Former Teacher Acquitted of Videogame Massacre Threat

[KiKiweaky]

Month in jail seems a little nasty, but with all the school shottings in america I'm not surprised that he was arrested. Losing his career is also a really really shitting thing to happen to anyone.

 

[MrSnugglesworth]

that's a load of bullshit he clearly referenced he was talking about a video game

no it's not. I agree that this is bull, but given the spate of school shootings and the lawsuit happy public this was going to happen.

I hope this guy can get something for a wrongful termination suit.

No...

Its still bullshit.

Him getting arrested is not, I can see that happening, but getting thrown in the slammer for a month? Fuck that. The officers who did that should be punished. (Unless he didn't say anything about a videogame. In which case he is a fuckwit)

 

[Jinx_Dragon]

A month? A fucking month in jail before the hearing?
What fucktard lawyer did that poor sod have?

Sadly this is normal in the USA. It isn't really a problem with the lawyers themselves, it is with the court system as a whole. They are just booked solid that people have to wait months before they can get a hearing. That is what most people watching shows like 'law and order' don't realize, there are months on months between scenes! That bail hearing at the start of the court part of the show... two, three, months easily.

Worse, the less 'critical' the crime the more likely you're going to wait in jail for months on a end before you even get to the bail hearing. This is because they have to make sure they have at least two minutes of a judge time for that media frenzy driven 'mass murderer' case that might pop up at any time. Nothing is ever done fast in a court of law, twice so if your dealing with someone who has committed a non-crime.

The reason for this is simple: Politicians who have to play judge and jury.

Over the last fifty years alone, and more so in the last two decades, we have seen the number of criminal acts sky rocket. This is because politicians come forth and push a 'touch on crime' attitude without having a single understanding how justice works. They then criminalize more misdemeanors and create whole new bunch of new crimes just so they can promote themselves as tough on crime. Just so they can go in front of a camera and boost about how many people they have personally allowed to be locked up! Of course, ignoring the fact we never would of locked them up in the first place if we hadn't of created a BS law just for that purpose.

So a month before you even see a judge... that was quick by current standards. After all, when we doubled the criminal code we didn't make twice as many courts to deal with the increased number of people being arrested. Though we did build more prisons but prisons for profit is another argument all together.

Now, as others have said, it never should of got to this point at all. He never should of been arrested without any real evidence that he was going to kill people. Even the most simplest of 'crimes' to prosecute someone for, conspiracy to commit, demands more then just a 'he said he was going to do it' as evidence a crime was going to be committed. Even to detain him they would, legally, need more then just 'he said.' I'm not talking about the fact he was detained while they investigate, the law gives them the right to hold someone for a few hours (24 usually) in the station while they do some digging around but this isn't what happened here. He was arrested here, he was charged with a crime and detained for a trial... all which wouldn't of happened if there was even a half-brained investigation.

Nothing in this case should of gone this far, the school might of pulled the teacher aside and told him no talking about games in class but that is it.

But add to this oversight a congested court system and you have what we have here: A innocent person being locked up for a month for... nothing... nothing at all. Not to mention the fact he lost his job and this will be on his record, even acquitted, and all the other horrors added to it. All because he said something he was free to say and someone else bitched to the police that this teacher shouldn't have free speech and/or enjoy video games.

 

[Doc Theta Sigma]

A month? A fucking month in jail before the hearing?
What fucktard lawyer did that poor sod have?

Someone who got their degree on the internet probably.

 

[BiscuitTrouser]

And he doesn't even get some form of compensation?
Poor guy's practically fucked. Life may be unfair, but this is just full of shit.
*goes off to find bowel disruptor*

Your avatar sums up my thoughts nicely. That poor guy, what did they do the first time he meant, i meant a game... do we have to be really carefull we never imagine or play anything dangerous lest we be taken by the thought police and lociked away for terrorism most foul?

 

[Treblaine]

Are you in support of my statement? Or am I not conveying my points clearly enough...? Which I rarely do... why is that a problem with me? I'm probably just too tired to realise the points I'm actually making. I'll try to stay more focused.

Oh I'm bucking the trend. I know it's standard operating procedure on the internet to only reply if you fundamentally disagree with someone but every now and again I do agree though want to add more to the conversation than just "/this"

The 2nd amendment is the US citizen's inalienable right to the ABILITY of self defence beyond the mere right. It's like giving man a right to have a baby even if he doesn't have a womb (python), that's what it is like giving a person a right to self defence... but not the right to bear arms.

As I said before, this is a case of public safety. In that situation, you remove a potential threat and then determine the accuracy. Hindsight; "because he was proven innocent, the arrest was wrong". Yes, he was proven innocent. If they had taken the time to determine that before arresting him and he had been a legitimate threat, it would have given him time to go through with it.

Arrest yes... but charge, no

You have a 24 hour window between arresting and needing to make a charge. Even longer if you ask them to come into questioning and then officially arrest them if they refuse or when they try to leave: now start the 24 hour clock. That is plenty of time to make sure this isn't a benign conversation blown out of proportion by rumour. Something they failed to do. And remember this is not a case of petty thievery, this is an extremely serious crime related to terrorism that has very stringent bail conditions.

A lot of taxpayer's time and money has been WASTED in the lengthy legal process because the police were quite frankly incompetent as they followed rumour and conjecture over evidence.

It's one thing to arrest a man on rumour and hear-say. It is a WHOLE OTHER THING to charge him entirely based on that pitiful evidence.

I mean once they are down in the nick, search their home to see if they have a CAPABILITY to carry out that threat, such as testing their person and house for gunpowder/explosives residue. Search his computer. And so on.

Ah, but that's the problem with this Patriot Act. It doesn't have to be a real threat.

"If they had taken the time to determine (innocence) and he had been a legitimate threat, it would have given him time to go through with it."

That's the thing about this law, the accused DOESN'T EVEN HAVE TO BE A THREAT! It can be utterly baseless and that is enough for 10 to 25 years in an 'orrible Kentucky Prison. He only got acquitted on the revelation that the statement in question was about a fictional video game.

They could search his home and find nothing more deadly than a spoon (Python reference), no documented plans, nothing and yet they'd still have a case. Yes, no threat at all but 10-25 years. And IF he was a real threat then in 24 hours that is plenty of time to search his property for incriminating documents or weapons/explosives to find an actual danger and charge him with old pre-9/11 laws.

 

[Drejer43]

that blows

and how did it take a month to get him out?
and the school just left him? what a bunch of a-holes

 

[Mr. Grey]

Are you in support of my statement? Or am I not conveying my points clearly enough...? Which I rarely do... why is that a problem with me? I'm probably just too tired to realise the points I'm actually making. I'll try to stay more focused.

Oh I'm bucking the trend. I know it's standard operating procedure on the internet to only reply if you fundamentally disagree with someone but every now and again I do agree though want to add more to the conversation than just "/this"

The 2nd amendment is the US citizen's inalienable right to the ABILITY of self defence beyond the mere right. It's like giving man a right to have a baby even if he doesn't have a womb (python), that's what it is like giving a person a right to self defence... but not the right to bear arms.

Yeah, sorry, I'm just not focusing as much as I should. I'm dead tired and for some reason I feel like frying my brain by staying awake.

I like to joke that the Second Amendment gives us the right to stage a coup, though. I'm not entirely sure why... I'm not entirely sure if it's even a joke anymore the way things have been going lately, what with the forming of militias for asinine reasons. I'm so tired I'm starting to understand the conspiracy theories, it's not pleasant.

 

[incal11]

People are paranoid, even more so in a school. A school where children go to learn and become better people -- in theory. You don't talk about killing people in a place like this and expect to keep your job.

They need to learn that life is not like a disney movie, and ...

I'd prefer that people have "brooms up their asses" when it comes to public safety, especially child safety, than risk a breach of either.

Manic paranoia does not reduce risks, it increases them, common sense reduces risks ; plus leaving in a constant state of fear, having to watch your every move...
Don't be surprised if you die of a heart failure before you can enjoy retirement.

It was probably because of those things that the person who reported Mr. Davis felt even more uneasy. You never hear often about the guy that thwarted a school shooting, you hear about how it ends up successful. This increases the paranoia of people to take anything said involving killing very seriously. Especially if he was talking about how mad he got when someone took those markers, that makes them think he'll go off for sure eventually and this may just be the final straw.

Even if it was right to report what he said, the way the justice system worked is inept, to say the least.

A lot of the outrage in this thread seems to be due to a lack of understanding of the legal system in the United States. Particularly when it comes to public safety, the difference between jail and prision, the judiciary responsibilities of police vs juries, and how due process works.
(...)Well, if it was true by then he would have gone ahead with it, wouldn't he?

When someone is suspected of premeditation they are put under surveillance while basic investigation is carried on immediately.
The case of this teacher is a good illustration of why the police SHOULD have to do this in your country too.
Your attitudes shows well that you have no understanding of what it might be to have your life destroyed because of a screwy system ; even and especially if you did something trivially stupid like saying the wrong thing at the wrong time.

You can stop repeating yourselves, I got your meaning.
Moving this argument forward :
The way US's justice worked here is wrong.
The way the police did it here is wrong.
If the police and the judge had no choices then it's because the laws themselves are wrong.
Finally, how you think all this is all right is wrong, and depressing.

Why is it all wrong ?

Because "guilty until proven innocent" killed more people worldwide than all the terrorists combined.
"Innocent until proven guilty" saved more people than you think, and is the way things work where I live, and they work very well.
You have your pride, I understand.

You are not abandoning your pride by accepting that your country's ways should be changed.
You are by refusing to see that some things need change.

 

[Nuke_em_05]

People are paranoid, even more so in a school. A school where children go to learn and become better people -- in theory. You don't talk about killing people in a place like this and expect to keep your job.

They need to learn that life is not like a disney movie, and ...

I'd prefer that people have "brooms up their asses" when it comes to public safety, especially child safety, than risk a breach of either.

Manic paranoia does not reduce risks, it increases them, common sense reduces risks ; plus leaving in a constant state of fear, having to watch your every move...
Don't be surprised if you die of a heart failure before you can enjoy retirement.

It was probably because of those things that the person who reported Mr. Davis felt even more uneasy. You never hear often about the guy that thwarted a school shooting, you hear about how it ends up successful. This increases the paranoia of people to take anything said involving killing very seriously. Especially if he was talking about how mad he got when someone took those markers, that makes them think he'll go off for sure eventually and this may just be the final straw.

Even if it was right to report what he said, the way the justice system worked is inept, to say the least.

A lot of the outrage in this thread seems to be due to a lack of understanding of the legal system in the United States. Particularly when it comes to public safety, the difference between jail and prision, the judiciary responsibilities of police vs juries, and how due process works.
(...)Well, if it was true by then he would have gone ahead with it, wouldn't he?

When someone is suspected of premeditation they are put under surveillance while basic investigation is carried on immediately.
The case of this teacher is a good illustration of why the police SHOULD have to do this in your country too.
Your attitudes shows well that you have no understanding of what it might be to have your life destroyed because of a screwy system ; even and especially if you did something trivially stupid like saying the wrong thing at the wrong time.

You can stop repeating yourselves, I got your meaning.
Moving this argument forward :
The way US's justice worked here is wrong.
The way the police did it here is wrong.
If the police and the judge had no choices then it's because the laws themselves are wrong.
Finally, how you think all this is all right is wrong, and depressing.

Why is it all wrong ?

Because "guilty until proven innocent" killed more people worldwide than all the terrorists combined.
"Innocent until proven guilty" saved more people than you think, and is the way things work where I live, and they work very well.
You have your pride, I understand.

You are not abandoning your pride by accepting that your country's ways should be changed.
You are by refusing to see that some things need change.

You continue to make personal comments, this is unnecessary.

You are confusing caution with panic. I am saying; "better safe than sorry", and you are assuming "run for the hills and hide in caves!"

I'll more likely die before retirement because I won't be able to until I am 120 years old. You also seem to think that my opinion on one issue dictates my behavior over my whole life.

I'm not saying the system is perfect. They probably could have handled it differently, but you also must keep in mind that this was in a town of less than 4,000 people. It is probably due less to panic and corruption and more due to inexperience with a scenario like this of the school and law enforcement staff.

It is easy to pass judgement and speculate about how "I would have done it" sitting comfortably behind a computer screen and having all of the facts up front. It is another thing entirely to experience it firsthand and understand what was happening at the time.

All-in-all; legally, he is clear. I do believe he was wrongfully terminated with that being the case.

Snips

Touche

Arrest yes... but charge, no

You have a 24 hour window between arresting and needing to make a charge. Even longer if you ask them to come into questioning and then officially arrest them if they refuse or when they try to leave: now start the 24 hour clock. That is plenty of time to make sure this isn't a benign conversation blown out of proportion by rumour. Something they failed to do. And remember this is not a case of petty thievery, this is an extremely serious crime related to terrorism that has very stringent bail conditions.

A lot of taxpayer's time and money has been WASTED in the lengthy legal process because the police were quite frankly incompetent as they followed rumour and conjecture over evidence.

It's one thing to arrest a man on rumour and hear-say. It is a WHOLE OTHER THING to charge him entirely based on that pitiful evidence.

I mean once they are down in the nick, search their home to see if they have a CAPABILITY to carry out that threat, such as testing their person and house for gunpowder/explosives residue. Search his computer. And so on.

Ah, but that's the problem with this Patriot Act. It doesn't have to be a real threat.

"If they had taken the time to determine (innocence) and he had been a legitimate threat, it would have given him time to go through with it."

That's the thing about this law, the accused DOESN'T EVEN HAVE TO BE A THREAT! It can be utterly baseless and that is enough for 10 to 25 years in an 'orrible Kentucky Prison. He only got acquitted on the revelation that the statement in question was about a fictional video game.

They could search his home and find nothing more deadly than a spoon (Python reference), no documented plans, nothing and yet they'd still have a case. Yes, no threat at all but 10-25 years. And IF he was a real threat then in 24 hours that is plenty of time to search his property for incriminating documents or weapons/explosives to find an actual danger and charge him with old pre-9/11 laws.

Some of what I said above applies to some of what you have said.

Fair enough, there is an important distinction to be made between the arrest and the charge.

Yes, it could have been handled better, but none of us were there.

I think too many fingers are pointed at the legal system, and too few at the school.

He definitely said the very wrong thing in the very wrong place.

None of us were there, and the details are to sparse to really know how it all happened. If a kid overheard it, and started running around screaming "he's going to kill us all!", or if they subtly walked over to a professor. Whether or not the story changed by the time it got to a person of action. Maybe the principal heard "Mr. Davis has a gun!", and at that point he wouldn't think "I should walk over and ask him if he has a gun, because he may very well shoot me!".

No, no, the all-knowing anonymous internet surely cannot be wrong in assumptions. He actually said "I want to go home and pet 500 kittens", then a kid with a knife tried to stab him, but someone walked in and the kid stabbed himself and pointed at the teacher.

And the kid was paid by patriot-act supporters and a corrupt chief of police, while the principal went along with it because he was blackmailed about his coke and hooker addiction.

 

[Revolutionary]

The justice system needs to have a good look at itself. (*FacePALM*)

 

[Mr. Grey]

It was probably because of those things that the person who reported Mr. Davis felt even more uneasy. You never hear often about the guy that thwarted a school shooting, you hear about how it ends up successful. This increases the paranoia of people to take anything said involving killing very seriously. Especially if he was talking about how mad he got when someone took those markers, that makes them think he'll go off for sure eventually and this may just be the final straw.

Even if it was right to report what he said, the way the justice system worked is inept, to say the least.

Is it so inept? Is it truly? Isn't he free and not currency in a federal prison? I must not have paid much attention, because I was led to believe he was acquitted and set free. Are you telling me he was found guilty after all? That he was sentenced to spend most of his life in a federal prison? You know, being currency?

I hate having to resort to this method of communication, but I can't stop making this point. He's free and he's not in jail, a federal prison was where he was probably headed and he managed to get set free and never have to go through that kind of horror.

You can stop repeating yourselves, I got your meaning.
Moving this argument forward :
The way US's justice worked here is wrong.
The way the police did it here is wrong.
If the police and the judge had no choices then it's because the laws themselves are wrong.
Finally, how you think all this is all right is wrong, and depressing.

Why is it all wrong ?

Because "guilty until proven innocent" killed more people worldwide than all the terrorists combined.
"Innocent until proven guilty" saved more people than you think, and is the way things work where I live, and they work very well.
You have your pride, I understand.

You are not abandoning your pride by accepting that your country's ways should be changed.
You are by refusing to see that some things need change.

No apparently we still have to repeat ourselves as you keep missing the point.

The world doesn't work like how you want it to, sometimes a threat is made and then carried out. Wanna know why? Because they didn't hold the guy in prison, he got spooked and set it off to make sure it went off. Killing a lot of people. You want police officers to take that chance? Because a lot more people will die from it than they have under the current system.

Granted, it went a little too far than it should have and a proper investigation should have been made, but there's that damned Patriot Act giving you a raspberry as it moons you. It doesn't give a damn about you and how you want this country to work.

And since when was I on the side that this was all right? Him getting fired was due to his stupidity and the stupidity of the school, but the school has the right to fire him for any reason that he can give them. So he's out of luck, that's life and it keeps moving on. He got accused, charged and then set to trial before being acquitted. That didn't need to happen, but that's not the fault of the police, that's the fault of Congress refusing to do anything about the Patriot Act -- oh sure, they tried... but they didn't get anywhere, now did they?

You assume much of me. In fact, you haven't read all of my responses and how often I've been saying how I hope he petitions the Supreme Court to strike down the Patriot Act and all bills like it. Pay attention, we've already been through this once. Ironic, I know, I'm dead tired and barely focused through the discussion with Treblaine and Extraintrovert, but I was polite through the whole thing -- or at least meant to be, if they ever took something out of context and felt offended I apologize to the both of them.

You, on the other hand, insulted me and called me stupid/paranoid. You also didn't pay any damned attention to my context -- my fault probably, I have been having trouble getting my point across that I'm apathetic through this whole ordeal. I just want to tell people that he can not sue anyone, for anything. They seem to think he has the right to, but he doesn't.

Oh, and our legal presumption is "innocent until proven guilty" over here. Not the other one.

 

[DSK-]

Americans, paranoid?! Never!

Sometimes the British justice system doesnt seem quite so bad.

I had the exact same thought

 

[incal11]

You continue to make personal comments, this is unnecessary.

Yes it is, you accepting this state of affair makes me sick.

you are assuming "run for the hills and hide in caves!"

That's exactly the kind of attitude I've observed when I lived in the US.

I'll more likely die before retirement because I won't be able to until I am 120 years old.

Well, I pithy you then.

You also seem to think that my opinion on one issue dictates my behavior over my whole life.

Basically, you're admitting you are a hypocrite.

I'm not saying the system is perfect. They probably could have handled it differently, but you also must keep in mind that this was in a town of less than 4,000 people. It is probably due less to panic and corruption and more due to inexperience with a scenario like this of the school and law enforcement staff.

There's a point where "inexperience" becomes plain stupidity, and this is it.

It is easy to pass judgement and speculate about how "I would have done it" sitting comfortably behind a computer screen and having all of the facts up front. It is another thing entirely to experience it firsthand and understand what was happening at the time.

Actually I've heard people talking about killing in video games, in public places, and I sometime joined the conversation.

All-in-all; legally, he is clear. I do believe he was wrongfully terminated with that being the case.

Good start, now you can begin demanding a better system.

Is it so inept? Is it truly? Isn't he free and not currency in a federal prison? I must not have paid much attention, because I was led to believe he was acquitted and set free. Are you telling me he was found guilty after all? That he was sentenced to spend most of his life in a federal prison? You know, being currency?

There are worst systems in the world obviously, but this is certainly not the best, so a month in jail for nothing and career screwed = inept.
You can say that's how things work, it is still inept.
You can say in the end noone was hurt (except the teacher), it is still inept.

No apparently we still have to repeat ourselves as you keep missing the point.

What IS the point then ? You're just changing the subject.
In this case the person was held in jail and suspected guilty until proven innocent, a month later.
Sure the world does not world like we'd want to, but I choose to not be apathetic about it ; don't assume your attitude is the best, it definitely is not.

I'm sorry I took some things out of context, but overuse of sarcasm can backfire.
Plus you take some things as personal attacks when I'm just challenging your opinion, learn to accept that there are time when you are wrong, and here is one.

I am not saying you are wrong about the Patriot act though, I guess you're not hopeless.

 

[incal11]

You continue to make personal comments, this is unnecessary.

Yes it is, you accepting this state of affair makes me sick.

you are assuming "run for the hills and hide in caves!"

That's exactly the kind of attitude I've observed when I lived in the US.
Also you did say something about having to avoid "giving even the *appearance* that you *might* do something bad", frankly there, I know blind panic and mass hysteria when I see it.

I'll more likely die before retirement because I won't be able to until I am 120 years old.

Well, I pithy you then.

You also seem to think that my opinion on one issue dictates my behavior over my whole life.

Basically, you're admitting you are a hypocrite.

I'm not saying the system is perfect. They probably could have handled it differently, but you also must keep in mind that this was in a town of less than 4,000 people. It is probably due less to panic and corruption and more due to inexperience with a scenario like this of the school and law enforcement staff.

There's a point where "inexperience" becomes plain stupidity, and this is it.

It is easy to pass judgement and speculate about how "I would have done it" sitting comfortably behind a computer screen and having all of the facts up front. It is another thing entirely to experience it firsthand and understand what was happening at the time.

Actually I've heard people talking about killing in video games, in public places, and I sometime joined the conversation.

All-in-all; legally, he is clear. I do believe he was wrongfully jailed with that being the case.

Good start, now you can begin demanding a better system.

Is it so inept? Is it truly? Isn't he free and not currency in a federal prison? I must not have paid much attention, because I was led to believe he was acquitted and set free. Are you telling me he was found guilty after all? That he was sentenced to spend most of his life in a federal prison? You know, being currency?

There are worst systems in the world obviously, but this is certainly not the best, so a month in jail for nothing and career screwed = inept.
You can say that's how things work, it is still inept.
You can say in the end noone was hurt (except the teacher), it is still inept.

No apparently we still have to repeat ourselves as you keep missing the point.

What IS the point then ? You're just changing the subject.
In this case the person was held in jail and suspected guilty until proven innocent, a month later.
Sure the world does not work like we'd want to, but I choose to not be apathetic about it ; don't assume your attitude is the best, it definitely is not.

I'm sorry I took some things out of context, but overuse of sarcasm can backfire.
Plus you take some things as personal attacks when I'm just challenging your opinion, learn to accept that there are time when you are wrong, and here is one.

I am not saying you are wrong about the Patriot act though, but it expired apparently.

 

[ImprovizoR]

What a bunch of paranoid morons. I would sue the shit out of them for keeping me in jail for a month.

 

[direkiller]

If it took a judge all of 10 minutes to determine he was innocent in court, why could that not have been done BEFORE he spent a month in jail and so long on parole with no job and no chance of getting work?

I hope he sues. If he needs a legal fees pot I'd gladly donate as the state MUST be punished for their callousness so that they NEVER DO THIS AGAIN plus this guy has been extremely badly hurt financially costing him his job, he deserves to be compensated. If ever there is a case to be made for suing the state THIS IS ONE OF THEM!

It took a jury to find him innocent. This was the actual trial, they usually have a hearing beforehand and that may be the due process your thinking of. So he got his due process then the judge said that he will be held in prison until the trial date was settled. He either couldn't post bail or they wouldn't let him go due to that inane Patriot Act and this falling under "terrorism". So, he honestly has no right to sue the state.

But if it is the fault of the Patriot Act, he could petition the Supreme Court to strike down said Act. He can't sue the country or the state because of it, however. Well he could, but he won't have anything to gain out of it save for the Act being removed. The chance is slim.

And suing the state to be punished for doing something to protect people... yeah, that'll never backfire later on. Like when it's actually going to happen and they do nothing as they fear another lawsuit. Even then he'd probably only lose and have to pay their attorney's fees.

What he should do is sue the person that reported him in Civil Court, but that won't work because he probably doesn't have proof of intent or motivation let alone anything actually useful. He could sue the school for discrimination, but of what kind? They have the right to fire anyone they want so long as they don't suffer from a disability, they are old or they happen to be a darker skin tone.

He's screwed, plain and simple. The best he can do is move to another county or state and see if there is a school that will hire him.

EDIT:

Unless that state allows people to not be discriminant of criminals, but he isn't exactly a criminal since he had an acquittal.

The patriot act expired under Bush's term and was not renewed.

 

[Funkysandwich]

This makes me so angry I have to go kill 500 people.


In a video game, of course. I don't want to go to jail for a month if someone misquotes this.

 

[Mr. Grey]

Spoiler

If it took a judge all of 10 minutes to determine he was innocent in court, why could that not have been done BEFORE he spent a month in jail and so long on parole with no job and no chance of getting work?

I hope he sues. If he needs a legal fees pot I'd gladly donate as the state MUST be punished for their callousness so that they NEVER DO THIS AGAIN plus this guy has been extremely badly hurt financially costing him his job, he deserves to be compensated. If ever there is a case to be made for suing the state THIS IS ONE OF THEM!

It took a jury to find him innocent. This was the actual trial, they usually have a hearing beforehand and that may be the due process your thinking of. So he got his due process then the judge said that he will be held in prison until the trial date was settled. He either couldn't post bail or they wouldn't let him go due to that inane Patriot Act and this falling under "terrorism". So, he honestly has no right to sue the state.

But if it is the fault of the Patriot Act, he could petition the Supreme Court to strike down said Act. He can't sue the country or the state because of it, however. Well he could, but he won't have anything to gain out of it save for the Act being removed. The chance is slim.

And suing the state to be punished for doing something to protect people... yeah, that'll never backfire later on. Like when it's actually going to happen and they do nothing as they fear another lawsuit. Even then he'd probably only lose and have to pay their attorney's fees.

What he should do is sue the person that reported him in Civil Court, but that won't work because he probably doesn't have proof of intent or motivation let alone anything actually useful. He could sue the school for discrimination, but of what kind? They have the right to fire anyone they want so long as they don't suffer from a disability, they are old or they happen to be a darker skin tone.

He's screwed, plain and simple. The best he can do is move to another county or state and see if there is a school that will hire him.

EDIT:

Unless that state allows people to not be discriminant of criminals, but he isn't exactly a criminal since he had an acquittal.

The patriot act expired under Bush's term and was not renewed.

Patriot Act was renewed, the good news is that it should be gone within a year unless someone in the current Administration gives reason otherwise. [http://boingboing.net/2010/02/26/usa-patriot-act-rene.html]

That or Nancy Pelosi opens her mouth.

Is it so inept? Is it truly? Isn't he free and not currency in a federal prison? I must not have paid much attention, because I was led to believe he was acquitted and set free. Are you telling me he was found guilty after all? That he was sentenced to spend most of his life in a federal prison? You know, being currency?

There are worst systems in the world obviously, but this is certainly not the best, so a month in jail for nothing and career screwed = inept.
You can say that's how things work, it is still inept.
You can say in the end noone was hurt (except the teacher), it is still inept.

I don't know the full story, the article doesn't mention whether or not he went through more than one trial until the final verdict. Or how long it took to schedule a trial considering the severity of his "crime" - or lack thereof - or even the specifications of his trial.

But considering that he's a "terrorist" he'd be transferred to a more important court than his own town, probably. He was probably even transferred to a more secure prison. Again, I don't know as it doesn't give me the details. That would explain why he had to wait a month after his hearing to go to trial, however. Depending upon where he had to go, it could take that long till a final trial is set up.

Hell, my dad - a lawyer - has to go through more than one trial and each one can span a month until the next. It's not so much the legal system is the problem, it's that it's getting flooded and we're not doing a damn thing to help it.

What IS the point then ? You're just changing the subject.
In this case the person was held in jail and suspected guilty until proven innocent, a month later.
Sure the world does not work like we'd want to, but I choose to not be apathetic about it ; don't assume your attitude is the best, it definitely is not.

I'm sorry I took some things out of context, but overuse of sarcasm can backfire.
Plus you take some things as personal attacks when I'm just challenging your opinion, learn to accept that there are time when you are wrong, and here is one.

I am not saying you are wrong about the Patriot act though, but it expired apparently.

That was the first time I ever used sarcasm, unless I've forgotten something from when I finally got some sleep. And I haven't assumed any amount of superiority over anyone. I never once claimed that my attitude was the best, but declaring that he should sue and that he has the right to is wrong. He doesn't have a chance in the world. Which has been my stance, both sides are wrong - the school and him - as far as I can care and the police should have done a better job, but the fact remains they did a job so it doesn't matter.

Oh and I took some things as personal attacks when I'm apparently just wrong?

Do you mean for me to believe that if you overheard someone say they needed to "deal with this stress by killing 500 people", your immediate reaction would be mild inquisition into the nature of the killing, virtual or real? Don't kid yourself, you aren't fooling me, you'd freak out just like whomever reported him.

I'm not American but I lived there for a time, and I have seen with my own eyes unbelievable displays of stupidity mixed with paranoia, so I know blind panic because of an overheard conversation is very sadly probable...

he lost it by being stupid and talking about this in a freaking school. A school, a place more sacred than the airport. The cops did their jobs, the person that reported him did what was asked of them

^from people like this...

Explain that, if you would be so kind.