I think many posters are missing a point here. This woman was NOT arrested for sending her child to school. She was charged with fraudulently claiming she lived in a city simply to send her child to a better school district where she, in fact, did not live. Free education was always available to her; she just wanted her child to go for free in a municipality in which she did not reside. In most of the US, education is paid for by local taxes and a district's schools are available only to those who reside in the district. I certainly do not think that she should be arrested or fined...she clearly did no great harm. But please don't think she did NOTHING wrong. It is clear to me that the local DA brought these charges solely to make others think twice before they did the same thing. I am certain the charges will be dropped after the publicity has made it's point.
Reread
my post here; not only does she frequently use a shelter in the municipality of Norwalk (who's suing her), but, again, I don't know how someone who is homeless can be said to "reside" anywhere specifically. By definition, she is without a permanent residence.
If Norwalk believes that she's defrauding their fine city, it is likely on cultural/racial notions of what constitutes a resident of Norwalk, nothing else.
Anyone who'd care to spend 90 minutes in Bridgeport, then the same time in Norwalk, would recognize instantly why the latter would be preferable on every level. In fact, if anything, sleeping at a shelter in Norwalk would seem to be greater documentation illustrating her right to send her child to their schools than the undocumented anecdotal "evidence" of couch-hopping in Bridgeport.