It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.
Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.
Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.
Originally posted by xxpigxx
My kids were throwing balls outside. One went over the neighbors fence. They had to go and ask for it nicely, then apologize, then thank the neighbor. They were then instructed by me, to not play near that fence, because if the ball went over again, it was gone.
One went over a few days later. They have not seen it since. Not my problem. They cried to me about it, and I reiterated the rules. Do they play near that fence now?
And ill be damned if some old elderly person decides it is OK to commit a crime against a child, just because of their age, regardless of how petty it is.
I want my child to understand the law clearly.
Obviously too many people are willing to allow the elderly to comitt petty crimes soley on the basis of it is "taboo" to not simply allow them to carry on.
She should be happy someone in this generation is actually enjoying the outside instead of boxed inside their conditioned cell in front of a screen.
There is nothing to suggest these kids are intentionally throwning this ball in her yard. She may just happen to be close to the safest location of suitable size for this activity to occur.
It is not as if she has to go out and throw a twenty yard pass. A simple toss right over the fence is suitable.
This is a neighborhood, innocent things happen. She should be the mature adult and allow the kids the opportunity to carry on with their recreational outdoor activities.
Originally posted by Ian McLean
The police asked her to give it back, but she refused. She said she'd give it back on her own time. Then they gave her a ticket, to appear in court, which she refused to sign. So, off to the clink, granny!
Last week, Blue Ash Police were asked to intervene in a neighbor dispute. It is regrettable that Police were pressed to give a citation when the involved parties could not reach a compromise.
On Thursday evening, October 16, the Blue Ash Police were called to Myrtle Avenue. Responding officers were advised by Mr. Paul Tanis that his son’s football had landed in the yard of Ms. Edna Jester, and that Ms. Jester had taken the ball and would not give it back.
Officers made contact with Ms. Jester believing that they would resolve the situation by retrieving the ball; however, Ms. Jester refused to return the ball. With the property owner demanding that police resolve this issue, and with Ohio law stipulating that Ms. Jester did not have the right to keep the other person’s property, Police were pressed to give Ms. Jester a citation to Mayor’s Court for petty theft. When Ms. Jester declined to sign the citation acknowledging that she would appear in court, she was placed in a police car and taken to the station where she was processed and released. The officers, in respect of her age, did not handcuff her at any point. Even though Ms. Jester insisted the officers put handcuffs on her, officers refused and did not, despite what has been reported in various media.
This incident is the result of a series of disagreements between neighbors on this street. The police have responded numerous times to similar disputes over the past several months in this area involving the same individuals, and have attempted to address each circumstance with minimal amount of intervention.
The City sincerely hopes that similar future disputes among neighbors can be resolved without police action.
It means that when there is no definitive proof of ownership, the person in possession of the item can keep it, by law. This "ownership" will remain in tact until it is proven otherwise. The term usually applies to property law.
Obviously if a ball shattered her window, that would be destruction of property and would require monetary restitution.
Obviously if she were not able bodied, that would have been discovered upon the police visitation
No there was not someone "I like to torment" when I was younger, and I cannot really think of any of my regular freinds who did that. That was not something that came across our simple minds.
As far as we know, a football landed in someones yard. The owners of it requested for it back, intentionas were made that the property would not be returned. That is theft. This was not an item that was dug up underneath her yard so she gets rigths to claim treasure or whatever. By sheer chance a recreational object landed in her yard, and she refused to give it back.
The whole ordeal in itself will bring lessons to all parties involved as stated earlier. I honestly do not believe the stupid father even intended it to lead to her arrest. I have no doubt that the parents in the immediate neighborhood are goign to be talking to their children about the proximity of their games to peopels yards as a result of this.
Morals and laws go hand in hand. Thats why laws exist, they are based (at least loosely in this day) on morals.