Subject:
|
Re: Is this an overreaction and a violation of rights?
|
Newsgroups:
|
lugnet.off-topic.debate
|
Date:
|
Mon, 23 Sep 2002 12:18:08 GMT
|
Viewed:
|
334 times
|
| |
|
|
In lugnet.off-topic.debate, Frank Filz writes:
> Christopher Weeks wrote:
> > Like what? Am I missing a bigger trend?
>
> The Medical Students in Florida...
> The Isamic leader
OK, so did you just use those two as examples of the hundreds, or is that
all you've got? I'm not trying to be trite about this, but I think you
could find more than two civil rights abuses in a year on any given year
since you've been alive. I'm just not sure that you're not being paranoid
about the role that our recent difficulties have played in our overall
arrest treatment. The several examples of the civil rights of Arabs in the
US being trampled are tragic indeed -- and certainly linked to the 9/11/01
incident, but I'm not sure that:
> We are clearly reacting to these cases...differently because of
> all that has gone on recently.
is true. I just don't see how you can say it.
> My question is can you REALLY tell from the video (which I haven't seen
> - maybe it is more damning)? What are the true circumstances.
My idiot coworkers (who watch TV, and have seen it) are telling jokes about
how inappropriate the lady was. You can apparently see the child's head
"juking and jiving around" as she's being punched. They all seem to approve
of physical violence as a disciplinary tool and yet still think this lady
was over the top. Further, she said in an interview that "she remembered
pulling her daughter's pigtails, slapping her with an open hand, and
knocking her on her forehead, but denied punching the girl" contrary to the
video evidence.
> All I know
> is that videos can look an awful lot more sinister than first
> appearances show.
I wonder. Maybe it's just that we can't trick ourselves into thinking it's
just not that bad when it's laid out starkly before our eyes. I like video
evidence.
> I believe our standards of evidence have in the past
> required more than just video evidence. And what value is the
> confession?
If for whatever legal reasons, video evidence is considered unreliable or at
least insufficient, then I suppose there are probably reasons. But that
doesn't make it not be probable cause or whatever. And the confession
wasn't beaten out of her, so what's your problem with it?
> As far as the sister, my question is what is the belief that she knows
> something? If she was in the car, then she is a potential witness, and
> perhaps might have something to show. On the other hand, if she was, her
> non-cooperation might be an unwillingness to supply information which
> would be misinterpreted.
She witnessed child abuse and did nothing to intervene, nor to help the
authorities when they were seeking the mom. I think she has a
responsibility to comply, and if she opts out (and I can empathize with that
decision) then it's reasonable to expect punishment.
> I say that there is a serious chance of misinterpretation here, and
> without any other evidence, an arrest is extremely disturbing. If you
> show me damage consistent with a history of abuse (if she was really
> punching the child, and this was anything other than a one-time loss of
> cool which did no permanent damage [remember, the child has been
> examined and shows no permanent damage], then a complete examination of
> the child should turn something up).
That's a crock of hooey. How bad does abuse have to be before you're
willing to intervene? You're basically saying that it has to be so bad that
no amount of healing can mask it's presense, or it doesn't count. I refuse
to live in a world where parents are allowed to do any amount of damage as
long as it can heal.
And anyway, the real damage that abuse causes is to the psyche. How is the
medical examiner going to find that?
> I just find this incident very disturbing as it seems to be another case
> of jumping to conclusions with limited evidence. No matter what comes
> out of it, this woman's life is permanently trashed, and even if she if
> found completely innocent, has probably lost her children.
That's not how it seems. She doesn't have _any_ standing at all to lose, so
there's no biggie there. She has already kept her boys, and I suspect that
her daughter will be returned to her.
> I think
> children need to be protected without removing them at the slightest
> rumor that their parents are not perfect, counter to the trend I see.
I hope you're kidding. Or I hope it's a kind of inverse macho flash. Or
something. I don't even know how to respond to this. Your comment is
obviously a disingenuous association between this incident (maybe I should
be calling it a barbaric tragedy to counter your cavalier dismisal) and the
ludicrous and certainly fake stories that we all hear about CPS destroying
the lives of perfect families on the words of disgruntled neighbors.
> I have another reason for being EXTREMELY worried about how we handle
> child abuse cases. I volunteer as a youth advisor.
I'm sorry that you feel afraid. I don't think you should. As I see it,
it's kind of like fear of sharks. When someone is mauled by a shark, it's
big news and everyone remembers it for years. But the fact remains that
almost no one is mauled by sharks. There were five shark deaths reported
world wide in 2001. (That's a lot of safe ocean bathers, by my count.)
> I sometimes think I'm insane
I'm starting to wonder too ;-) But seriously, how did you mean this?
Insane for continuing to work with kids? I'd say insane (as in failing to
do the math and thus worrying irrationally) for being overly concerned about
a trivial risk.
> Believe me, if this particular woman is guilty, I want to make sure
> appropriate action is taken, but I want to convict her on solid
> evidence, not ONLY video camera footage from one angle.
But an arrest is not a conviction right? I mean, isn't it normal to arrest
on a small amount of real evidence so that society will be safe while more
evidence is gathered? What are you suggesting as an alternate method?
> What if the "punch" wasn't really a punch, but was the woman just
> clenching her fist trying to control her anger?
Then she can tell that to the police and/or the court. And she'll get off.
I clench my fist as an anger management tool. No one ever claimed that I
was punching anyone.
> While I completely
> disagree with slapping children, our culture has not yet chosen to make
> it by itself a crime, in fact, many are strongly in favor of slapping
> returning to use in the schools. I don't think it's right to destroy
> someone's life because they are operating under a well established set
> of rules and we decide to change them. I do want to change the rules
> though, but lets not expect people to overnight suddenly understand the
> new rules.
Reasonable people have already abandoned physical violence as a mode of
coercion. Why shouldn't they comply overnight? How long should we have
given slave owners to free there chattel after the emancipation
proclamation? Screw that. Wrong is wrong.
> To be honest, I was hoping someone would post more information. Right
> now, what I see is a gross overreaction. Give me more evidence.
I'm willing to hear more evidence, but what I see is clearly damning.
> Hmm, the link now points to a different article I read. It now indicates
> the sister was visible on the tape (I don't remember seeing that
> before).
That was on the radio piece that I heard. I really do think that you're
sympathizing with the perpatrator, not the victim.
Chris
|
|
Message has 1 Reply:
Message is in Reply To:
62 Messages in This Thread:
 
 
 
- Entire Thread on One Page:
- Nested:
All | Brief | Compact | Dots
Linear:
All | Brief | Compact
This Message and its Replies on One Page:
- Nested:
All | Brief | Compact | Dots
Linear:
All | Brief | Compact
|
|
|
|
