Today, 10:37 AM
Yes. But is that the whole explanation?
So, this cafeteria worker gets a bill unlike any he or she has seen before. It certainly looks impressive, with tons of intraglio scrollwork, an impressive portrait of Jefferson and a fine likeness of an interesting old mansion on the back, and all the right mumbo jumbo in even lettering all around. Does this person say, well, that's a conversation piece worth two dollars, and pocket it, substituting two of his or her own dollars in the till? No--it has become a fad of late to prohibit employees who handle cash from making such substitutions, and from making any personal transactions with customers. And The Pen accused this person of trying to pass counterfeit currency, so the bill cannot be accepted. This cafeteria worker is risking losing that job if he or she does anything other than kicking this problem upstairs. His or her hands are tied.
Now, one would hope that the principal gets involved at this point, because accusing a child of counterfeiting is certainly not something that any rational system would leave to a flunkie. Enter an educated person who presumably has at least a master's degree from some reputable institution of higher learning. Does this person, who is (or should be) an expert in child development, look at all of this fine engraving, all of this scrollwork and perfect lettering and its recognizable portrait (dare we ask if this principal is familiar with Thomas Jefferson and his mansion Monticello?), and say, there is no way this was created by a thirteen year old child? Does this principal use the internet to see if this bill is a denomination that was ever issued by the Treasury, and check to see if they were ever withdrawn from circulation and declared Not Money? Does this person go to the chemistry teacher and ask how The Pen works, The Pen being the sole source of evidence that this child is passing counterfeit money? Does this principal interrupt chemistry class for the five minutes it would take to learn that if a bill sat under a piece of normal, wood pulp paper for sixty years there might be enough traces of that wood pulp clinging to the bill to react with the chemicals in The Pen? Does the principal look at all of that intricate detail, and get visions of the prizes this child could win for that school if he or she actually is talented enough to pull that off at the age of thirteen? No. If this principal, presumably vetted to ensure that the welfare of the children is a fairly high priority in their minds, decides to blow this thing off, to be governed by a sense of proportion concerning this alleged two dollar crime, someone could tell the tale and this principal could later be accused of aiding and abetting a counterfeiter. And if the two dollar bill is no longer around at that point, how could this presumed guilty principal prove his or her innocence? This problem must be kicked upstairs.
'Upstairs' in this case being a junior college Associate Degree holding steroid junkie moron in a uniform. Does this beat cop stop to think that this is a federal crime the child is accused of, and call in the Secret Service? Does this individual stop to think that the child did nothing to deserve a false arrest, and use the car the taxpayers put at his disposal to go to any bank and ask if this bill is legal tender? Does this beat cop think, this child couldn't possibly run a counterfeiting operation alone, it doesn't fit the M.O? Does this beat cop call in a detective to delve into the possibility that this child is the tip of an iceberg, and maybe is more of a useful source of information than a malignant criminal mastermind? Does this cop remember his Associate's Degree classwork, and recall that a normal criminal does not risk decades of his freedom for minor payouts or deliberately call attention to his crimes by making them unusual and likely to draw the sort of attention something as unusual as a two dollar bill would attract? ...