Kindergarten student arrested for tantrum

[cafe]

News story: (http://www.wftv.com/news/11455199/detail.html) The school called the police who arrested a six year old for throwing a temper tantrum. She was cuffed, transported in a cruiser, and booked on felony charges.

Um. Yeah . . .

[slacker]

I can't help but think that race played a factor in the decision, because that is just too bizarre.

[Dark Razor]

Can they actually charge a child with a crime? That seems ridiculous to me especially for acting out in class, unbelievable.

[outmywindow]

Can they actually charge a child with a crime?

In general, sure. In this case, however, it does seem strange.

[sandwich]

The cops better stake out every grocery store and Wal*Mart.

[Meliora]

The cops trying to restain her is one thing, but booking her into the jail with a felony charge? Absurd...

[Dark Razor]

In general, sure. In this case, however, it does seem strange.

Ah I see, in my country you can only be charged with a crime if you're at least 14 years old, so this seems a little strange to me.

Maybe the teacher should just have slapped her, that would probably have resolved things more smoothly, but uhh.. wait.. slapping kids is not ok, better throw them into jail.

[outmywindow]

Ah I see, in my country you can only be charged with a crime if you're at least 14 years old, so this seems a little strange to me.


I realize this question is a direct result of American culture, but if a person under 14 commits murder, who is charged with the crime? The parents?

We have certain punishments which are reserved for adults, but in certain cases (if the perpetrator is nearly 18 and the crime is particularly gruesome) a minor can be "tried as an adult," which means that they can be sentenced with adult punishments if found guilty.

[Jivinjeffjones]

I realize this question is a direct result of American culture, but if a person under 14 commits murder, who is charged with the crime? The parents?

No one. You just spend 5 years debating nature vs nurture.

[cafe]

Maybe they tried to call her family and couldn't reach them, but I would think that if a child is out of control, that calling family would be something you'd do before calling the police.

Myself, I'd rather they paddled my kid than arrest them and make them fear/hate cops for the rest of their life.

However, I think tantrums are just par for the course with kids that age and it shouldn't be too far out there to be able to handle it without handcuffs, etc. Usually, if you don't give a kid attention for it and you absolutely do not give them what they want, they stop doing it.

[outmywindow]

No one. You just spend 5 years debating nature vs nurture.

Do you have problems with the families of victims feeling that their dead relative didn't recieve the justice they deserved (to use an Americanism)?

[Jivinjeffjones]

Do you have problems with the families of victims feeling that their dead relative didn't recieve the justice they deserved (to use an Americanism)?

Yeah. We don't even have the death penalty, so of course there will be dissatisfaction. It isn't really hyped up that much by the media though. We have a guy who shot 40+ people in jail atm. You only hear about him when he tries to swallow a rolled-up tube of toothpaste to kill himself.

[Dark Razor]

I realize this question is a direct result of American culture, but if a person under 14 commits murder, who is charged with the crime? The parents?

We have certain punishments which are reserved for adults, but in certain cases (if the perpetrator is nearly 18 and the crime is particularly gruesome) a minor can be "tried as an adult," which means that they can be sentenced with adult punishments if found guilty.

I see, I didnt mean to say that it was "bad", it's just unusual to me, generally if a person under 14 commits a crime or damages someones' property it is considered the parent's fault, since they neglected their responsibility to observe their children. They are not actually charged with the crime of course, but often have to pay compensation for the damage.
And a person under 14 commiting murder, I am not even sure if that has ever happend, the child would probably be put into a mental institution or some other type of therapy. Once you're between 14 and 18 the maximum penalty is 10 years in prison, since it is generally assumed that someone so young should be given a second chance.

And at school, well teachers need to be given appropriate authority to discipline their students, which does not necessarily have to involve corporal punishment, though this might depend on the individual students, but there should not be a need for the police to become involved, but I realize this might differ with different cultures.


We have a guy who shot 40+ people in jail atm. You only hear about him when he tries to swallow a rolled-up tube of toothpaste to kill himself.
:rofl:

[LongSilence]

Seeing as it happened at school- I'd like to have a bit more in-depth information about whether the girl was really being a huge handful, the teacher felt inhibited by modern laws regarding interaction between teachers and pupils or whether the teacher was really just scared and rather crap at reprimanding and controlling children when they are behaving inappropriately.

Also, if it had happened a few days later I'd imagine that the guys working in the police station must have been sure that the cops bringing the kid in were just playing an April's fools.

[INThoughtPolice]

This came up after I watched the video about the arrest. http://www.wftv.com/video/11587632/index.html

[Hamro]

Pushing towards police state

[rainfall]

-So when'd ju first get locked up in da joint, maan?
-I was six, yo.
-No way, dat's sum bullshit right there, dog.
-No, seriously, man, six years old, I ain't shittin ya.

[cafe]

-So when'd ju first get locked up in da joint, maan?
-I was six, yo.
-No way, dat's sum bullshit right there, dog.
-No, seriously, man, six years old, I ain't shittin ya.
:rofl:

[omnirook]

Ever see the episode of "The Andy Griffith Show" where Andy goes to Mount Pilate for a one day sheriffs' conference, leaving Barney Fife as acting Sheriff?

Andy comes home that evening to find that Barney has locked up the whole town, including Aunt Bea and Andy's 8 year-old son, Opie. Aunt Bea was arrested for "incitement to riot" because she told Barney not to interrupt her while she was speaking. One 80 year-old man was arrested because he got into his usual argument w/his life-long friend while playing checkers and tipped the checker board, sending a few checkers flying: someone could have been blinded by a checker, after all - a reckless endangerment charge!

Point is, fact is, the average cop is a fairly stupid individual - only somebody w/a level of intelligence that is at least slightly below average would ever become a cop - and the average person is virtually an imbecile. So, this is what happens when power is handed to the police. This was why our Founders and the early Supreme Courts were in favor of putting the police under the control of civilians and limiting police powers to limit the abuse of the public. Time and again - as is only natural! - the police have sought to justify an expansion of their power. Thankfully, they have usually been denied more power. But now we have some of the stupidest people on the planet in oversight positions, and we are suffering and will continue to suffer until the courts or legislators wake up and slap down the police and put them back into their place.

[Madrigal]

Handcuffs don't fit on kids. They're too big. That's what the policeman that came to my school to talk about safety told us.

[cafe]

Handcuffs don't fit on kids. They're too big. That's what the policeman that came to my school to talk about safety told us.They supposedly put them on her upper arms.

[MacGuffin]

Thank God, these little fuckers have gotten away with shit for too long.

[digesthisickness]

it's definitely a switch from how it has been for so long. where all an adult has to do is punish a child and if it hurts their feelings, the kid gets revenge by calling the law and claiming "abuse!"

[rainfall]

Ever see the episode of "The Andy Griffith Show" where Andy goes to Mount Pilate for a one day sheriffs' conference, leaving Barney Fife as acting Sheriff?

Andy comes home that evening to find that Barney has locked up the whole town, including Aunt Bea and Andy's 8 year-old son, Opie. Aunt Bea was arrested for "incitement to riot" because she told Barney not to interrupt her while she was speaking. One 80 year-old man was arrested because he got into his usual argument w/his life-long friend while playing checkers and tipped the checker board, sending a few checkers flying: someone could have been blinded by a checker, after all - a reckless endangerment charge!

Point is, fact is, the average cop is a fairly stupid individual - only somebody w/a level of intelligence that is at least slightly below average would ever become a cop - and the average person is virtually an imbecile. So, this is what happens when power is handed to the police. This was why our Founders and the early Supreme Courts were in favor of putting the police under the control of civilians and limiting police powers to limit the abuse of the public. Time and again - as is only natural! - the police have sought to justify an expansion of their power. Thankfully, they have usually been denied more power. But now we have some of the stupidest people on the planet in oversight positions, and we are suffering and will continue to suffer until the courts or legislators wake up and slap down the police and put them back into their place.

I was considering being a cop.

It would certainly make it easier to get away with crimes.

[ataronchronon]

When I saw the website, I thought it said "wtf tv", I thought it was appropriate, given the nature of the story.

I know the story sounds ridiculous, but I think you need to take it in the proper context. We currently live in a culture that tries to punish everyone with the law and no admiration is given to anyone who tries to take care of things on their own. If a teacher did try to restrain the kid, it would be that teacher finding him or herself in the handcuffs. I can't imagine the charge sticking though, but some people take the law VERY seriously.

[booyalab]

my mom babysat a few neighbor kids when I was about 13. She seriously considered calling the cops a few times. These kids were fucking demented around her, at least two demonic tantrums a day. But either they were better behaved around their father or he spoiled them rotten, because he always had the same reaction as the mother in this article whenever my mom told him her version of how they had behaved. There was never a possibility in his mind that they could have acted any less than perfect angels.

edit: I don't know what happened with this girl, obviously. I'm just saying that there are some kids out there that deserve to be arrested.

[zhang_bob]

You know a government is on it's last legs when even the school children rebel. I think she was just protesting about George W. Bush's "no child left behind" law, as she did not like doing reading and maths tests each year. Who says children these day don't like politics ? ;)

I think if what people are saying above about the teachers not wanting to restrain children, because they get may get sued, need to be sorted out as the police have better things to do. It's not like she even had a full set of teeth or anything.

[Carebear]

I'm just saying that there are some kids out there that deserve to be arrested.

If anything it should be their parents who deserve to get arrested, as six-year-olds are bound to act like they're conditioned to do by their parents. They don't throw tantrums like that if they haven't experienced that such tantrums are the most effective way of getting what they want. (That or they have some major ADHD thing going on, in which case they need professional help.)

(But sure, I've wanted to both call the cops and bash their heads in from time to time working as a substitute teacher, so if that's the kind of 'deserve' you're talking about, I'm with you.)

Edit: "their" in the sentence above refers to the six-year-olds, not the cops.

[omnirook]

It's better in this world to have a very short memory - as most people do, except when it comes to their own money. It's a curse to have a long memory, especially if one's memory is an INTP memory, one that sees patterns, whether there are patterns.

I'm particularly sensitive to perceiving patterns when it comes to what I consider propaganda. How many cop shows had it where the police and the DA were being thwarted by "technicalities," where "stupid" judges let evil bastards go because of some "tiny" flaw in the case? Time and again, the audience were set up by being equipped in advance w/a behind-the-scenes look at the "suspect" actually committing the crime, and usually it was one of those crimes that causes indignation on the parts of Joe and Joanne Public. This way, their sympathies were already lined up w/the police before the judge invoked the Constitution.

The above format was virtually standard for many tv seasons during the 60's, 70's, and 80's. Everyone was going about ranting about "technicalities" - the dismissive label that had been slapped on our Constitutional rights!

There was also a long period of adding the twist of a juvenile offender getting away w/heinous crimes just because of statutory age - but the audience knew that the punk was a bad seed and should be fried. This bit even got the "real news" treatment on shit shows like "60 Minutes."

Rarely was the other side shown - the thousands and thousands of cases where the police simply rounded up the "usual suspects" and found one whose alibi was leaky and promptly turned him over to the DA for a quick railroading w/the help of PD's understaffed, underfunded, overworked attornies. Today's DNA evidence and the hardwon right to introduce fresh evidence in old cases is forcing the release after decades behind bars of men and women who were - INNOCENT.

Point is, if the public's vigilance had not been eaten away by corrosive propaganda, something like this would have been tossed from the courts by arraignment time. The police wouldn't have done it in the first place - they would have been laughing stocks before the child got to the station house. The DA would never want to face a judge w/such bullshit. "Get out of my court! Get out of my court!"

But, no - we live in a madhouse. The criminalization of childish behavior in children is well underway. Ritalin stock keeps rising, and we're arresting naughty children whose bottoms are barely recovered from diaper rash.

[hereandnow]

It's better in this world to have a very short memory - as most people do, except when it comes to their own money. It's a curse to have a long memory, especially if one's memory is an INTP memory, one that sees patterns, whether there are patterns.

I'm particularly sensitive to perceiving patterns when it comes to what I consider propaganda. How many cop shows had it where the police and the DA were being thwarted by "technicalities," where "stupid" judges let evil bastards go because of some "tiny" flaw in the case? Time and again, the audience were set up by being equipped in advance w/a behind-the-scenes look at the "suspect" actually committing the crime, and usually it was one of those crimes that causes indignation on the parts of Joe and Joanne Public. This way, their sympathies were already lined up w/the police before the judge invoked the Constitution.



Those shows might as well have been produced by a propaganda minister. I used to recoil from then due to the overbearing sense of one side being "right" and the consitutional safeguards regarded as evil. IMO they aren't meant to coax the majority, most of whom are cattle, but those who might offer some form of resistance. The minority sees through it but , alas, is so small as to be insignificant.

Civilizations fail.

[omnirook]

Those shows might as well have been produced by a propaganda minister.

Nah - our "democracy" is too "sophisticated" (read, sneaky) for such ham-handedness. Much better to allow vested interests (read, giant corporations) to buy up all of the media outlets (the recent hacking away at FCC and other market ownership rules has cinched the job) and close out all dissenting voices. Fear of the Internet is just that - fear that somebody might say this or that that strays from the approved line. Hence all the hysteria about "child predators" lurking behind every IP address. Sooner or later, a way to raise enough outrage will be devised to get a "mandate" for draconian regulation. Threatening people's children is a favorite route. Hell, on a slow "news" night, the stations whip out a "Your child's life is in danger because of ..." piece that's been sitting on the sideburner to boost ratings. Eventually, a big move is going to be put on the Internet. It's just too much freedom going on our "free" society!


I used to recoil from then due to the overbearing sense of one side being "right" and the consitutional safeguards regarded as evil. IMO they aren't meant to coax the majority, most of whom are cattle, but those who might offer some form of resistance. The minority sees through it but , alas, is so small as to be insignificant.

Civilizations fail.

Quite right. Absolutely so. Thank you.

[cafe]

Omni, I agree with you about the propaganda. I can't watch Law and Order most of the time without screaming at the TV: "Tell them you want your lawyer and SHUT YOUR MOUTH!!!"

[omnirook]

Omni, I agree with you about the propaganda. I can't watch Law and Order most of the time without screaming at the TV: "Tell them you want your lawyer and SHUT YOUR MOUTH!!!"

That show is particularly effective - at least at portraying the cops and DA's as lovable, respectable, honest, and beyond reproach. You couldn't help but like Jerry Orbach, you just couldn't - yeah, that's the Columbo bit - the confessing to wrap up the story before the credits roll. Sometimes, I expect Jessica Fletcher to pop out and lead the criminal through his/her paces during the confession scenes. Ever notice how in the episodes where there was a dirty cop wrapped up in the crime, the cop was always from some other unit, often one from noplace like Staten Island?

Cop: Good morning!

Harry: I want my lawyer.

Cop: But we haven't arrested you. We just want to talk.

Harry: I want my lawyer.

Cop: Would you like some coffee?

Harry: Yes, black, no sugar - and I want my lawyer.

Cop: Really, you're not even a suspect.

Harry: I want my lawyer.

Cop: Just co-operate! We just want to ask a few questions.

Harry: I want my lawyer.

Cop: You don't need a lawyer if you're not under arrest.

Happy: Need and want are two different things - I want my lawyer ...

Later. After being let go.

Harry: I don't know why they bother. They should know after all these years that I want my lawyer from the minute I see a cop till the minute I get my lawyer. Never, ever speak to the police w/o your lawyer. And they pull that shit all the time, take you in "for just a few questions," refusing to arrest you, so you're not entitled to a public defender. Fuck em. Don't talk w/o a lawyer. Force them to arrest you or let you go. They can't keep you more than 24 hours, anyway. (This was pre "Patriots'" Act.)