Truemors
is reporting from
Member
NP Rank:
NP Rank:
Revealing Sickles High School Yearbook Photo Causes Uproar
Share:
by Jordan Yerman | May 14, 2009 at 10:20 am
110961 views | 19 Recommendations | 74 comments
A female student decided not to wear underwear to school one day to "avoid panty lines" at Sickles High School in Citrus Park, Florida. However, a photos taken that day has appeared on page 219 of the yearbook, which has just been handed out, and it shows a bit more than she intended.
The predictable uproar has ensued. The girl, a junior, is mortified, her mom is demanding that the yearbook be pulled, and still others are debating the actual content of the photo in question, which, no, I'm not linking to here.
Videos
And it is published in the school yearbook.
"When I saw it, I kind of flipped out. I was like, 'Oh my God', but I think that she's probably like really horrified," said sophomore Caitlin Darden.
The yearbook flap has spread to the web, as well. A forum on the topic carries a wide range of comments, from "just add black marker" to "what was she thinking?"
If you're wearing a dress or skirt on yearbook photo day, underwear is highly recommended.
What is NowPublic?
NowPublic lets people work together to cover news events around the world.
Most Recommended Comment
Crowd Power
Tina Kells
Vancouver, Canada
Most Recommended Stories in Strange
Recommendations (19)
AlvarezGalloso
Miami, Florida, United States
Samir Joshi
Vadodara, Gujarat, India
Anonymous users (15)
Most RecentMost Recommended Comments (74)
at 20:29 on May 14th, 2009
This story made http://detentionslip.org ! Check it out for all the crazy headlines from our schools.
at 13:23 on May 23rd, 2009
Here is the picture, see for yourself that there is really no cause for alarm. She is an attention seeking idiot.
http://www.documentingreality.com/forum/attachments/f2/51309d1242783693-sickles-high-school-yearbook-crotch-shot-picture-005.jpg
at 05:04 on May 15th, 2009
awe poor girl. will she ever live it down.
at 20:35 on May 15th, 2009
Don't feel bad for her. Did you watch the video of her and her mom? Notice how she dressed to be on tv for the news. Notice the items around there house?
And if mommy hadn’t decided to take this story to the press and use the press as leverage to have the yearbooks taken back up then the rest of us would never had know that this happened.
If she is so distraught and doesn’t want to go back to school because of this picture then why involve the rest of the world with it.
My point is. How many of you either went to Google or You Tube to see if you could find the picture after you saw this report?
How many of you would have ever known about it had mommy not wanted publicity over this?
at 05:24 on May 15th, 2009
lets be honest...she wasn't wear ppanties because she was worried about her panty line. come on she knew she made this decision not to wear them, so wouldn't she be a little more careful how she sat. she probably was giving shows all day long.
at 08:00 on May 15th, 2009
She wasn't wearing panties BECAUSE she wanted to give a show. Wear a thong if you don't want lines - don't go commando.
at 08:13 on May 15th, 2009
underwear or no underwear, your business. How about you sit like a LADY!!!! Dummy!
at 08:42 on May 15th, 2009
If the principle continues to hand out the yearbooks with that image included, he should be brought up on charges of distribution of child pornography. Do the right thing, and reprint it without the photo.
at 17:19 on May 15th, 2009
Why should the taxpayer have to pay for this girl's stupidity! Does you know how much the county would have to pay for this?
Disribute the yearbook.
All she's looking for is to collect money in a lawsuit.
at 08:17 on May 17th, 2009
Taxpayers pay for yearbooks? Not quite, Einstein.
at 04:35 on May 19th, 2009
@ Mark Sphincter......Um, dude. Where do you think public schools get their money, Chuckles?
at 18:08 on June 17th, 2009
Students pay for yearbooks. Also at my school seniors could by a page for $50 and put their own pictures there. Thats how schools get money for yearbooks. Not tax payers
at 06:36 on May 18th, 2009
Read the definition of child pornography in the Florida statutes. You can find it in Florida Statutes 827.071. Even if you could clearly see her "parts" it would not qualify as kiddie porn.
at 18:52 on May 21st, 2009
yeah. but do you understand how much money that would cost? Most schools barely get a profit from selling yearbooks in general.
at 18:15 on August 1st, 2009
the crotch isn't in the picture! i have the yearbook and you can actually see her hand pushing down her dress in between her legs, so that would block it anyway. the principal at that school is a great guy, and he's the smartest principal i ever had, and i've been to like 8 different schools, i trust his opinion
at 09:05 on May 15th, 2009
If she decided not to wear underwear then she gets what she deserves. All the girls in my school are teases also.
at 09:55 on May 15th, 2009
Mom&child want a reprint - fine pay for it! and issue a public appology for the debacle.
Get real! Mom should be looked into by Child services (though so should 80% of students parents now) Girl needs to get a clue on life and if she's going to go natural in the future LEARN TO CLOSE YOUR LEGS!
I'm surprised she isn't already in the trailer park with 12 kids but she probably will be soon.
Flame ON!
at 10:40 on May 15th, 2009
@ Foley:
He would not be brought up on charges because it doesn't fit the criteria of child pornography, in order for it to be child porn the girl would have to be a child firstly, and secondly would need to be doing a sexual act
i.e: masturbating, posing sexy, performing oral sex
at the most he could only be charged for distributing photos of a teenage girl without consent from the parents
at 19:55 on May 15th, 2009
The minor (which WOULD include most high school students) does not have to be doing anything. But the pictures would be taken or distributed for the purpose of sexual gratification. This appears to be an error on the schools part (and really bad judgement on the student's part) - so the intent is not there.
at 08:03 on May 16th, 2009
Child Pornography isn't defined to include anything that means sexual intent necessarily. A 16 year old is still a child, and photos of her legs spread and showing a sexual part of her fits the legal criteria for being child pornography. It's not that the photo was taken for a sexual purpose. It can now be used for a sexual purpose and a photo distributed publicly of a child's vulva isn't in keeping with good manners anyway. Somehow I think whoever proofed this photo let it go in anyway. High schoolers can be pretty vicious that way.
The yearbooks should be recalled, and then reissued with this girl and her mother responsible for paying for the reissue. If they don't, then the other parents can sue them for the removal of the yearbooks (a small class action suit). At some point we must be responsible for our actions. It wouldn't hurt my feelings to see this girl work for a couple years at a Sonic or McDonalds to pay back the value of the reissuance of the yearbooks. She would have more on her mind than worrying about panty lines. Her mother should contribute, also, for the sole purpose of not having properly taught her daughter on those behaviors (closing your legs with a dress on) that are necessary to avoid scandal and be a lady.
at 13:15 on May 23rd, 2009
Did you even watch the video or see the pictures? Her legs were not "spread", and its not conclusive that what is seen is her "bush" and not a shadow. The reporter should have asked her if she has ever had a "brazillian", and if she was wearing underwear to the interview.
at 22:50 on May 26th, 2009
That is dead wrong. Even if her slit is showing that doesn't make it child porn. I'm a nudist and there are plenty of families, with kids, that are into nudism and they even take family pictures of their vacations to nudist destinations and those are not child porn either.
at 10:48 on May 15th, 2009
There's something fishy about that photo.
at 18:25 on May 15th, 2009
CUTE!
at 11:51 on May 15th, 2009
Mother and daughter want to live in the style to which they would like to become accustomed. the school has deep pockets and I'm sure Morgan and Morgan (for the money) or attornies of their ilk will be suing the school in the very near future.
Sad, really, because at 16, if bimbo didn't wear panties or a thong, it was done on purpose. She's old enough to know better.
As for a settlement, I would love to get half of what John (for the money) Morgan will get.
span.jajahWrapper { font-size:1em; color:#B11196; text-decoration:underline; } a.jajahLink { color:#000000; text-decoration:none; } span.jajahInLink:hover { background-color:#B11196; }
at 12:52 on May 15th, 2009
its call a THONG!
at 13:02 on May 15th, 2009
Big Deal--Only Americans are capable of raising such a flap over this. Get over your prude selves. If this was in Europe no body would even batt an eye.
at 13:23 on May 15th, 2009
Big deal--Only Americans are capable of raising such a flap over an issure like this. Get over your prude selves. If this was in Europe it would not be news.
at 14:40 on May 15th, 2009
Unreal. The really said thing about the WHOLE thing is that if the people selecting the pictures had noticed anything revealing, chances are they would not have printed the picture in the first place. If they didn't catch it the first time, then it probably wasn't all that noticeable to begin with. In fact, most people probably would not have noticed unless it was pointed out to them because its not like its a full page picture or even half a page. Honestly, this girl should have worn a thong if she didn't want panty lines, but y'know what? She's 16. Whoever said that teenagers think things through? Even if she thought it would be a cool joke that backfired on her, once again, she's 16 and teenagers don't think things through. She did something stupid, whether intentional or not, and she has to deal with it. Stupid stuff is going to happen to her as an adult too, although hopefully it won't become public knowledge like this photo. If nothing else, at least hopefully she'll learn something from this experience.
at 14:47 on May 15th, 2009
well they were worried that the kids at school saw it, why not make it a news story so the whole world will know.Its only matter of time till name and photo are on internet