfriend.

His foster mother said yesterday that she had notified the police when she learned the video had been posted on the site.

The 45-second video, which is no longer displayed there, shows Mr. Lane and his girlfriend standing near an open elevator door. She pulls her hands across her face as if wiping away tears and kisses him briefly, then they hug for a long moment, until she gently pulls away and steps into the elevator.

Mr. Lane waits for the elevator door to close, stares at it for a second, then pulls out the gun, puts it in his mouth and fires once, falling to the ground.

The site, Consumption Junction, describes itself this way: ”Sociopathic surfers have declared this free site the best place to get their fix of sick free adult humor, tasteless (but way funny) dirty jokes, and free video clips that include shocking moments, brutal stupidity, and a healthy dose of hardcore sex.”

It says it does not pay for the materials, which are sent in by its users, but it gives an award for one submission each month. The more printable video titles were, ”The Beer Helps You Lower Your Standards a Little” and ”His Air Bags Didn’t Inflate.”

The video of Mr. Lane’s death was labeled ”Introducing: The Self-Cleansing Housing Projects.”

Mr. Lane’s foster mother, Martha Williams, 56, called the Web site racist. She said she began receiving calls on Sunday from people telling her that the video, which does not identify him, was on the Internet. She said she had looked to confirm it was true, but could not watch it.

She went to C. Virginia Fields, the Manhattan borough president, for help. A spokeswoman for Ms. Fields said Ms. Williams had previously asked the police if she could view the video, but had been denied.

Ms. Williams said the video’s appearance on the site ”desecrated” the memory of her son.

”I just started back to work. I started healing, and this kicked me backwards. My whole body was shaking,” she said.

The camera that captured the suicide was part of an extensive police surveillance system that had been installed in 15 of the city’s housing projects, said Paul J. Browne, the department’s chief spokesman. It records digital images, which means they could have been easily sent by e-mail, he said. He said the department still had the original compact disk containing the video.

The police were investigating whether someone could have hacked into the system. ”But we’ve never had it happen,” Mr. Browne said.

The department has obtained a subpoena to learn who owns the Web site and will try to learn how the video was obtained. Mr. Browne said he did not know why the video had been removed from the site. It disappeared on Tuesday, a day after Ms. Williams notified Ms. Fields and the police.

In a chat area on the site, members debated whether the video was genuine or staged. ”It’s 100 percent real,” wrote one member, smitty4699. ”I submitted it, I know the cop who was at the scene.”

Mr. Lane had apparently killed himself because he was despondent over his relationship with his girlfriend, Mr. Browne said. He had prior arrests, including one on domestic violence charges, Mr. Browne said.

Ms. Williams had cared for him since he was 11, when his father died of AIDS and his mother entered a drug rehabilitation program. His mother died about six years later, also of AIDS.

In an article about World AIDS Day in 1999, Mr. Lane, then 17, told The Times-Union of Albany that when his mother died, ”That’s when I lost all faith in everything.”

He continued, ”I couldn’t understand why God would take away someone who was trying to make right from wrong.”

CLICK HERE TO SEE THE VIDEO

http://www.documentingreality.com/forum/f166/suicide-hand-gun-head-i-cant-live-if-living-without-you-11828/

Lane was an aspiring rapper who used the name Paradice. He hugged a friend goodbye, she gets on an elevator, and he shoots himself. It just happened that it was being captured on video.

There were three closed-circuit cameras in the lobby of 1358 Washington Ave. in the Gouverneur Morris Houses that captured Lane’s final moments. The shocking footage, recorded March 16, shows Paris Lane, 22, embracing a teenage girl as she gets into an elevator, then shoving a gun in his mouth and firing.

The girl, Krystin Simmons, 16, was stunned when her phone began ringing with friends telling her that footage of the tragic last goodbye was being played on the Web. “I gave him a hug and got into the elevator. When the elevator got to the second floor, I heard the shot,” Krystin said.

2 comments - What do you think?
Posted by admin - at 8:47 pm

Categories: Police Abuse   Tags: , , , , , , ,

Timeline of Tyler Clementi’s Last Days Before Suicide

Timeline of Tyler Clementi’s Last Days

Sept. 1: Fall semester begins at Rutgers. Dharun Ravi and Tyler Clementi are roommates in Davidson dormitory on Busch Campus.

Sept. 19: Twitter feed from Ravi: “Roommate asked for the room till midnight. I went into molly’s room and turned on my webcam. I saw him making out with another dude. Yay.”

Sept. 21: Twitter feed from Ravi: “Anyone with iChat, I dare you to video chat me between the hours of 9:30 and 12. Yes, it’s happening again.”

Sept. 22, around 8 p.m.: Friends say Clementi sends a Facebook update: “Going to jump off the GW Bridge. Sorry.”

Later that hour, Clementi commits suicide by jumping from the George Washington Bridge, authorities and the family’s attorney said.

Sept. 27: Molly W. Wei, charged with invasion of privacy, surrenders to authorities.

Sept. 28: Ravi, also charged with invasion of privacy, surrenders to authorities.


Tyler Clementi’s family released the following statement Sept. 29:

On behalf of the family of Tyler Clementi, I can confirm that Tyler committed suicide last week by jumping from the George Washington Bridge. His body has not been recovered.

Tyler was a fine young man, and a distinguished musician. The family is heartbroken beyond words. They respectfully request that they be given time to grieve their great loss and that their privacy at this painful time be respected by all.

The family and their representatives are cooperating fully with the ongoing criminal investigations of two Rutgers University students. They will have no further comment at this time.

Paul Mainardi, Esquire


Facebook tribute page: In honor of Tyler Clementi

Be the first to comment - What do you think?
Posted by admin - at 6:26 pm

Categories: Gay Abuse Laws   Tags: , , , , , , , ,