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.

 

Children arrested, DNA tested, interrogated and locked up... for playing in a tree

page: 4
0
<< 1  2  3    5  6 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Aug, 3 2006 @ 07:38 PM
link   

Originally posted by 2manyquestions

Originally posted by 25cents
come on now, nobody is saying it's ok for anyone to hurt another individual. had either of those instances been the case, then by all means, take the iondividual to jail. threatening someone with bodily harm is NOT the same as climbing a tree and stripping a few branches to make a treehouse.

and i doubt they did that much damage to the tree, at 12. living wood can be very hard to break.


It says it right there in the article,.... the kids broke EVERY branch off the tree.


Superintendent Stuart Johnson, operations manager at Halesowen police station, said: 'I support the actions of my officers who responded to complaints from the public about "kids destroying" an ornamental cherry tree by stripping every branch from it, in an area where there have been reports of anti-social behaviour.


So who's telling the truth? The Superintendent who says they stripped every branch from the tree,... or the parents and kids who say they broke a few "loose" branches from the tree? Hmmmm....... I want to see a current photo of this ornamental cherry tree.


things like that are exaggerated all the time. i was told i did $400 worth of damage, and it turned out to only be $150. that's the difference between a felony and a misdemeanor - pretty damned big difference.




posted on Aug, 3 2006 @ 07:58 PM
link   

Originally posted by 25cents
things like that are exaggerated all the time. i was told i did $400 worth of damage, and it turned out to only be $150. that's the difference between a felony and a misdemeanor - pretty damned big difference.


Yet still we have no idea who is the one doing the exaggerating. Are the parents and kids exaggerating by saying the kids broke only a few loose branches, or are the Police exaggerating by saying the kids broke every single branch off the tree? I guess we won't know until we see a photo of the cherry tree before and after the crime was committed.



posted on Aug, 3 2006 @ 08:03 PM
link   
and the likelihood of that happening is almost nil. i still say that the cops were overreacting in a huge way.



posted on Aug, 3 2006 @ 08:45 PM
link   

Originally posted by 2manyquestions

Originally posted by 25cents
things like that are exaggerated all the time. i was told i did $400 worth of damage, and it turned out to only be $150. that's the difference between a felony and a misdemeanor - pretty damned big difference.


Yet still we have no idea who is the one doing the exaggerating. Are the parents and kids exaggerating by saying the kids broke only a few loose branches, or are the Police exaggerating by saying the kids broke every single branch off the tree? I guess we won't know until we see a photo of the cherry tree before and after the crime was committed.


It's a crime to climb trees now? :shk: How can you quantify "Damage to a tree" anyway? It's not like you can repair it and glue back the branches the kids broke off you know.
Sounds like some haters getting their jollies off by opressing the Little people(literally). Or the next likely scenario is this: The kids probably pissed off some wacko tree humpers(3 categories above Tree Hugger which I certainly am). As usually, the majority I've spoken too about this said the kids got what they diserved... has everyone above age 30 forgotten what its like to be a kid anyway?



posted on Aug, 3 2006 @ 09:35 PM
link   
It is happenin all over the U.K. an Nnorthern Ireland: A 11 year old girl from Londonderry was photographed and fingerprinted by officers.




Police turned up at the child's home in the Creggan area after she had allegedly been seen writing graffiti on the city walls.





The girl's mother, Eileen Millar, said officers were guilty of child abuse.

A police spokesperson said they have an obligation to investigate all reports of criminal damage.


Take it We are all now taken a tougher stance when it comes to minors now, I remember when Ii was that age I would not have dared to get caught, if I was doing something I should not be doing
. All this tough stance by the police is going O.T.T.

Link: news.bbc.co.uk...



posted on Aug, 3 2006 @ 09:52 PM
link   
i can't believe how many of you are so willing to accept this sort of behavior on the part of the police; some of you have even gone so far as to condone it.

has this society completely forgotten the meaning of freedom?

even if what the kids were doing was criminal vandalism, which the article seems to counterindicate, there was no reason whatsoever for the police to bring them back to the station. none.

i've been caught red-handed committing a few various misdemeanor offenses in my time, and not one of them has necessitated my being handcuffed, brought downtown, and detained. i'm talking real criminal offenses, not tearing a branch off of a tree in a public area. every time i've dealt with the police in the capacity of a suspect, i've been searched, reprimanded, sometimes even issued a citation, but never forcibly detained.

and here this is, happening to kids, and some of you are saying that not only is this acceptable, it was the right thing to do!

maybe the police should've escorted the kids home and had a word with their parents. maybe they should've given the kids a stern lecture to help them take law enforcement more seriously in the future. but i just can't rationalize such behavior as was actually carried out.

this sort of thing disgusts me... and i imagine those who support the police in this will have a change of heart when it is their children, or themselves, suffering this kind of harrassment.



posted on Aug, 3 2006 @ 10:35 PM
link   

Originally posted by spencerjohnstoneI would be fuming if it was my kids who were involved.


I would also be fuming if my kids were involved.

I would be fuming at my kids for destroying a tree (if the police version of the story is true).



posted on Aug, 4 2006 @ 01:26 AM
link   
Hmm.

Anybody think of explaining to these kids that you don't use living wood - but collect deadfall instead? ...And then send them on their way to enjoy nature actively not passively, but responsibly too?

IMO - sounds like the complaints were exaggerated. Also IMO - taking DNA samples from children? ...Seems authorities are using any excuse to get that stuff these days.

Wonder why?



posted on Aug, 4 2006 @ 05:08 AM
link   
Arresting officers' sense of reality and proportion of what constitutes anti-social or criminal activity would indicate they have their bloody .s up the arses and the IQs of insects.

The sad part is you have people that are of such a level of utter ignorance and complaceny, that they will let this crap keep sliding along all the way to forced labor camps and slavery.

When the government turns from fearing the people, to the people fearing the government....you're screwed.

[edit on 4-8-2006 by Regenmacher]



posted on Aug, 4 2006 @ 06:10 AM
link   
Just another day in Bush's world- the police have been given the power to control everyone- no matter how small the offense. No matter how ridiculous.
Yep- just another day.



posted on Aug, 4 2006 @ 06:12 AM
link   

Originally posted by dgtempe


Just another day in Bush's world- the police have been given the power to control everyone- no matter how small the offense. No matter how ridiculous.
Yep- just another day.


i was unaware that bush controlled the police in britain. it's worse than i thought.



posted on Aug, 4 2006 @ 06:23 AM
link   
I just wanted to make sure you were awake


Substitute "Bush" for "NWO"....and there ya have it.

Just an attempt at being funny.



posted on Aug, 4 2006 @ 06:27 AM
link   
gah, it's too bleedin' late for funny. 430 am and i'm stuck at work. three and a half more hours before i can escape these morons.



posted on Aug, 4 2006 @ 06:32 AM
link   


There are 2 sides to every story;


I believe that's incorrect. There are 3 sides to every story: one side's view, the other side's view and the TRUTH which generally lies in between the two.

I believe the officer overreacted in this case and was using their power in an excessive way. This will not be healthy for the children in the long run. Imagine when you were 12 - were you ever locked in a jail? If you were, has it done you any good?

Take care,
- Nazgarn



posted on Aug, 4 2006 @ 06:55 AM
link   

Originally posted by Regenmacher
The sad part is you have people that are of such a level of utter ignorance and complaceny, that they will let this crap keep sliding along all the way to forced labor camps and slavery.


Nope. The sad part is that people who do not know the facts of a scenario are prepared to criticise the police and predict someting close to the collapse of modern society based on one newspaper article from an organ that is far from unbiased. Futhermore they believe that those who wish to take a rational and considered view of the situation are complacent and ingnorant - thanks for that.

Let's look at this again and consider what is really worrying people.

1. Police responded to multiple complaints from the public reporting significant vandalism. Any problems here at all?

2. Police took 3 kids into custody. This may be overkill but we don't have the facts to support this judgement. Consider this scenario: the kids tried to run off and were abusive when apprehended then refused to give their addresses - still overkill? Or perhaps, when police arrived they found evidence of further vandalism and drug abuse, maybe nothing to do with these kids but the police want to learn more and the kids aren't talking. - Still overkill?

3. Police "hauled" the kids off to the cells - says who? Says the Daily Mail and the kids parents. Perhaps what really happened was the kids were driven half a mile to the local police station where they were interviewed, (as opposed to the Mail's "interrogated") in an interview room, (as opposed to the Mail's "cell") - Still overkill?

4. Police lock the kids up for two hours. No they don't, the article says they were held for "up to two hours", so at a guess, one was held for two hours and the others for what, 15 miuntes, half an hour? We don't know because the Mail doesn't tell us. Why not? Perhaps because it spoils the impact of their story. - Still overkill?

Why were they detained at all? Because the police would only release them to their parents for their own safety as they are all minors and some of the parents were at work and and not immediately available to come and collect them? - Still overkill?

5. They were arrested for playing in a tree. No they weren't, they were arrested for vandalism of public property. - Still overkill? Would you think it was overkill if it had been a tree in your garden?

6. Mouth swabs and DNA tests were performed. Really? sounds like mouth swabs were taken for DNA samples, one procedure only, and probably one standard procedure. So the police are being criticised for following their standard procedures after the arrest of suspected vandals? - Still overkill?

I don't know if any of the scenarios I've speculated on above are true or not and neither does anyone else on here who is eagerly anticipating the apocalyptic breakdown of society - the fact is that this is a non-story.

So, what makes this story newsworthy at all? Strangely, the online edition of the Halesowen News makes no mention of it at all whilst still managing to sqeeze in the breaking news that "A Halesowen school cricket side are bowled over after winning a prestigious school competition. " www.halesowennews.co.uk...
So what made the parents talk to the Daily Mail? Any chance of money being involved anywhere in the equation?

Expect news of the compensation claims to be grabbing the .lines any time soon.


[edit on 4-8-2006 by timeless test]

[edit on 4-8-2006 by timeless test]



posted on Aug, 4 2006 @ 07:06 AM
link   
tt, you make a lot of suppositions in this situation.



posted on Aug, 4 2006 @ 07:10 AM
link   

Originally posted by 25cents
tt, you make a lot of suppositions in this situation.


Yes, that's the idea. Some of what I wrote is a matter clarifying factual information which is frequently being misrepresented. e.g. they were arrested for "playing in a tree" which is simply not true.

The rest is to illustrate what MIGHT have happened, (perhaps some, perhaps all), to make the police act the way they did.

All I'm saying is consider all of the facts and think about what is not being told to us before jumping to unreasonable conclusions and calling people "ignorant".

Edit text: (Sorry 25c, I didn't mean to suggest it was you throwing the insults around)

[edit on 4-8-2006 by timeless test]



posted on Aug, 4 2006 @ 07:19 AM
link   
ok, well then we might also assume that the damage was NOT extensive, and that perhaps the cops WERE out of line.

it works both ways.



posted on Aug, 4 2006 @ 07:32 AM
link   
Indeed it does, but I am always fascinated by the way in which so many people automatically assume that the police, (or whatever authority is involved), are blatently lying whilst the newspapers speak nothing but the truth.



posted on Aug, 4 2006 @ 07:41 AM
link   
All i can say about this is: the world is getting more and more crazy and freaky every day!



new topics

top topics



 
0
<< 1  2  3    5  6 >>

log in

join