An altercation between two minors differs from that between a minor and an adult.
Dumbest reason for arrest
- Thread starter Rmay635703
- Start date
Yes it does, in my experience altercations between minors can be much more serious and dangerous than the example of spicing up a drink and there are no consequences.
And we wonder why people get creative
"An altercation between two minors differs from that between a minor and an adult."
So, a little off track here. If a minor punches a minor in the face , thats different than 2 adults doing the same. Kinda like burning and looting in "peaceful protests" vs doing the same in a "riot"
If its wrong its wrong, I can't keep up with the new millenial laws and rules,nuances now a days. Used to be what was good for the goose was good for the gander.
So, a little off track here. If a minor punches a minor in the face , thats different than 2 adults doing the same. Kinda like burning and looting in "peaceful protests" vs doing the same in a "riot"
If its wrong its wrong, I can't keep up with the new millenial laws and rules,nuances now a days. Used to be what was good for the goose was good for the gander.
Last edited:
That is part of the problem we have taken youthful ignorance and adult liability to an extreme place where there is basically inaction against the behavior of certain types of students.
An adult (outside police) are never allowed to intervene in any way even if the student has caused the room to be evacuated because they are trashing the place.
We then proceed in extreme cases to have legal proceedings against the minor which only screws up their future adult life while doing absolutely nothing to discipline them or change their behavior.
We have forgotten the nuances that some students don’t respond to normal things rational students would view as discipline as a lesson not to do in the future.
Last edited:
I'd wager that any chance for discretion disappeared the moment the school became involved, and beyond that the escalation path is predetermined.
Oh, and doing this was beyond idiotic.... let's bring myself to the kids' level and risk my future opportunities while I'm at it...almost unbelievable, almost. What did this muppet think would happen?
Oh, and doing this was beyond idiotic.... let's bring myself to the kids' level and risk my future opportunities while I'm at it...almost unbelievable, almost. What did this muppet think would happen?
Last edited:
dnewton3
Staff member
Just to clarify the info in the article that is somewhat misleading ...
The story indicates common consumable products; lemon juice, vinegar, salt and a sports drink. And it is true to say that these would be "non toxic" in general consumption. However, even common products consumed in certain ways can be toxic, even lethal. Even water (yes, good ol' H20) can be toxic if consumed in too great a quantity. You can actually DIE if you consume too much water in a short amount of time! The same is true of some things like vitamins and minerals.
The reality is that the child was hospitalized due to complications from that concoction she made and he consumed.
Most states have fairly clear laws that are predicated on a few things regarding arrest and prosecution:
- motive
- intent
- opportunity
- success of act or at least attempt of the act
- some description of victimization effect
So, did she have motive? Yes.
Intent? Clearly so.
Opportunity? Yup.
Success in the attempt? Yeah, surely did.
Was the victim affected in a negative manner? Hospitalization certainly counts as a big yes here.
Like it or not, arrest wasn't the wrong thing to do here. It fits all the criteria. Further, what would have happened if the police had NOT arrested her? There'd still be outcry, just in the opposite manner. This is because the public likes to be "shocked and appalled" at whatever happens, regardless of where the story lands. Darned if ya do; Darned if ya don't ... If the cops/prosecutors do nothing, they get blamed for inaction. If they take action, people still like to complain. There is no pleasing the public. So the reality is that the "law" is fulfilled, even if the public isn't happy about it.
And the criminal aspect doesn't even address the civil causes (lawsuit sure to follow in this case).
The story indicates common consumable products; lemon juice, vinegar, salt and a sports drink. And it is true to say that these would be "non toxic" in general consumption. However, even common products consumed in certain ways can be toxic, even lethal. Even water (yes, good ol' H20) can be toxic if consumed in too great a quantity. You can actually DIE if you consume too much water in a short amount of time! The same is true of some things like vitamins and minerals.
The reality is that the child was hospitalized due to complications from that concoction she made and he consumed.
Most states have fairly clear laws that are predicated on a few things regarding arrest and prosecution:
- motive
- intent
- opportunity
- success of act or at least attempt of the act
- some description of victimization effect
So, did she have motive? Yes.
Intent? Clearly so.
Opportunity? Yup.
Success in the attempt? Yeah, surely did.
Was the victim affected in a negative manner? Hospitalization certainly counts as a big yes here.
Like it or not, arrest wasn't the wrong thing to do here. It fits all the criteria. Further, what would have happened if the police had NOT arrested her? There'd still be outcry, just in the opposite manner. This is because the public likes to be "shocked and appalled" at whatever happens, regardless of where the story lands. Darned if ya do; Darned if ya don't ... If the cops/prosecutors do nothing, they get blamed for inaction. If they take action, people still like to complain. There is no pleasing the public. So the reality is that the "law" is fulfilled, even if the public isn't happy about it.
And the criminal aspect doesn't even address the civil causes (lawsuit sure to follow in this case).
Last edited:
News at 5 woman trips bully who broke sons leg, gets death penalty
dnewton3
Staff member
There's a difference between street justice and legal justice. One could argue that Street justice was served; the kid got sick and paid a price.
Legal justice is pending. It's a process; let's not act like the cop did this in a vacuum. The actions of the suspect met criteria which defined a crime. There was probable cause; she was arrested. There will be a prosecutorial assessment; she may or may not be indicted. If she's tried, there will be a jury who will assess the facts as presented for both sides. If she's found guilty, there will be a "reformative" action; as little as time served and some community service, to serious time and fines.
Also, there's no mention of the victim's parents in the story ... how do you know they weren't screaming at the cop "We Want JUSTICE!!!" ? Maybe the cop tried to talk them out of it, or at least de-escalate the situation, and the parents of the sick kid were having none of it?
LIke it or not, the world is very litigious today. There is little room for the middle-ground in many folks eyes. The poker game of life has become an "all in" situation for most people; they can't see compromise. Plus, as I said, this will likely result in a civil suit with punitive damages; that ups the ante also (pun intended).
I marvel how many of you make 1000 assumptions, as if you understand all the nuances of the entire story, from reading a short news clip. And I'll be the first to remind you that news stories are often clipped for content and space, and (at best) 70% accurate most of the time.
Legal justice is pending. It's a process; let's not act like the cop did this in a vacuum. The actions of the suspect met criteria which defined a crime. There was probable cause; she was arrested. There will be a prosecutorial assessment; she may or may not be indicted. If she's tried, there will be a jury who will assess the facts as presented for both sides. If she's found guilty, there will be a "reformative" action; as little as time served and some community service, to serious time and fines.
Also, there's no mention of the victim's parents in the story ... how do you know they weren't screaming at the cop "We Want JUSTICE!!!" ? Maybe the cop tried to talk them out of it, or at least de-escalate the situation, and the parents of the sick kid were having none of it?
LIke it or not, the world is very litigious today. There is little room for the middle-ground in many folks eyes. The poker game of life has become an "all in" situation for most people; they can't see compromise. Plus, as I said, this will likely result in a civil suit with punitive damages; that ups the ante also (pun intended).
I marvel how many of you make 1000 assumptions, as if you understand all the nuances of the entire story, from reading a short news clip. And I'll be the first to remind you that news stories are often clipped for content and space, and (at best) 70% accurate most of the time.
Really? if my son was such a POS that he's stealing stuff from his classmates, I'd thank the mother for teaching him a lesson....
But usually POS kids come from POS parents, so I'm sure they are pressing charges and suing....
Look, let’s face it. It’s not 1951 when I was born. Retribution such as this is simply not going to down as forgiving and anonymously now as it would have then. Mom was guilty of poor judgment, but worse, bad timing. Can’t do that kind of thing .
- Joined
- Jun 2, 2002
- Messages
- 4,204
Many of the issues with our society today are reflected in the comments of this thread. You can delete and "social engineer" all you want but sometimes the truth just hurts. Why wasn't the bully arrested for stealing? Why is it always the victim that takes the brunt of the punishment? We've failed as a society and the comments here tend to reflect the mentality that has led to this failure.
I'll stand by my original response....If you purposefully concoct a drink to harm my child, bully or not, you will not be happy with the response. My Father kicked my ass for anything I did that he didn't like but would never seek revenge on a child, bully or not.
If he caught word of me being anything but polite to others there would be hell to pay.
If I were being bullied he'd send me out to settle it on my own. It's all part of growing up.
Dad would not take kindly if you tried to harm any of his children.
Nor would I.
Take it up with the parents. That's what a grown-up would do.
Thank a person for trying to hurt your kids? POS parent comes to mind.
I think it's likely the child was admitted purely for observation. They probably didn't know what he had ingested. And he was probably discharged the next day having received no treatment, when nothing untoward had happened, and all the bills had been paid.
When I was a kid I suffered the attentions of a bully. My mother said I could fight with him but I wasn't allowed to hurt him. He wouldn't let up until the day I sent him and his wing-man home crying. I pulled off their hats, filled their hoods with snow and pulled their hoods over their heads. Then I pulled off their mitts and pushed them into a snow bank. Take that, and that!
A few years later I beaned the same bully right in the forehead at a range of about 100 feet with a walnut sized rock. He had been spitting on people and throwing stones at a group of us and I got in a lucky/unlucky throw. He ran home crying again. He probably caught hell (for throwing stones) when he got home too. I was a minor hero with my friends for several days. No-one raised a fuss. No-one called the police, and he certainly wasn't admitted to the local hospital.
When he grew up he moved to a major city and later moved his family to a small town "because a city is no place to raise kids". He may have learned a few things about life by then.
When I was a kid I suffered the attentions of a bully. My mother said I could fight with him but I wasn't allowed to hurt him. He wouldn't let up until the day I sent him and his wing-man home crying. I pulled off their hats, filled their hoods with snow and pulled their hoods over their heads. Then I pulled off their mitts and pushed them into a snow bank. Take that, and that!
A few years later I beaned the same bully right in the forehead at a range of about 100 feet with a walnut sized rock. He had been spitting on people and throwing stones at a group of us and I got in a lucky/unlucky throw. He ran home crying again. He probably caught hell (for throwing stones) when he got home too. I was a minor hero with my friends for several days. No-one raised a fuss. No-one called the police, and he certainly wasn't admitted to the local hospital.
When he grew up he moved to a major city and later moved his family to a small town "because a city is no place to raise kids". He may have learned a few things about life by then.
- Joined
- Mar 8, 2024
- Messages
- 31
That's like going in to a convenience store with your finger inside your
coat pocket making them think you have a gun... you'll still get arrested.
That's up to a jury to decide.
- Joined
- Mar 8, 2024
- Messages
- 31
Nothing like swiping people's lunch from the company refrigerator in the break room at work!
But we do not know if the bully took the drink or it was offered to him at the time.
"Hospitalized" means nothing. He was taken to the hospital - maybe this "charter school" didn't have a nurse. What was the outcome of the "observation"? No data provided.
The drink was not toxic whatsoever if made as described - it was a better Gatorade - like a Pedialyte.
Hopefully the judge will hear the case and toss it.
________________________________________
Possibility #2 The mother was lying and actually put automotive antifreeze in the drink; Highy Toxic.
Then absolutely Arrest, Jail, and conviction is warranted in such a case.
Hopefully there is a follow up report of this incident.