Should A Teacher Lose His Job For Posting X-Rated Pics On Craigslist?

Teachers Can Be Fired Over Cruising For Sex On Craigslist: Court


Frank Lampedusa in November 2008 was ousted as a tenured teacher the
dean of students at Farb Middle School in San Diego when administrators
learned of a Craigslist ad he posted in the men-for-men section. He's
been battling his termination in court ever since and even won the last
round before the Commission on Professional Competence. But the Fourth
District Court of Appeal this week overturned
the decision and decided Lampedusa's firing was completely kosher,
because men who cruise for sex online clearly prove they are "unfit" to
teach children.

Lampedusa, who was hired by the San Diego Unified School District in
1999, did not post his name or affiliation with the school on his
Craigslist ads, which he acknowledged to the commission he had placed
four or five times. The ads did feature photos of his stomach, butt,
penis, torso -- and yes, his face. (There were also "graphic
descriptions" of the type of sex he liked.) I'm guessing it was that
face photo that got him caught: In June 2008 a San Diego police
dispatcher received an anonymous call from a man who said a friend had
told him Farb Middle School's dean was cruising Craiglist. (Don't guys
cruising Craigslist, who have something to lose, know to only send face
pics in private emails, if at all?) A district supervisor, reports KSWB-TV,
asked Lampedusa to pull the ads, which he did, but by November Lampedusa
was served with a termination notice by the school.

His defense in all of this is that merely by posting M4M sex ads
online, he is not unfit for his teaching job -- even if his own
students could possibly happen upon the listings. The school disagreed.
The competence omission did not. But the Fourth Circuit Court did, and
for now it's that ruling that sticks. The court www.courtinfo.ca.gov/opinions/nonpub/D057740.DOC+Frank+Lampedusa+craigslist&cd=5&hl=en&ct=clnk&gl=us&client=firefox-a&source=www.google.com" target="_blank" rel="nofollow">writes:

The Commission erred in finding there was "no evidence
of aggravating circumstances surrounding [Lampedusa's] conduct." This
finding ignores the fact Lampedusa posted graphic, pornographic photos,
and obscene written material, on a Web site open to the public.
Lampedusa admitted that he had posted similar ads in the past and did
not believe he had done anything immoral. Moreover, rather than taking
complete responsibility for his conduct, he shifted responsibility to
parents and students to not access his site.

Further, while it is true that he promptly removed the ad after
being directed to do so, it does not mitigate his conduct that would
have likely continued had a parent not viewed and complained about the
ad. This factor also does not support the Commission's decision.

[...] While Lampedusa's conduct may not have been blameworthy in the
sense he was seeking a date, it was extremely blameworthy in the
pornographic, obscene manner that he did so. This factor also does not
support the Commission's decision.

[...] A teacher may also be dismissed for "[i]mmoral or
unprofessional conduct." (§ 44932, subd. (a)(1).) " 'The term "immoral"
has been defined generally as that which is hostile to the welfare of
the general public and contrary to good morals. Immorality has not been
confined to sexual matters, but includes conduct inconsistent with
rectitude, or indicative of corruption, indecency, depravity,
dissoluteness; or as wilful, flagrant, or shameless conduct showing
moral indifference to the opinions of respectable members of the
community, and as an inconsiderate attitude toward good order and the
public welfare.' " (Board of Education v. Weiland (1960) 179 Cal.App.2d
808, 811.) Moreover, the definition of immoral or unprofessional
conduct must be considered in conjunction with the unique position of
public school teachers, upon whom are imposed "responsibilities and
limitations on freedom of action which do not exist in regard to other
callings." (Board of Trustees v. Stubblefield, supra, 16 Cal.App.3d at
p. 824.)

The public posting on a Web site of pornographic photos and obscene
text constitute immoral conduct in that it evidences "indecency" and
"moral indifference." Thus, the District's decision to terminate
Lampedusa was also supported on this ground.

CatEyes10736 wrote:I say yes. When you're a civil servant, you're held to a higher public standard. Even though he wasn't breaking any laws, I still don't understand why any teacher would jeopardize their accreditation by posting x-rated pictures of themselves on Craigslist. At some point, he had to consider what this could do to his reputation if it got out.

CeCe wrote:The internet age has complicated things for everyone. I understand people are going to get upset about things of a sexual nature regardless of gender. But I hate to see people lose their job because of something they posted that is not illegal. People are getting fired because of something they wrote on facebook these days. It's a lot of intrusiveness. What bothers me even more here is that he was asked to remove them, did it & was still fired. I just think if people are doing their job, not breaking the law or violating clearly defined rules it shouldn't affect their job. I'm not seeing "moral" issues here. Grown ups have sex. This is not something that would upset me as a parent.