It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

Dad Arrested for Taking Daughter’s Phone as Punishment.

page: 2
13
<< 1    3  4 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Jan, 28 2016 @ 04:57 PM
link   

originally posted by: ketsuko
a reply to: Annee

If two parents are working together in the best interests of their kids, then why are they divorced?



I can answer that. Because often one of the parents is a complete (insert something awful) and separation is better than staying together.
I speak from experience, and my two kids (now adults) agreed.




posted on Jan, 28 2016 @ 05:03 PM
link   

originally posted by: ketsuko
a reply to: Annee

If two parents are working together in the best interests of their kids, then why are they divorced?

Because sometimes that's in the best interests of the kids, as well as the parents. Stupid question.



posted on Jan, 28 2016 @ 05:07 PM
link   
What a fantastic lesson in conflict resolution for their daughter!

/sarcasm



posted on Jan, 28 2016 @ 05:21 PM
link   
a reply to: gladtobehere

Primitive Creatures.



posted on Jan, 28 2016 @ 05:22 PM
link   
a reply to: ketsuko


What does anyone want to bet he is still paying child support and that part of that went to help pay for the phone everyone here is claiming mama paid for?


Don't be that way. Come on. Child support is used to support the child, including junk like paying the power bill, and buying things the child needs. Would you feel the same if he had kept her gym shoes?

I once had a mother (client) who spent the support check for new school clothes. Child went to visit Dad for a week and came home without them. Said her Dad said she had to leave them at his house, since HIS money had bought them, leaving her nothing to wear to school that week, but her old clothes.

It's petty and vindictive. Using the child as a pawn in the ongoing power struggle game. He wasn't addressing discipline. He was trying to punish the mother for God knows what. Surely you can see that.

eta: or maybe he just wanted a new cell phone.

edit on 1/28/2016 by ladyinwaiting because: (no reason given)



posted on Jan, 28 2016 @ 05:43 PM
link   
Nm
edit on 28-1-2016 by Annee because: (no reason given)



posted on Jan, 28 2016 @ 05:45 PM
link   
Nm



posted on Jan, 28 2016 @ 06:15 PM
link   
a reply to: gladtobehere

Seems to me that the parents need to work some crap out.

Sad and pathetic story in my opinion.



posted on Jan, 28 2016 @ 06:22 PM
link   
The Dad stole the phone. He chose to steal the phone multiple times.

When he took it from his daughter, that was punishment. When he refused to return it to the mother, that was stealing. When he decided not to return it and to take it to court, that was legally stealing.

He sounds like the daughter is better off without him. I hope he enjoys his 5 mins of fame caused by his poor choices. One of which caused him to again choose no contact with his child. Great choices this man makes.



posted on Jan, 28 2016 @ 06:40 PM
link   

originally posted by: MagesticEsoteric
a reply to: gladtobehere

Seems to me that the parents need to work some crap out.

Sad and pathetic story in my opinion.



I completely agree. This obviously was an extreme miscommunication of judgement. It is unfortunate. I realize both parents believed they were in the right. They could not compromise and lost track of the real issue at hand. Their daughter was obviously abusing her phone privileges. Instead they focused on the competition of 'who is the better parent' and began an ego competition.
Divorce is difficult, and it strains personal egos. After wasting tax payers money, this judge should have made this couple and daughter go to counseling to learn how to communicate better, otherwise it was a complete waste of everyone's time and may result in a waste of future conflicts.
edit on 1 28 2016 by CynConcepts because: (no reason given)



posted on Jan, 28 2016 @ 06:45 PM
link   
I'm PRETTY SURE (could be wrong) that none of them TECHNICALLY "own" the phone... I think it's in Apple's terms and conditions of use that it belongs to them, and if you don't like it, don't use it.

That being said, I think he SHOULD have returned the phone when prompted to. HE DIDN'T own it.

I'm not even upset the cops came to his place to get the phone back, as that is what I would expect to happen if I requested it, but from what I gather from the news, police supposedly don't have the time to inconvenience themselves with small stuff like this... THAT makes me question whether the Mom's husband pulled some strings that the general public doesn't usually have access to.

I wonder what the "lack of evidence" was all about... The fact that he was in possession of the phone wasn't disputed, was it? If this is going to be used for precedent, what's the logic behind it?

To everyone who said he should've punished her another way, what do you suggest? Imprisonment? (Sarcasm.) He could take away property or privilege, but how much would that teach the girl when that lesson would be cancelled out by the mom as soon as the girl went home... Sure, he could lay down the rules for his house for the future, but then wouldn't the daughter choose not to go there, anyways? At least this way, the guy was given a voice, or soapbox, before getting the same outcome, for the price of the lawyer and a night in jail.

Edit:

If "better communication" could've resolved this, then by all means, that would've been the best course of action, but if that's ALL the problem was, I don't think it would've gotten as far as it did...

Also, I wonder what was in the text... If it was SUPER inappropriate, then the Mom could've been on the hook for claiming ownership, so I'm guessing it wasn't. If it wasn't, then the father probably overstepped his bounds, especially if he doesn't have custody (which I don't remember them specifying, but I'm guessing he didn't.)
edit on 1/28/2016 by japhrimu because: (no reason given)



posted on Jan, 28 2016 @ 07:06 PM
link   

originally posted by: Benevolent Heretic
a reply to: WeDemBoyz

I agree completely. The phone wasn't his. He took it. That's theft. He should have thought a little more about how to punish his daughter and remain within the law.


So... Let's tie up the courts over a $450.00 (tops) phone that the kid was almost certainly going to get back at some point anyway.

The whole scenario is frivolous, wasteful and stupid. It sounds like a petty grudge-match between the parents that is just wasting time and money for everyone else. I'm glad that they tossed it and I wish mom could be charged with all of the court fees for this foolishness.



posted on Jan, 28 2016 @ 07:32 PM
link   
I can't believe the idiots saying the father was in the wrong and stole something blah blah.

The report states the girl was using the phone for no good. Sexting probably, as it seams to be a common thing these days. Its doesn't matter where the phone came from, there is a much larger issue here. The mother was probably to stupid to protect her daughter.

I was nearly arrested for simply telling some young punk to stay away from my daughter. It seams society has disarmed us parents from protecting their own children. But it won't stop me, my children are too precious.



posted on Jan, 28 2016 @ 07:33 PM
link   
Incidents where a LEO starts/pushes/is in any way involved with charges or actions against someone that involves relatives or lovers should result in immediate decertification.

I bet you a coke that baby's momma lover was the torch bearer for the whole thing, up to and including pushing for prosecution of a trivial charge.

On top of that, unless it's pretty standard to bring something this petty to trial in Dallas County, the prosecutor ought to be censured for it. I've had phones stolen and told the cops where the damned thing was and they didn't bother to even show up. But that's Kern County. Maybe in Dallas County it's a big deal. Or maybe only when cop's bed buddy is involved. A 2AM arrest for a cell phone months after the fact? Why not call out a few K9 and SWAT teams and really show the guy who's boss, eh?



posted on Jan, 28 2016 @ 08:15 PM
link   

originally posted by: Benevolent Heretic
a reply to: WeDemBoyz

I agree completely. The phone wasn't his. He took it. That's theft. He should have thought a little more about how to punish his daughter and remain within the law.


He did. Hence the result of the trial.



posted on Jan, 28 2016 @ 09:19 PM
link   
If it was not his property then it is theft. Simple case.



posted on Jan, 28 2016 @ 09:53 PM
link   

originally posted by: WeDemBoyz
a reply to: gladtobehere

If the mother paid for the phone, then the mother owns the phone ...not the daughter, not the father. If, at the mother's request, the father did not return the phone to the legal owner of the phone (the mother), then that is absolutely theft.

However, I do agree with the father's actions and am glad to see that he took this to trial and got the case tossed.


There is a saying we have here.

There is the letter of the law and then there is the spirit of the law.

So yeah technically your right. But come on lets use some common sense.



posted on Jan, 28 2016 @ 10:44 PM
link   
In looking at the article, it doesn't say that the couple was divorced. I suspect it may have been a boyfriend/girlfriend or baby-momma/baby-daddy situation.

Just wanted to offer that observation.

-dex



posted on Jan, 28 2016 @ 11:37 PM
link   
One of my kids was caught on video stealing from another kid at school, so I took his PS2 and smashed it front of him, and I'd do it again.

You don't learn humility from being coddled and spoiled, and either you can parent-up and teach it to your children, or society will damned sure do it for you. Anybody bother to find out what kind of 'monkey business' the 15 year old girl was up to before they decided to demonize this father, for all we know he might have been trying to save her ass from a teen pregnancy or a drug addiction.

How does this crap make the news anyway? Oh yeah, we're empowering 15 year olds now. Good luck with that America lol.
Please discipline your children, the rest of us have to live with your offspring.



posted on Jan, 28 2016 @ 11:37 PM
link   

originally posted by: WeDemBoyz
a reply to: gladtobehere

If the mother paid for the phone, then the mother owns the phone ...not the daughter, not the father.

Actually once it is given as a gift who paid no longer matters. It was the daughter's phone.



new topics

top topics



 
13
<< 1    3  4 >>

log in

join