Instagram Photo of Non-student Ruled an Exempt Education Record by LASD

[XLFD]

In late November, a student at Mason County Central Schools (MCC) at his home in the evening took a photo and put it on Instagram with a caption.  The next morning, an unnamed Ludington Area School District (LASD) administrator saw the picture and deemed it as a threat and involved the Ludington School Resource Officer (SRO) Chad Skiba and MCC Middle School Principal Jeff Tuka, who had that student attending his school.  

MCC Schools and the area's law enforcement reacted by apprehending the student, and relocating the other students while a bomb-sniffing dog was called up from Muskegon to make sure there was no bomb on the middle school's premises.  None were found, the boy insisted it was a joke, but MCC school Superintendent Jeff Mount (pictured below, with a fuse in his forehead) didn't see it that way, strongly supporting a year long expulsion of the young boy from any Michigan school, and getting it from a willing school board after discussing the particulars during a closed session on December 17.  

"We have to send a clear message to (the student) and others that this is a behavior that cannot be tolerated... it completely threw the school on its ear that day and there was little academic progress made by the other 1300 kids we are responsible for.", he reportedly said, "We need to send a message to our community that this is a safe place.  We need to send a message to our kids that this is a safe place and that we cannot tolerate unsafe behavior."

Obviously, the student's sending of a message is what started this series of events, but what message does everybody get from the school's action if we do not know what the nature of the Instagram post actually was?  No law enforcement or school official wants to show us the post and let us judge for ourselves whether the school's/police's reaction was reasonable or overblown (if I can say 'overblown' in this context without shutting down half the county and endangering my freedom).  For fear of my own safety to express my opinion through a picture, I feel I must also offer a disclaimer that Jeff Mount is not an actual explosive device, not even a firecracker, and that nobody should go to school tomorrow since it's closed for Christmas vacation.

And since this Instagram post was discovered by a LASD administrator, one would have to believe that they made electronic copies of the post, and made contacts with the local police and/or appropriate MCC officials.  This is why I chose to make a request through LASD to get the original post, since sources told me that the 'bomb threat' was made as an attempt of humor by somebody whose first language may not be English.

But even LASD would not reveal the Instagram post/picture, deciding that they could withhold it from the public by claiming it was an 'education record' protected by the federal Family Educational Rights and Privacy Act of 1974 (FERPA).  This law's original purpose was to prevent schools/colleges from accessing your personal school records to just anybody, but it has been used quite frequently (and unlawfully) to block FOIA requests for records that are not educational in nature.

And that's what happened here after I sent a FOIA request to LASD Superintendent Jason Kennedy.  I asked for:   "The LASD administrator's copy of the bomb threat and any written communications (including E-mails, social media messages, and text messages) regarding that threat sent to other school and law enforcement officials made by that administrator."

If it's not intuitively understood by the layman, there isn't any 'education records' called for, these are all communications between officials regarding a perceived threat made by a child who isn't in the LASD.  FERPA agrees:

Ergo, for Superintendent Kennedy to claim a 'FERPA privilege' the student needs to be attending an LASD institution, minimally.  Claiming no other exemption the response with the picture blurred out, many words on communications between officials blacked out, is an invalid response.  I have appealed this to the LASD Board who may consider it at their special meeting on January 7th, if it does not get corrected before then.  

What did I get?  I received a browned out picture, with the poster's name blacked out, and the nine words I put under Superintendent Mount above.  Apparently the only part of this 'education record' the non-LASD-student made that was not exempt were those words.  Then there was this communication between Chad Skiba and our still-unknown LASD administrator:

These text messages are definitely not 'education records' and so the elimination of certain words regarding non-curricula material is violating the pro-disclosure tenets of the FOIA.  Another page starts out with a totally blacked out paragraph between Principal Tuka and the LASD administrator followed by what mode each school was going into.  

If our school leaders want to send everybody a message, why don't they let us see their messages and the context behind those messages rather than congratulating themselves for successfully expelling a student for what could have been protected speech under the First Amendment-- as my original picture with those same nine words were, expressing the explosive character of Jeff Mount, running his school on fear rather than hope, intolerance rather than tolerance.  

It should also make you wonder that if LASD Superintendent Kennedy is willing to forego transparency by openly violating the FOIA in this case, is he also hiding relevant public information and records regarding the $100 million renovations of the LASD Buildings from the public as well?  

[Freedom Seeker]

XLFD, I can somewhat understand your point about FOIA on the Instagram, but this post is disturbing because there is a very fine line today between Freedom of Speech and terroristic threats.  Not having the exact "threat" to judge is problematic, but then we must leave it to the school board and administrators to make an initial judgement, imo.  It's a different world today and threats must be taken seriously.  The caricature and phrasing in this post of the administrator with a fuse in his head, if I were an administrator, I'd take seriously.  Maybe a year suspension is a bit too much, but if his threat warranted bringing LE from PawPaw certainly requires looking into and having a good discussion and some punishment with a disturbed young student.  At least subject him to counseling.

[XLFD]

I am not faulting the administrators for taking this as a serious threat and executing necessary safeguards until they could judge it as a non-threat.  Having the word 'bomb' followed by the phrase "don't come to school tomorrow" in any social media post should trigger school officials and/or law officials into an investigation.  

To my understanding, the child involved had no prior disciplinary problems, the picture did not show a bomb, rather an article of fireworks that is readily and lawfully available, and that in Spanish, the word 'bomba' can apply to any type of explosive.  If my sources are correct, this student had Mexican heritage, and may have referred to a firecracker as a bomba since he may have not known the English vernacular.  There doesn't appear to be any kind of intent to use the Instagram post as a threat, rather it was one of those 'jokes' which didn't go over the way the teller intended-- and I'm sure we can all remember one or two of those from our own adolescence.  

The punishment seems rather severe and based on a zero-tolerance policy that in my honest opinion, should be abolished along with minimum sentencing guidelines.  The cover-up by the school and police of the facts of the case strike more fear into me than that post would.

[Freedom Seeker]

It is hard judging anything on partial facts and social hysteria.  I truly believe in greater transparency for the quieting and safety of the public.  But based on your hint that this student may not understand the difference between firecracker and bomb in English gives more credence for him to learn to speak English ... And even messing around with the word firecracker in school as a joke is not good.  I hope he and his parents and many others inclined to joke like this do learn a lesson.  In 1913 in Calumet, Mich. Many people died when someone joked calling "fire".  It's not a new idea, and still not a joke.

[XLFD]

Interesting thing about the Calumet Italian Hall Disaster, is that the 73 people killed would be over 10% of the entire population of modern day Calumet, but it's quite unlike this case in that the person who shouted 'fire' in that case appears to have been up to mischief-- here that doesn't seem to be the case with the limited amount of information available.  

The MCC student made an Instagram post which had been on the ether for about half a day, likely noticed by a LASD student who saw the posting who showed it to a teacher, who showed it to the administrator, and by that time, the hysteria snowball could not be prevented from going down the length of the mountain, eight miles away in Scottville. 

Again, it would be negligent to not investigate the issue as immediately as possible, but I'm fairly sure the credibility of this 'bomb scare' could easily have been debunked more efficiently and without the loss of several hours of learning for the whole district, and the debilitating effect such a scare has on the student population, especially when they get kept in the dark and need to rely on rumor rather than their officials acting with transparency.

[Freedom Seeker]

Maybe true, X, that it could have been handled more closely within the administration by just asking the student, but maybe they are trained to have to notify the SRO. Who knows fully? I still don't see the post. How do you know it wasn't a bomb threat? All I can discern from your two posts (from Foia disclosure?) is nine words and no picture (you received a grayed out picture?). The nine words would be enough for me to notify the SRO probably trained to deal with incendiary devices. I agree with Stump ... What if no one reacted and a homemade firecracker went off that only scared the mice out of the lunchroom. Would making a firecracker go off in school be called mischievous? Just putting those words on social media was bad behavior, imo and the student needs disciplined of some sort. I can't fault the perhaps Draconian punishment if it is universal and written? Maybe if the rules aren't published, they should be.

[Willy]

I see both sides of this issue. The student, being a minor, has the right to have his identity concealed. However the schools must release all other information so the public can decide who and what are at risk. Either this student just landed on Earth or he is as dumb as a rock and cannot understand how a bomb threat will bring wrath down on his head. . From what I can see, he deserves at least a year of freedom from school attendance or even some jail time. The public has a right to know and the schools must be open and share that information.

[XLFD]

I agree with the sharing of information, and should also note that there really is no FOIA exemption that should block the LASD from releasing the name of the child at this point, although I do believe it is a reasonable journalistic practice to conceal that identity in accounts of this story if that revelation has no significance to what else may have happened.

I disagree in imposing harsh, Draconian penalties onto a young child on his first unintended offense rather than just providing a stern warning, maybe a token punishment, and a threat that further errors in judgment could have severe consequences. 

[Willy]

As far as I'm concerned threatening to blow up a school with a bomb is not an error in judgment. This is not the kind of kid I would want being in the same school as my child. He didn't threaten to put bubble bath soap in the school pool as a prank, he threatened to destroy property and kill and injure people. Now is the time to be tough not after the school has been destroyed. If the parents think it's to harsh then they can move to a more understanding school district.

[XLFD]

Except there was no bomb threat. A bomb threat is defined as a threat to detonate an explosive or incendiary device to cause property damage, death, or injuries, whether or not such a device actually exists.
If we read past the scary combination of the nouns 'bomb' and 'school' so close together, there is nothing in the words to suggest placement or detonation of the one in the other, nor is the method of delivering this message through Instagram suggest a threat is being made. It's similar to reading the sign below and thinking that the congregation is going to go into full cannibal mode on the pastor, rather than what was meant to be related.

[Willy]

The statement posted "just made a bomb, don't come to school tomorrow" is not intended to make people laugh. A bystander can only make one assumption if the post is taken seriously. A funny statement would have been "just made beans, don't breath in school tomorrow". When someone informs people that there may be a bomb at school, people are going to take it seriously, and not as a joke. If the kid wanted to create a play on words, he definitely picked the wrong ones. 

[XLFD]

Due to school officials unlawfully blocking the actual picture and other modifiers that went with the posting, it would be premature to say that it wasn't taken out of context.  Perhaps the student was on the MCCMS band or choir (there was a concert scheduled that day, which was postponed), and had a sense after their practices that the concert would be a flop (aka a bomb) and was warning his friends to not go to school tomorrow.  

Or maybe, using the same line you just did, Willy, he warned his friends that he had just made a 'jalapeno bomb' and that there would be repercussions in the morning, as the following illustration shows.  Yes, those are the actual annotations from the picture(s) actually seen on Instagram.  The pictures are my own of actual jalapeno bombs and anal distress

[snide]

I guess the only issue I have is Ludington getting involved with problem at MCC... Notify Law and then MCC administrator that this post is up and then get out of the way and let everyone else do their job.....but to call it an "education record" issue to delve deeper into the who , where , why etc. is wrong.... I don't care for this new administrator at Ludington at all & if in any way this is deemed a violation of any type of legal protocol I certainly hope action will be taken against him.