Re: CURMUDGEN V RESPOND

More | Report Post

On 3/17/05, v wrote:
> TV i'm ot an attorney. But i
> think your missing the point. Your
> son is not an adult. He is not
> garenteed the same rights under
> the constitution in this
> circumstance. He hasn't reached
> the age of majority. He is still
> your responsability. Compareing
> this to shooting the sheriff, is
> like apples & oranges. Then he
> might be tried as an adult.
>
>
> On 3/17/05, tv wrote:
>> On 3/14/05, v wrote:
>>> TV: Your son got busted for
> not
>>> folowing the rules. I'm not an
>>> attorney, but in this situation
>>> there is no due process. He
> knew
>>> the rules, he broke them three
>>> times. He is paying the price.
> He
>>> is your responsabilty. There
> are
>>> laws against truency. If your
> son
>>> can't learn how to behave now.
>>> Who's fault is it? you blame
> the
>>> courts? The court is going to
>>> blame you! & he'll learn the
> hard
>>> way now before he has to in
> prison
>>> latter. Sociaty dosen't have to
>>> tolerate bad behavior. AND THE
>>> MESSAGE HAS BEEN SENT.
> Apparently
>>> niether of you get it. Sounds
> like
>>> you are condonning this. Maybe
> you
>>> are part of the problem.
>>>
>>> you are partially right v, he
> broke the rules and i have no
>> problem with him being punihed
> for it. but you are wrong about
> due
>> process, he cannot be imprisoned
> for breaking the rules. rules and
>> laws are 2 different things and
> according to our constitution
>> everyone born in the us has the
> right to face their accusers in
>> court. i had no problem with the
> 3 days of oss he was going to get,
>> and i told this to principal.
> but if they want to confine him he
>> must be charged with something,
> and if he is charged he must be
>> given his day in court even if
> it is inevetible he will lose.
> doesnt
>> matter what they think or know
> he has done you cannont be
> confined
>> just because they think it will
> teach you a lesson. theres a
> process
>> and they skipped it. we had a
> initial hearing asked for a lawyer
> and
>> we were denied, i guess he was
> charged for delinquecie but im not
>> sure. either way we were denied
> any defence and arequest for a
>> lawyer. if he was put in det for
> del, then they put the cart before
>> the horse. he should have been
> charged asked to plead guilty or
> not
>> guilty that didnt happen. if
> you walk in to local sheriffs
> office
>> shoot the sheriff in front of
> everyone, you still get the
>> oppertunity to plead your case.
> that is what i have a problem
> with.
>> not the punishment. if they had
> done it the right way i wouldnt be
>> on this chatboard, my son has
> the right to plead his case even
> if
>> hes guilty.
>>> On 3/14/05, tv wrote:
>>>> On 3/14/05, Curmudgeon wrote:
>>>>> Sir v, you're closer than you
>>> thought.
>>>>>
>>>>> The posts piqued my interest,
>>> so I did a little digging. In
>>>>> the OP's home county, there
> is
>>> a cooperative program
>>>>> established by the schools,
>>> juvenile authorities, and the
>>>>> courts.
>>>>>
>>>>> It kicks in when a child has
>>> received a third out-of-school
>>>>> suspension and is, thus,
> facing
>>> expulsion. Rather than
>>>>> letting the little buggers
> run
>>> the streets unsupervised while
>>>>> suspended, they are required
> to
>>> report to the program and
>>>>> spend the days studying,
> doing
>>> community service, and taking
>>>>> appropriate classes on anger
>>> management, life skills, etc.
>>>>>
>>>>> If they fail to report on the
>>> first day of the suspension,
>>>>> they will be picked up and
> held
>>> until they can go before the
>>>>> judge and explain why they
>>> didn't report. It is the
> parents'
>>>>> responsibility to get the
> child
>>> to the program.
>>>>>
>>>>> Amazingly, many of the
> involved
>>> parents complain because its
>>>>> such a "hardship" to deliver
>>> the child to the program and
> pick
>>>>> him up at the end of the day.
>>>>>
>>>>> On 3/14/05, v wrote:
>>>>>> TV: Are you related to
>>> Roosta? I
>>>>>> wouldn't worrie about the
>>> little
>>>>>> buggers. It'll keep them off
>>> the
>>>>>> streets. Their probly headed
>>> for
>>>>>> prison any way.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> On 3/14/05, TV wrote:
>>>>>>> hello reader. in the city
>>> of
>>>>>> wabash in wabash county ind
>>>>>>> ther is an order from local
>>>>>> court that apon 3rd referral
>>>>>>> to out of school suspension
>>> from
>>>>>> principal. that the child
>>>>>>> is to be picked up
>>> immmediatly
>>>>>> and put in detention center
>>>>>>> until next court date. some
>>> of
>>>>>> the offenses that can get a
>>>>>>> refferall are tardys
>>> horseplay
>>>>>> foul language ect. mostly
>>>>>>> descretion of principal.
>>> seems
>>>>>> to me this gives principal
>>>>>>> the power to sentence
>>> children
>>>>>> to jail time without their
>>>>>>> due process. they also make
>>> them
>>>>>> write out a statement of
>>>>>>> guilt to be used against
> them
>>> in
>>>>>> court but they are
>>>>>>> teenagers and dont
> understand
>>>>>> what their doing as far as
>>>>>>> legality, they are told to
>>> just
>>>>>> write the statement and
>>>>>>> they may or may not get
>>>>>> suspended. they are not told
>>> that
>>>>>>> it will be used against
> them
>>> in
>>>>>> court. it seems to me that
>>>>>>> the principal given this
>>> power
>>>>>> should be considered as an
>>>>>>> officer of the court and
> have
>>> to
>>>>>> go by their rules as far
>>>>>>> as interegating a student
> for
>>>>>> info to be solely used
>>>>>>> against them in court. and
> my
>>>>>> question is can a local
>>>>>>> judge issue such a blank
>>> order
>>>>>> legally wouldnt it have to
>>>>>>> be some type of city or
>>> county
>>>>>> ordinance. thnx tv
>>>>>>
>>>> ok gonna try this 1 more time
>>> the juvenile was taken to det
>>>> center on friday he was to
>>> report to day reporting on
> monday
>>>> thats today. we went to court
>>> today he spent the weekend in
> det
>>>> center. this morning in court
> he
>>> was ordered to report to day
>>>> reporting. i told the judge we
>>> wanted a lawyer, he said we
> could
>>>> hire a lawyer and contest it
> but
>>> as far as he was concernd my
>>>> son was to report to day
>>> reporting. we werent given any
>>>> oppertunity to put up a
> defense
>>> of any kind. and my son spent 3
>>>> days in det without being
>>> charged for any crime. so as
> you
>>> can
>>>> see he wasnt sent to det
> center
>>> for not showing up. he was sent
>>>> because of the 3rd referral.
> get
>>> it now and he was also
>>>> sentenced to day reporting.
>>> so you tell me where was the
> due
>>>> process we had 1 court
>>> appearance and it was a
>>>> sentecing. thnx tv
>>>
>