Alleged Campus Safety Misconduct

---

This page has been proposed for deletion because of the following concern:

see discussion page

If you can improve the page, please edit it. Once you have done so, you may remove this template. Please explain why you think the page deserves to stay on the discussion page or in your edit summary.

This page may be deleted within a couple days if no improvements are made. Please check the article history to see when this template was added.

---

Like the Campus Safety Log, but with a different spin.

Instances of Alleged Misconduct

Currently, the allegation comes first, followed by a chance for rebuttal or any other kind of argument against the allegation and the evidence used to support it. This page is currently under heavy discussion, so visit the Discussion page and join in.

Friday, May 16 (part 1)

Just after midnight, a campus safety officer detained two students walking in the basement of SMC and accused them of removing signs from bathroom doors and demanded to search one of their bags. When the students refused the search on the basis of their 4th amendment rights, the officer lied to them, saying that those rights did not apply on private property, and called the police. the police officer who searched AND violated the student's 4th amendment rights told the campus safety officer, "we cannot legally search them", however proceeded to searching both students, without a warrant and without consent.

• • Because the officer did not search the students their 4th amendment rights were not violated. The officer was offering the students an easy way out. If they had submitted to the search, it is likely they would have been referred to the Office of Student Development. When the police searched the students bags and found signs that had been taken down from restrooms in the buildings. The students were taken to jail for stealing college property. They were there less than an hour.
  • The previous comment is inane. My 4th amendment rights were violated--not by campus safety, but by the Galesburg police, as stated in the account above. The campus safety officer merely demanded an illegal search and lied about its being compulsory. This seems to me like misconduct; if it isn't, it should be. Further, if the campus safety officer had wanted to offer an "easy way out" demanding to search my property seems a strange way to do it.

Friday, May 16 (part 2)

Late, after Girl Talk, Campus Safety called the police on an intoxicated student who was on campus, violating the Good Samaritan policy.

• • The Good Samaritan policy only protects students from college rules, not federal, state, or local laws.

Sunday, May 18

In the early morning, a student left belongings in Founders, while computers were restarting, and Campus Safety took the liberty of searching the students personal belongings, without the student present, or consent from that student.

• • A Campus Safety Officer noticed money hanging out of an unattended purse. When he checked the property for an id, drug paraphernalia was found. Possession of drug paraphernalia is against college and state laws.
  • Once again, can you substantiate your claim that there was drug paraphernalia in the bag? Even if there was drug paraphernalia, its presence in the bag does not justify the search of the bag in that it was not apparent--just the money (which, last time I checked, is legal under state and college laws...

Wednesday, May 21

Campus security was seen and over heard referencing the use of pepper spray on a student during the afternoon.

• • This is hearsay. No student has ever been pepper sprayed. It is true that some Campus Safety Officers carry pepper spray for protection.
  • Has the author personally consulted all of the students at Knox college? Otherwise, the statement that "no student has ever been pepper sprayed" is worse than hearsay--it's...just say.