A database containing information on about 2,100 mentor teachers since 1999 was posted on the web. It contained demographic information and SSN's. A letter of regrets was sent out by Pierce. Folks were warned to be aware of possible identity theft.

This is all a part of my master plan. Ex-Dean, I mean Dean, Pierce has added to the economic development of South Mississippi through a strategic release of some uninportant Social Security numbers. Just think of all those employees the SS Administration will have to hire from right here in South Mississippi to assign new SS #'s to all those individuals! Think about the additional District Attorneys that will be needed to prosecute identity thieves! Brilliant job, Willie!

Pass me a hammer wrote:

---

Now we get to find out if the "crime" shoe fits. If it was a crime for G & S, surely it's a crime for Pierce and whoever else posted the information. The spin on this one will be verrrry interesting. Disclaimer: disclosing a Social Security number is not a crime. Posting it on the web is just real, real, real dumb.

---

It is my understanding that Gary passed one number to a personnel director who already had it in order to confirm they were talking about the same person. No new information changed hands.

Toolbox wrote:

---

It is my understanding that Gary passed one number to a personnel director who already had it in order to confirm they were talking about the same person. No new information changed hands.

---

That's not the point.

Pass me a hammer wrote:

---

I know what Gary did wasn't improper or illegal. The point is that Roy Klumb, Shelby Thames, and now J. Hanbury kept on saying it was. What are they going to say now when their guy did something a lot worse. (Do we feel sorry for WP? I'm not sure.)

---

I was responding to Toolbox, not you, Pmah.

Toolbox wrote:

---

Blunt Scissors wrote:
I was responding to Toolbox, not you, Pmah.
Blunt Scissors, you obviously misread my post. I said "No new information changed hands." That was intended to mean that nothing improper or illegal occurred.

---

That's not the point.

Thames stated that G&S had committed a crime by disclosing AD's SS#, even though she had included it on her vita in the first place. The fact that it was already public didn't matter to Thames -- the argument was made that her SS# was already public, and Thames dismissed that argument. All that mattered to Thames was that G&S had revealed a SS#. Now he has a loyalist who has revealed SS#'s. Will this act be criminal? Or will he rely on the "the faculty said it was OK for G&S, so it's OK for Pierce"?

Thames dismissed the public/private information argument as being irrelevant in the G&S case. That's why your comments are off point.

Pierce is the fall guy...he didn't didn't authorize posting the list. The NCATE brain trust would be the ones responsible, but this will be just another excuse to hatchet the "yes" man.