National, Regional and Local News

[ponchi101]

Too bad. It would have been so good to be able to charge them with something else.

[ti-amie]

Too bad. It would have been so good to be able to charge them with something else.

I think their lawyer told them just that ponchi. What are their chances of bail now though?

[ti-amie]

[dmforever]

So wait. The school also saw the unaltered drawing from the teacher's cell phone pic. (Excellent quick thinking on the teacher's part). The school brought the shooter into the office to talk with his parents and presumably the principal or other staff member. He had a backpack. But no one asked him to open his backpack and empty its contents? Am I missing something?

And yes, don't you usually arrest people before you announce that they are going to be charged?

IF this weren't so horrible, it would be funny. Please tell me I'm missing something.

Kevin

[ti-amie]

So wait. The school also saw the unaltered drawing from the teacher's cell phone pic. (Excellent quick thinking on the teacher's part). The school brought the shooter into the office to talk with his parents and presumably the principal or other staff member. He had a backpack. But no one asked him to open his backpack and empty its contents? Am I missing something?

And yes, don't you usually arrest people before you announce that they are going to be charged?

IF this weren't so horrible, it would be funny. Please tell me I'm missing something.

Kevin

We can't lie Kevin. You didn't miss a thing.

[ti-amie]

Her text to her son is shady as all get out.

[JazzNU]

And yes, don't you usually arrest people before you announce that they are going to be charged?

Kevin

The way it was done here is done pretty common. Not all the time or every day, but it's also not rare. The reason they'd likely do it in this case was that they already had counsel, the "we'll turn ourselves in" is an agreement thru the attorney and made in good faith with an officer of the law. It usually doesn't go like this because people aren't usually dumb enough to think it'll work out for them, they basically know it'll go about how it's going, where it's highly likely they're gonna get extra charges for this, and if they crossed state lines, it'll be federal charges. Once you say you're gonna turn yourself in, you do.

That being said, I know nothing about the parents background, if either have a record, etc. At the very least, even if this was the agreement, they could've had officers watching them to make sure they didn't flee like this.

But an important caveat, yes there was an idea that the parents would be charged and it was well known. But no one knew the charges were going to be for manslaughter. Parents are rarely ever charged in cases like this, let alone for murder. Just about everyone was thinking some lesser crime because we didn't know all the reckless things they'd done to not stop their kid until today. Don't think the prosecutor knew yesterday that they'd have enough to charge them with this serious of a crime.

Attorney is playing a dangerous game lying the way they are. It's a bold strategy, but they shouldn't be surprised if their career goes off the rails as a result.

[ponchi101]

... The school brought the shooter into the office to talk with his parents and presumably the principal or other staff member. He had a backpack. But no one asked him to open his backpack and empty its contents? Am I missing something?

And yes, don't you usually arrest people before you announce that they are going to be charged?

IF this weren't so horrible, it would be funny. Please tell me I'm missing something.

Kevin

American law and fear of invasion of privacy, and then a lawsuit?
(I am also puzzled).

[Deuce]

I do not think the kid should be charged as an adult - because he is not an adult. Charging kids as adults within the same legal system which does not allow them to vote, to drink, to work as strippers, etc. is highly hypocritical. On the one hand, the system is saying that people under, say, 18 years of age do not possess the experience and maturity to make conscious, well thought out decisions, and on the other hand, the very same system is saying that people under 18 DO possess the experience and maturity to make conscious, well thought out decisions.
I guarantee that all of us were very different at 15 years old than we are now - or than we were 10 years after we were 15. Maturity and experience are evolutionary elements which we gain with time.

The kid should be punished, because what he did was tragic. But I have known enough troubled kids to know that this was much more of a 'cry for help' by this kid than anything else. That may sound cliché - and I really don't like clichés, and I use them as little as possible - but in this case, I firmly believe it holds true. This kid obviously wasn't getting the help he needed from his parents - and he wasn't going to be getting help from them at any future point, either. It looks like the school wasn't of any help to him, either. Realizing all of this, and not being mature or experienced enough to know where he could get help, he did something to make it obvious to everyone that he needs help. In his adolescent mind, he did not differentiate between getting help and being punished. Sometimes, to desperate people, punishment is a sign that someone at least cares enough to punish you. Yes, it's complicated...
There are reports that he was also bullied - which leaves kids even less trusting of others, of course. And that factored into it, as well. If you don't trust others - because they've proven to not be worthy of trust - you have nowhere to go for help.
He should face the justice system as a 15 year old teenager - because that's what he is. A suitable punishment would then come. At the same time, every attempt possible should be made to help him, and to salvage the rest of his life.

As for his parents, they should be charged with parental negligence resulting in death. If that is not an official charge available in that jurisdiction, it certainly should be. And the punishment should be greater to the parents than it is to the child - because the child is a product of his parents. The child would not have done what he did had he received proper nurturing and parenting. And so the punishment to the parents should reflect that, and be severe.
That said, the parents in this case are very, very likely the products of the neglect of their own parents. If I've learned anything while working in this field, it is that these things are cyclical within families. That's why external help is almost always needed to stop the unhealthy cycle.
However, this kid's parents have lived long enough as adults to possess the experience - if not the maturity, owing to their own troubled upbringing - to have had several opportunities to correct their parental behaviour, but had not done so. Therefore, severe punishment for the parents is warranted.

[dmforever]

... The school brought the shooter into the office to talk with his parents and presumably the principal or other staff member. He had a backpack. But no one asked him to open his backpack and empty its contents? Am I missing something?

And yes, don't you usually arrest people before you announce that they are going to be charged?

IF this weren't so horrible, it would be funny. Please tell me I'm missing something.

Kevin

American law and fear of invasion of privacy, and then a lawsuit?
(I am also puzzled).

I know why now. The school didn't know that the parents had bought a gun for him, so they didn't have any reason to think he had a gun, other than the google search for ammo. But the parents knew. That's one of the reasons why they are going to be charged. They knew they had bought him a gun but the didn't tell anyone or even think to look at home.

As for searching the backpack, I don't know if they can order him to show what's there, but they could have certainly asked him if he would show them what was inside. His parents could have easily just asked him to open up the backpack, and if he had said no, they could have then taken appropriate action. And many schools have metal detectors now and locker and backpack searches. I don't know if that's state law or county law.

But I really see now why the parents are being charged. They knew he had a gun, they were told he was looking for ammo, they saw pictures of the drawing, and they did squat. I don't have words.

Kevin

[skatingfan]

Locker searches are legal because the locker belongs to the school, and not the student, so if the school gives permission the search can proceed.

[JazzNU]

[ti-amie]

[ponchi101]

Sure. All true.
But it always cuts both ways. I have a very good friend, formerly in the industry, that used to say "Dead men don't need money", when we would get an offer to go to Ethiopia, or Iraq, or some other hell hole where our lives would be in danger.
I would tell him "But live men do", because I always felt that it was not a total picture of the reality of income.
Sure, life is short. And it certainly feels like it is a lot shorter when you don't have an income.

[ti-amie]

If you look to the right you can see smaller tornadoes.





Rand Paul, noted "Libertarian", to POTUS today. He's voted against everything that would help those affected by this horror.





Everything they do is performative.