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.

 

89-year-old charged with keeping kids' ball

page: 5
3
<< 2  3  4   >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Oct, 21 2008 @ 09:55 PM
link   

... old hag



... evil old lady



Misogyny

Age discrimination


The victim in this case is (a) female and (b) elderly

and it's apparent that a minority of posters are under the impression that an elderly female doesn't have a leg to stand on ... is automatically 'wrong' .. is to be regarded as a figure of fun and/or derision


However --- would that same minority of posters who focus not upon the situation but upon the fact the victim is an aged female be of the same stated opinions were the victim to be a hulking young male ?

More to the point --- would the children have continued kicking their ball into the property of a hulking young male ?

AND, would the children's father have summoned the police against a hulking young male ?

And WOULD the police have lain charges against a hulking young male ?

Further, if that hulking young male had large, assertive, aware-of-their-rights as property owners young SONS --- would this incident have occurred ?

I strongly suspect it would not.



What cowardice


Those children would not have continued kicking their ball into the property belonging to a strong father figure and his equally strong, assertive sons. Because those kids wouldn't have DARED to kick their ball into that yard.

And the father of the ball-kickers would NOT want to make enemies of the capable father figure and his sons

Clear to see why an elderly female was targeted by the odious father and his equally odious children

Cowardice

Cowardice




posted on Oct, 21 2008 @ 11:00 PM
link   
We can ponder the what ifs, but these children dont drive yet, t.R.N. We need to stop coming up with all these "what ifs" and focus on "what actually happened" .

I will yield to agree that absolutley that the two sparring neighbors over reacted. The police played a role, but only reluctantly as they are bound to operate by the rule of law. Please let us have mercy for the police, they were contractually obligated by occupation to carry out the directives that they did. They have explicitly stated so, and even portrayed it by not physically restraining Ms Jaspers, even upon her own request.

The fact that she requested to be cuffed displays an intention to instigate matters further with another party. I think this shows upon her own character in a negative light, and should be considered in forming your opinion of her.

I dont disagree about making sure ones children are disciplined.

I just feel that this woman made an incorrect judgement by not simply trying to be a good samaritan and interact with the local youth, build bonds across generations. She was able to "pick up the ball". The home on the street do not even appear to have fences in the front. She could kindly say, "its ok boys, just be careful with my plants, you can come and get the ball".

That is how good neighbors treat their peers in the community. You dont take it personally, maybe you exchange greetings , and then the entire less than ten second instant is over, and both people can go on with their lvies once more.

This is how rational people will make their judgements. A simple incident, which caused no damage, injured no one, and lasted an enitre less than ten seconds probably instead goes on to span a period of weeks, ends with an arrest, and more multi-party resentment is created.

This is irrational thinking, why would anyone justify this irrational thinking!?

Please, have mercy for rational thinking.



posted on Oct, 21 2008 @ 11:52 PM
link   
reply to post by DYepes

My example was not a 'what if' scenario; it was more of a comparison. It had something vital in connection with the situation we are discussing: in both cases, someone's right to privacy and property was violated, and in neither case there was any actual injury. But in the hypothetical case I brought up, I hoped one could more easily see the wrongdoing.

That said:

This is irrational thinking, why would anyone justify this irrational thinking!?

I am not justifying any of this. Read my posts and you will see that I have consistently faulted the kids for not being more careful, the parents for not handling their kids and for calling the police, and the old lady for being argumentative. The only people I can not find fault with in this instance are (to my great surprise) the police. You appear to be absolutely right that they were caught between two warring factions and their duty.

In a perfect world, yes, the kids would have been respectful, the parents would have responded should there have been a problem to discipline their kids, and Jester would have treated the kids to cookies and milk while they were carefully and apologetically retrieving their lost ball. But we do not live in the world of "Leave it to Beaver". We live in reality, and old age can get to be really painful and cause someone to not wish to be bothered. That is their right. Jester was on her property and did nothing we know of until her property was invaded by a stray ball. There is simply no other way to look at this from a legal standpoint. The only reason she was arrested was that she refused to sign a ticket, and the only reason she was to get a ticket was that she would not return the ball to the police.

She had no legal obligation to allow trespassing against her wishes. She had no legal requirement to return something which was thrown into her yard. She did have a right to remove the object from her yard. Only when she refused to obey a lawful order by a police officer did the legal problems arise.

On the other hand, the children did have a legal responsibility to control their property (the ball), and the parents did have a legal obligation to control their children. The only reason no legal action was taken against them was that the officers did not witness the infraction, which is a requirement for them to take action. They did witness the fact that Jester had the ball in question, and thus were able to take legal action to retrieve it.

I'm not on anyone's side on this issue, save the side of reason. And reason states that one does not place all of the blame on an elderly lady who, up until the police visit, was within her rights. Reason also states that one does not absolve from blame those who were not acting within legal boundaries just because they didn't get caught by the right people.

TheRedneck



posted on Oct, 22 2008 @ 07:07 AM
link   
I assure you there is more to this story then is being reported. Maybe the paper ran out of space. Maybe the reporter is simply to shallow to get into all the details; "You want me to cover WHAT story?"

You have some neighborhood brats and an old lady that may very well not be around long enough to have her day in court.

Folks, once you hit 80, it's all borrowed time.

I doubt any respectable judge will want this on his docket. No way is he going to risk his political career by attaching his name to this lynching.

The arresting officer likely had no interest in hauling her to jail. The kids were likely unreasonable. Their parents should probably be arrested for reproducing. And the old lady is probably no angel of lover either.

At that point, the officer simply goes by the letter of the law.

His fellow officers will harass him about this for the remiander of his career and then some. If he moves on to another department, it will follow him like an attached dark cloud.

"Grandma" will probably not even need a lawyer to get this case dismissed. Let her simply hobble into court with her walker. "Wh, wha, One day th, that ball is gonna come over da fence and, an, and hit me in the head. Then what? Wh, what happens to me if those little pu-punks don't get me help."

Like I said, case dismissed. One an only hope they waive her court costs to.

Here is what the judge could do.

Call the local media and have them put some heat on the kids and family. Put them on TV so the community can see how heartless and single-minded they really are.

The parents should have mediated this. The police have better then to do the deal with crap like this. My suggestion to the police department is to come up with smarter policies in regards to dealing with people over 80 years old.

After all, someday we will all be 80.

Cop: D-
Local Police Department: F
Grandma: C
Kids: D-
Parents: F
Media: F
Judge: To be determined

Folks, that's the real story.



posted on Oct, 22 2008 @ 10:19 AM
link   
reply to post by Genfinity
 


I'd give the cops on the scene a slightly higher grade, as it seems they did try to have the issue resolved by the parties, instead of having to act, and they also refused to handcuff granny even after she insisted.

Also an honorable mention to whoever wrote that city/police press release. It does an admirable job of ducking all responsibility and non-specifically blaming others, while sounding reasonable and concerned for the public well-being.

For the rest, I think you're spot-on.



posted on Oct, 22 2008 @ 10:22 AM
link   
I'm not sure about this but I'm not blaming the police on this. The person who initiated it would have to be the kids or the parents of the kids who owned the ball. Charges must be made for an arrest to result.



posted on Oct, 22 2008 @ 12:15 PM
link   

Originally posted by defcon5
reply to post by TruthTellist
 

ve
Actually, I have a lot of police officer friends,

...and at this point I ceased reading. A man is known by the friends hebag makes, and the enemies he keeps. You sir, are a thug, and I have no respect for anything you say, nor do I wish to indulge you by listening to it. Are you a liar/lawyer? Or a politician rat? Or simply a lawless creep? Which is it? That ball fell out of the sky, into a citizens private property, and IT BELONGED TO HER. They could have taken her to court to retrieve it, but they should lose. To arrest her was a criminal action under color of law, by the local gangbanger in blue. She should bring criminal charges against that gang for false arrest.



posted on Oct, 22 2008 @ 12:50 PM
link   
reply to post by cbass
 


If it was an isolated situation, I would say yes.
But I have found that people who do that sort of thing tend to be aggressive then you think. She may be hollering at kids constantly, shooting at wandering dogs or cats.
she may have been threatening. they tend to be uptight on everything.

And the people may have had it.
I have had cranky lady neighbors and they get on your nerves after while.
She even called the landlord saying that she didn't like the look of our patio furniture.


On the other hand, as someone who works for the environmental aspect of the gov't. People will also call on their neighbors about the dumbest things.
The first question I always ask is"did you talk to your neighbor about it?"and I get a stunned silence, because they never thought of that tactic.

So the moral of the story is, you don't know the story.

.
Honestly, I am just thrilled that there are still kids who go outside to play football.


[edit on 22-10-2008 by nixie_nox]



posted on Oct, 22 2008 @ 07:27 PM
link   
reply to post by nixie_nox

She may be hollering at kids constantly, shooting at wandering dogs or cats.

That's a bit of a leap of logic there. I have seen no report of shootings, and this being inside a city area, I'm sure if there were any they would be mentioned. If for no other reason than to condone gun bans.



So the moral of the story is, you don't know the story.

Now this I will agree with 100%!


TheRedneck



posted on Oct, 22 2008 @ 10:57 PM
link   
question? couldn't the old lady have the kid charged with vandalism for destroying her yard with the fooball



posted on Oct, 23 2008 @ 01:50 AM
link   
Definitely the parents who need to wake up here.

A million and one possible compassionate solutions and they call the cops - disgraceful and a sad reflection on the abysmal lack of community in many parts of the 'civilised' world.

How about the parents brokering a deal between the kids and Jester, that each time the ball lands in her garden the kids mow the lawn or run an errand for her.

This could have easily been a win win situation instead of another all round loser.

Sad



posted on Oct, 23 2008 @ 02:10 AM
link   
Just finished the thread and very entertaining reading.

I'm a bit surprised at the support for the arresting officer(s) though.

'He's just doing his duty' .... hmmm, not sure about that.

I bet if it were his own granny he wouldn't be hauling her off in the back seat. Prolly he'd find some reason not to 'enforce the law to the letter'. After all, who'd know?!?



posted on Oct, 23 2008 @ 03:18 AM
link   
It seems like most people here are just appealing to tradition that finders-keepers-losers -weepers stands correct, and that property rights magically transfer once an object you own finds itself in someone else's yard.

That's not childish at all.


It's rather ironic that the same people who suggest the above, also suggest that the people who are in line with societal and legal ramifications of wrongful property confiscation are questionable parents.

It's good that they called the police, otherwise they'd jut be promoting the idea to the kids that they shouldn't stand up for themselves or use whatever legal means available to halt a string of thefts. Inanimate objects can not trespass, btw, and the article mentioned nothing about the children entering her property.



Kelly Tanis has five children and says Jester has taken balls from her children before. So she called the police.




"I was giving it back sooner or later, but not right now so they could make a laughing stock out of me," Jester said ...

"I said go ahead and arrest me. Handcuff me if you'd like, because I said I'm not guilty of anything," said Jester ...

Jester was offered a chance by police to sign a ticket promising to appear in court, but she refused. Right or wrong, she is due in court Nov. 12.


She obviously put herself in the situation, she did this to herself, and probably through inaction now, she'll be hit with the books for completely disregarding the police, her neighbors, and the legal system.



posted on Oct, 23 2008 @ 03:19 AM
link   

Originally posted by RogerT
Just finished the thread and very entertaining reading.

I'm a bit surprised at the support for the arresting officer(s) though.

'He's just doing his duty' .... hmmm, not sure about that.

I bet if it were his own granny he wouldn't be hauling her off in the back seat. Prolly he'd find some reason not to 'enforce the law to the letter'. After all, who'd know?!?


I think he'd just say, "Granny, give me the damn ball so you don't get in trouble!" or else just locate the ball and give it back to the kids.



posted on Oct, 25 2008 @ 07:06 PM
link   
The whole situation is stupid. All this over a ball?! And people wonder why our country is in the state it is.

I'm inclined to side with the parents though, as absurd as this entire thing is. The old hag refused to hand something over that wasn't hers and claimed ownership of it instead. Granted, it was a ball, but nevertheless, she took something that didn't belong to her. And she displayed disorderly conduct when confronted by law enforcement.

It was from a child for crying out loud; we get it lady, you're old, dying, and a general grouch, but you don't need to take it out on the kid or society. Some of you don't seem to understand there is no age limit when it comes to the law; she could be 10 years old or 100, it doesn't matter, procedure stays the same. What I don't understand is why she still has the ball. That is NOT hers and is what started this entire fiasco. She has no right to hold onto it, the police should have returned it upon arriving.

And for all you people giving the arresting officer crap...The last time I checked, it was the police who were asked to be involved, and the lady's actions warranted action. Doing your job isn't a crime, being disorderly and stealing is. Simple solution to this problem would be give the kid his ball back so him and his parents can quit whining and let the old hag get back to her miserable life.



posted on Oct, 25 2008 @ 07:25 PM
link   



posted on Oct, 26 2008 @ 05:36 AM
link   
What is the world coming to if an old lady cannot keep the kids' ball? That's a time honored tradition.

If they take away the only fun thing there is to do when we get old, what do the rest of us have to look forward to? If we cannot open our doors and scream, "You kids get off my lawn! I'm keeping your ball!" then what is there to look forward to? What? Arthritis, no social security, and no ball collection? Hope I die before I get old, if that's the case.



posted on Oct, 28 2008 @ 01:17 AM
link   
lol thanks for this post it reminded me of my father who always said the kids shouldn't be playing ball in the yard they may break his window
when the kids when go home my father would go out and take all the balls haha when he passed i opened his closet and yep balls came falling out no joke i am laughing right now thinking of the memory



posted on Nov, 26 2008 @ 08:05 AM
link   

Originally posted by onewith
lol thanks for this post it reminded me of my father who always said the kids shouldn't be playing ball in the yard they may break his window
when the kids when go home my father would go out and take all the balls haha when he passed i opened his closet and yep balls came falling out no joke i am laughing right now thinking of the memory


I'm not even 40 yet and I've already started a collection. I have 4 so far and that's just in the last couple of years.




top topics



 
3
<< 2  3  4   >>

log in

join