Clearing the record on Dr. Phil
Talking it out on national TV.
Clearing the record on Dr. Phil
Michael Klein, Philly.com
Correcting a post from last night:
Dr. Phil McGraw did not sit down with Penn Valley's Michael and Holly Robbins, whose son Blake has been at the center of the laptop-surveillance case at Harriton High.
But the Dr. Phil show yesterday did interview two people with ties to the Lower Merion School District as part of a show about the controversy, a spokesman for the Dr. Phil show said.
Dr. Phil producers used the “Talk Philly” set at CBS3 yesterday to do a live “talk-back” with Phil McGraw, who was on set in Los Angeles.
An air date for the interview, which will be accompanied by news footage, has not been announced.
Meanwhile, the family's lawsuit against Lower Merion School District has made Wikipedia.
Comments (76)
CAUTION to parents: ask the school for their policy, read it and decide whether that's what you wnat for your child.IF you don't like the policy have the student use their own computer, or yours. What is UP with the webcams anyway? The schools have no other way of tracking their laptops? give me a break!— Filly5- Conerning the student: it dosn't matter if "where there is smoke there is fire". He's not the only student to have been photographed and his information USED without consent.IF they are trying to track laptops, and he's photograped eating candy, who are they to say he's selling drugs? It's ludicrous, and the LM knows they goofed bigtime. Some Districts stay away from this practice FOR this reason.— Filly5
- To TonyS- it shouldn't be all about the money, if the parents have any kind of conscience. This is an important case for privacy, whether the district owns the laptops or not. A District MUST have a signed consent form beforehand.— Filly5
For someone alleging to be a scientist, SnowQueen has a crude filter for actual evidence; the school district did NOT admit to accessing the laptop in the student's home, bedroom or other room. The only reference to any computer evidence available so far is the student's allegation that the Asst. Principal showed him a photo, and questioned him about the items he was holding. Did the school take that shot? We don't know. Does that photo actually exist? We haven't seen it. The closest parallel in recent memory is the "Balloon Boy" event from out west, and that turned out to be a publicity stunt. Watch this one over the next few months, as the family goes from Dr. Phil to Jerry Springer trying to milk this story for all it's worth. To me, it's worth less than the ink already spilled. An unproved allegation, from a source of questionable reliability. We should "fuggedaboudit".- All I have to say to everyone passing judgment before ALL the facts are known, remember Susan smith and the claim that her two kids were in a car that was carjacked and the stripper and her claims against the Duke lacrosse team. It has happened sooo many times before and those who spoke out too soon looked immature and silly. Because someone screams first and loud, does not always make it true.— tluvsphoto
Comment removed.- @MoZeu What you're describing is called "entrapment" and still against the law. If I give you a suitcase and a few bucks to hold it for me but I don't tell you what's in it, and that suitcase is filled with cocaine, and I'm a cop and come back with my buddies to arrest you - that entrapment. And, that's exactly what happened here, even if the kid didn't pay the $55. If the parents were aware they could be spied upon, they could have either made the decision to pay the money or refuse to let their son take it home. By the way, the kid had the laptop out for over a month. Why didn't the school district do anything when they realized the laptop wasn't where it was supposed to be? They set a precedent by letting the student take the laptop home without paying the fee for so long. Again, Lower Merion's fault.— dkaplan73
- Snow Queen--The school officials acted stupidly because it is the nature of school administrators to be stupid. And arrogant. And power-hungry. I think it is hilarious that now some of them will face possible sex-offender status. And not for a moment am I defending the rich, dead-beat parents' previous actions. Nobody should be that wealthy. But that is a totally separate issue.— Delaware Jim
- If PECO did their job and shut off their electricity due to the $30,000 tab they ran up the kid wouldn't have been able to use the laptop at home and we wouldn't be observing this ridiculous media circus!!! The school errored by not informing the parents about the web cam and should disband the practice which they have done. Schools have do deal with many complicated issues regarding computers, cellphones, My Space, cyber bullying etc. and are not perfect but I don't think their intention was to spy on a pimply teenager in his underwear. Some of the "entitled" in Lower Merion have an exagerated sense of importance.— chickletonian
- If the Robbins parents were actually concerned about their child's privacy why would they be putting this 15 year old kid all over the news every day and night and having him on the talk-show circuit. They say they are concerned about their child and his privacy - GIVE ME A BREAK!— ForReal?
- Give me a break. This family is look to make money. Check out all the lawsuits against them: http://webapp.montcopa.org/PSI/Viewer/Search.aspx?c=CaseSearch&panel=CaseParties It was recently reported that they live in home worth close to $1 million dollars (!!!) and they owe PECO $30,000, they owe their dentist, their pre-school, the lawyer that is today representing them had a lawsuit against them for unpaid bills, and it is clear that they don't pay their real estate taxes. GIVE ME A BREAK! This is outrageous. Who do these people think they are? What a disgrace! Their lawyer has sensationlized this case .... but the facts are now coming out and the family has some serious questions to answer.— ForReal?
"Laptop family is no stranger to legal disputes" is the title of the article about these sue-happy folks who live in a million dollar home and owe PECO $30,000. lol. Look it up.— Ralph 1- Comment removed.
- Comment removed.
- So, this is how they are trying to usher in Big Brother. How will they get us to readily accept this intrusion? With confusion! First get the media to attack and demonize the victims. Then, Dr. Phil will tell us why this is necessary to prevent drug abuse and terrorism. Dr. Phil will then start the conditioning process to soften resistance and popularize the idea with the masses. Wave to your kid's laptop, Amerika, and uh, long live Big Brother.— trainrdt
- Comment removed.
- Comment removed.
I don't know about anyone else, but if I felt like a school official had violated my child's privacy you had better believe my child would have been pulled out of that school immediately following the incident. I would not wait until four months later. That alone (besides their history of lawsuits and astronomical debt to Peco among other companies) really makes me question their motivations behind this suit. I personally don't agree with the measures taken by the school, but to wait as long as they did to take action makes me doubt and questions their intentions. They were fine with it before and now it is an issue. Yeah, that doesn't really add up.— Plastic Bertrand- Comment removed.
- Comment removed.
- The Snow Queen asks, "Why is this issue of “stolen property” coming into play now? Why now? Why THIS student in particular?" To answer your questions, it's because the family finally decided to sue. This incident was a non-issue back in November when it took place and now all of a sudden it has dawned on the family that it is something they are so upset over that the only thing that will make them feel better is some settlement money. That's why.— Plastic Bertrand
- "It was not concealed. They were aware that a student was taking the laptop home." You're an idiot. Given that hundreds of students take laptops home every day, that fact is meaningless. He took it without permission. Maybe the school should just check every student and match name to laptop number coming and going each day? Should we also require every student who has their own laptop bring the invoice for the purchase with them each day so it can be checked and they know it really belongs to the kid. You're really reaching to make excuses for this POS kid, aren't you?— Fascinated
- @THE SNOW QUEEN What if the person who activated the camera was trying to find out who had a computer that had been taken from the school without signing it out by someone to whom it was not assigned?— Fascinated
- @Fillygirl250 "If you can't afford your lifestyle, why are you still living in a million dollar home? If you can't afford the $55 fee, why did the kid take home a laptop?" Was the laptop he took home actually assigned to him and did he have permission to take it? How many school district laptops has this kid already "lost" this year?— Fascinated
- @towman "I say the school is probably wrong but because they are unable to talk about the case you can't be certain." Towman, the school cannot talk about the case because there is a court order prohibiting them from doing so. Trust me when I tell you that the order was not issued to protect the district, it was issued to protect the kid from having certain facts in this case which would be detrimental to his reputation and position come out.— Fascinated
- if you were truly concerned about your child's privacy I doubt a mother or father would be doing the talk circuit. These people are no better then the baloon boy family. LM has some issues to address which will come out once these stupid law suits are finalized. I for one will wait for the truth to come out because it always does. The parents are shameful. it will be the kids who pay the price in our district b/c they will now be wearing the "scarlet A" for the rest of their school term in LM. If the parents truly cared about the kids, this could have been done in privacy with lawyers to protect the kids.— A Friend
- "How savvy. I would sign on for every talk show on TV! Thank God his parents are no fools. They need to secure his financial future and in this economy, the school may have done him a service." I hope they do too. I can hardly wait for the slander suits to be filed against them, and that is where this is headed.— Fascinated
- Comment removed.
- Like my Papa always said: 2 wrongs (school district, deadbeat family) don't make a right. AND...regarding the high-schooler: where there's smoke there's fire. It will be interesting to see what other dirty linen gets hung out to dry.— dimon
- Comment removed.
- Comment removed.
- Comment removed.
- You know what, I really don't care whether they are in debt...heck if not for God's grace I'd probably been in the same boat more than once in my life. Haven't always made great financial choices and has gotten in over my head more than once. The issue here is whether the school or someone associated with the school activated the web cam and if so, whether or not they had a legitimate reason to do it. I have a 17 year old son and I snoop to check up on him. I also welcome others observing and correcting any bad behavior but I do not want anyone spying on my son in a way that is invasive. Think of it like this, If someone did activate the web cam and it was in your childs room or your living room on any given day or night what pictures would they see. Would they get a snap of you running to the kitchen half dressed or naked. Or a pic of your child dressing or undressing. Would they catch you and your partner in the middle of a intimate moment or your child exploring their body.....I can deal with spyware to monitor sites that kids access but pictures go too far when it is in MY home.— Justmy2cents
- Why are the comments longer than the article? Oh, right, because this ISN'T an article. Come on Inky, this is why people go to blogs for news and not you.— Philatonian
- Comment removed.
- Comment removed.
- Ah, not so fast SNOW QUEEN. I know there are problems with LMSD's policy; no need to debate that, but this kid took a laptop home that he did not have permission to take home. If you take someone's property without permission, that is called stealing it, and your privacy expectations in stolen property are substantially lower than they otherwise would be. I think there are a number of close calls in this case, but it is not at all clear to me based on what I know of the case law in this area of privacy rights that the District violated his privacy by activating a remote security system that took a limited snapshot of the screen and area directly in front of the computer if the computer was in fact and in law stolen property at that time. So the case isn't closed at all. (Being a "known lawyer")— MoZeu
- Comment removed.
- blew into town sums it up— footlooseman
- What are the Inquirer Staff reporters trying to tell us? If you owe PECO money, it is OK for the school to spy on your childern in their bedrooms ? This debt info is not part of the story. It is pure gossip.Do you wonder why the Inquirer is in financial trouble and readership is down ? How about sloppy reporting? Posts by IT people tell the legal implications of spying and wire tapping, but all the staff writers publish is DIRT . Get the hard facts, guys. It is no wonder newspapers are becoming obsolete.— Damsel555
- Comment removed.
- No one is denying that it's not right to spy on ANYONE, including a child, HOWEVER, let's call a spade a spade. These people are after nothing but the almighty dollar. They can weep all they wish about how violated they are, but the reason they are taking this as far as it's gone is because they spoke to an attorney, and both the attorney and the parents saw the monetary potential behind this case. This couple is teaching their children that yes, spying is wrong, and Mommy and Daddy are going to make a windfall off of it by draining the school district's accounts. If this isn't "about them", then why don't they take their winnings which they will surely get, and donate it back to a educational charity in Philadelphia after covering their legal fees? The saddest part about this case is that these two people have children, who will one day be adults, and they are learning that integrity means finding a great attorney, and standing by your principles is only neccessary if you'll make a quick buck. If their son getting snooped on by a middle aged woman who had no perverted intentions is the worst thing that will ever happen to him in his life time, then he is a very blessed human being. Someone ship them to Darfur for a week to show them what real pain, sadness, suffering, and loss is really about.— DukenfoldJ
- Comment removed.
- 1-Someone in the school district really messed up. Scary program. 2-It's a creepy story, but I doubt the guilty party was a pervert (as many suspect). 3-This family felt like they were wronged (they were), they smelled blood, and then jumped on the chance to sue because they are WT. 4-The story we are getting from the family is not 100% true. 5-Seems like a case where neither side is completely innocent.— Han Solo
- Comment removed.
- The School District made a mistake and they should own up to the fact that they did not communicate the webcam policy. But frankly, I wonder about parents who put a 15 year old in front of microphones to read the lawyer's statement. Is that really good judgement? And do you wonder about this lawyer who does not talk to print media, but only responds to television so he can control the message.— Sam Pileggi
- Nice smear job on the family. It really has nothing to do with their past financial problems. And who accessed their credit file to obtain and broadcast their private financial information?— essen
- Comment removed.
- This family is all about the money! They are up to their eyeballs in debt and doing whatever the can to make a quick buck.— anthonyg
- I agree that the Lower Merion School District was incredibly stupid and violated privacy laws, that said, there is a lot more to the story. Has anyone read this article http://www.philly.com/philly/news/nation_world/20100225_Laptop_family_is_no_stranger_to_legal_disputes.html The school did not call the parents in for a meeting to discuss their 15 year old's drug dealing with just a webcam pic. Significant evidence supported the schools claim. Let's not forget what started this and the family does not have the purest of reputations. Once the school district is done paying for the law suit, the Lower Merion taxes are going to rise, who do you think is going to pay for that? From the article I posted above, it's obvious the boys family won't pay their taxes. Dr. Phil, what a farce, can't wait to see that episode. That irresponsible family wants cash and that's the bottom line.— jbeaton
- What the school system did was probably wrong however it is hard to be sympathic to this family. Million dollar home, but don't pay their electric bill, or their dentist or their synagogue, hmmm. I hope after Phil lets them tell their story and consoles them over the webcam he then rips them a new one over their finances. Telling them to downsize the home, wife get a job and shop at Save-a-Lot (safe bet they don't now). I say the school is probably wrong but because they are unable to talk about the case you can't be certain. If they turned the camera on to see who was using it after their records showed the family had not signed for it and then observed suspicious behavior then I think thats acceptable. Any other reason is not. This case is like two skunks fighting over garbage in your garage. No matter who wins its going to stink.— towman
- Comment removed.
THis is a very scummy family. They are looking to make a quick buck toi pay for a lifestyle they could never afford. This is contrived..and every disgusting chirping lawyer will rise up out of the scum pond to find a way to get their 33% fee as well. These kind of people are large, blood engorged tics that life of the lifeblood of real, working people.— Yermak29- All well and good. I don't necessarily feel sorry for ANYONE living in a million dollar home in Lower Merion. Now do I condone the slimy way they have managed to PLAY the system. That being said, if someone were to have access to my children or your children's bedroom WITHOUT their knowledge.....I would be furious!!! I hope they get a positive judgment in their suit. BIG BROTHER does not have the right to peer into my teenage child's bedroom - - - PERIOD!!— twashington
- I've thought right from the start that there was something about this whole thing that didn't pass the smell test. Stay tuned till all the facts come tumbling out. All of you who were so quick to condem the school may be in for a surprise, but then, so might I, not passing judegement here, but I sure do have my doubts....I'm sure there's more to come, especially now tht Dr. Phil is on the case!— Elderlee
- This family is looking for money and fame.— RandomX856
I love how the father says, "So what about the debts," as if they are a couple of $26 parking tickets. They owe close to $30k to Peco alone. They couldn't even pay the $55 fee for the laptop. Yeah, right. They could pay it, they just chose not to. Accumulating the amount of debt they have considering that they make well over $100k (or as they claim $60k) a year speaks volumes about their shady characters and that is important. Yeah, something is not right here. I guess their other lawsuit in the works aka cash cow hasn't panned out yet, so why they were so hot on this one.— Jame Gumb- Comment removed.
- Comment removed.
- Comment removed.
- If it had happened to my child, including the note in his school records, I would do the same thing as the Robbins.— backhandgrip
- Maybe it is about the money, but Lower Merion was the one who stuck their bare tukis way out. I do not want schools pulling stunts like this on anyone.— robentcorp
- Did anyone read in the last article how their lawyer actually sued them not to long ago but he took on another case for them. These people are everything that is wrong with this country. And will someone please punch Phil in the face!— JohnnyThunderCak
- If you can't afford your lifestyle, why are you still living in a million dollar home? If you can't afford the $55 fee, why did the kid take home a laptop? Now, having said that, I do think everyone should have known that the laptop security feature could take pictures. That's non-negotiable. I too think it is about the money now...— Fillygirl250
- Comment removed.
- Comment removed.
- Comment removed.
- Comment removed.
- Comment removed.
- It's all about the money.— tonyS
- Comment removed.
- Judge Judy could take care of this case in about 10 minutes. She's smarter than the rest of us on our best day. This ain't no tea dance!— america
- So the family can say whatever they want, and people are happy to jump to the conclusion that all their allegations are fact, while the school district can't say anything without clearing it with the Robbins' family's lawyer first on six hours' notice...and now the family's going on TV with Dr. Phil? If the case stands on its own merits, why is Dr. Phil the first stop?— redshoes
- Comment removed.
- Comment removed.
- I guess Larry King will be next.. It's called ratings..
1
Popular Posts
About this blog
Michael Klein, the editor/producer of philly.com/Food, writes about the local restaurant scene in his Inquirer column "Table Talk." Have a question? Email it! See his Inquirer work here.
Reach Michael at mklein@philly.com.
Michael Klein
Philly.com
Search this blog:
Classifieds:
Site Services:
Partners: