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.

 

14-year-old at the center of "NRA T-Shirt Controversy" now facing possibility of 1 year in jail

page: 8
41
<< 5  6  7    9 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Jun, 17 2013 @ 07:16 PM
link   
reply to post by fnpmitchreturns
 


I am shocked and totally disgusted with the direction this country has taken. This is beyond violating his rights, this is an absolute attack on everyone's rights of expression as guaranteed by the US constitution.

The more of this kind of thing I hear about, the more I am reminded of the famous words of Thomas Jefferson regarding:

"The tree of liberty must be refreshed from time to time with the blood of patriots and tyrants."
Thomas Jefferson




posted on Jun, 17 2013 @ 07:24 PM
link   
Arresting officer James Adkins of the Logan City Police Department should be required to wear a sign warning citizens that he is not capable of multitasking, i.e. if you're talking he becomes paralyzed and cannot perform his job until you shut up.

I imagine the verbal exchange between Officer James Adkins of the Logan City Police Department and 14 year Jared Marcum went like this:

James Marcum: Talking nonstop expressing his point of view in a peaceful nonthreatening manner.

Officer Adkins: "Shut up, turn around, and bend over so I can do my job!"

And to read that these public servants were trying to scheme ways to charge the kid with making terroristic threats. Stupid a**holes should be fired for that alone.



posted on Jun, 17 2013 @ 08:07 PM
link   

Originally posted by spoonbender
Like his Ole Man said
It's ridiculous to have even gotten this far



I have a funny feeling
it will be dropped ...


they are just trying to
figure how to do it quietly now


They'll coerce the boy and his family into signing a gag order and agree to not file civil charges against the school and court, then drop the charges. That is how these situations usually resolve themselves and why it happens over, and over, and over again. Instead, the school admin should be canned, the cop fired, and the judge who allowed this farce to commence should be found in contempt of intelligence and disbarred.



posted on Jun, 17 2013 @ 08:17 PM
link   
they won't stop until they take away our free speech and our guns



posted on Jun, 17 2013 @ 09:11 PM
link   

Originally posted by burdman30ott6

Originally posted by spoonbender
Like his Ole Man said
It's ridiculous to have even gotten this far



I have a funny feeling
it will be dropped ...


they are just trying to
figure how to do it quietly now


They'll coerce the boy and his family into signing a gag order and agree to not file civil charges against the school and court, then drop the charges. That is how these situations usually resolve themselves and why it happens over, and over, and over again. Instead, the school admin should be canned, the cop fired, and the judge who allowed this farce to commence should be found in contempt of intelligence and disbarred.


Civil lawsuit over what? He broke the dress code, the school didn't do anything wrong as per their student handbook, and if the student was throwing a verbal temper tantrum, then perhaps the officer was correct in what he did. Some seem to think he quietly, and well mannered expressed his opinions, but it probably was something rather extreme for him to get an obstruction charge...



posted on Jun, 17 2013 @ 09:39 PM
link   
reply to post by Turq1
 


Public school is a tax payer paid for, government entity. They violated this kid's First Amendment rights. They are within the law to request he remove the shirt or leave the premises... they are not within the law to have him arrested and charged over him stating an objection over the policy so long as it is not disruptive to the learning process of others. Unless a class was being taught in the principal's office, no claim of disruption to the learning process may be made.

It was a freaking 14 year old wearing a non offensive shirt for Christ's sake. "He wouldn't stop talking and he impeded my abillity as a police officer" That cop (and I'm a pro-police guy, mind you. I defend them as a group always and usually stand up for them as individuals on ATS) is either an incomepetant buffoon, suffers from little man syndrome, or is a complete and utter retard. 14 year olds talk, that's what they do and that is something they're good at. The law dictates that a 14 year old is not old enough to make a good judgement about drinking, smoking, sex, or driving... but apparently a 14 year old has enough judgement to know when to shut their mouth when they feel like they're getting screwed!?!?! That's bush league crap and the school should share in the penalty phase by paying the lad restitution for hosing him.

ETA:

Originally posted by Turq1
if the student was throwing a verbal temper tantrum, then perhaps the officer was correct in what he did. Some seem to think he quietly, and well mannered expressed his opinions, but it probably was something rather extreme for him to get an obstruction charge...


I don't care if the child gave the cop double barreled one finger salutes while questioning his patriarchial heritage and suggesting he eat excrement and perish. Bottom line, "sticks and stones may break my bones, but children's verbage can never obstruct an officer from doing their duty." The cop had the full upper hand in this exchange and, instead of handling this responsibly, he has decided to get into something-or-other swinging contest with a 14 year old. If the child displayed poor judgement in this, then the officer and administrator who were unable to handle an entirely verbal confrontation behind closed doors displayed a lack of control and an ineptness for their positions in life. You call the child's parents and have the child picked up from the school by the parents... you don't tease the situation into a full blown event and back the child into a corner. These never ending laws that elevate school employees and cops to the status of gods whose orders are iron clad even when unreasonable or wrong are horsecrap.
edit on 17-6-2013 by burdman30ott6 because: (no reason given)



posted on Jun, 17 2013 @ 10:14 PM
link   

Originally posted by GBP/JPY
Why does something tell me a law firm will get a hold of this case and shove the legal details right through to a bunch of punitive action against the prosecutors. Including a suit against the magistrate. One attorney, or one firm and bash, boom....to the moon...


My impression is that the "obstruction" charges didn't happen until they filed a civil case against the teacher and the school system felt they had to reciprocate.

Hopefully the judge will drop the thing with prejudice and ding the prosecutor. The prosecutor would likely not EVER have entertained such a stupid charge in the other direction, but you know, criminal prosecutors are terrified of cops and cop unions and will almost always do what the police union recommends - their job performance ratings depend on it. Seriously - you wouldn't shut up when I told you to = obstruction? Really? That really really needs to be shoved up the LEO's arse for a demonstration of what obstruction actually means. If it's allowed to be cheapened by upholding this, then it's going to degenerate into another mopery charge, and eventually it's going to be taken away from the cops by legislation like that "if you dangled a sidearm from a string I can still claim it's concealed because the string obscured a tiny bit of the trigger guard" was in Mississippi so many years ago. The cops lost all access to pulling a concealed weapons charge on people because they abused it. That *might* have been of some use for real, actual bad guys but they worked it SO much that it got taken away.

This guy should be put in a Walmart as a greeter. He doesn't need to be a cop.

On top of that, the kids in the school system ought to be apprised of a surprising fact: the seniors can vote, and there are enough of them that they can shove this up the arses of the board and the superintendent of education. So FEW people vote for these positions that the year I graduated we had a senior run on the "rock and roll" ticket for SOE and come within a few percent with no more money expended than a bunch of bumper stickers. It was down to 100 votes or so, and a high school senior would have been superintendent of education. They can remove these guys from office and take over if they stick together. It's a great example of the system in action and how to take control of it that they ought to learn.

That or mayor. If you're mayor, you can suggest to the police chief that he toss the guy under the bus or find a new job, until you DO find a chief that will do your bidding. THAT would be entertaining.

"Hey, Jones, fire this guy or you're toast"

"No"

"Happy new job. Expect me to put on your review that you are stealing from the till, as my PI says you are. Ok, Smith, you are now police chief. Fire this guy or you're toast"

"Rog-o jefe"



posted on Jun, 17 2013 @ 10:14 PM
link   
This isn't some unique, novel case that's never been seen before. First Amendment isn't really going to come into play going by precedence. They, the school, didn't have him arrested. When an officer comes into the mix, you're playing by different rules, and not that of the school. Really separate entities. "Would not stop talking" is all we know, so saying "stating an objection" is being vastly overgenerous. He could have been constantly interrupting, which is sort of implied, going on a diatribe...who knows how long it went on, the officers stance might be fair. But to assume he was some goody two shoes valedictorian....it's obvious it's just something some folks want to hold.

"The learning process of others" isn't really relevant either as far as law goes. If that was the case, they'd say to get off their property and it'd become more a trespassing offense. Whether you are or aren't disrupting the learning of others, when there's an officer in the mix, it's only you and him. And if you obstruct him from doing his job, that has nothing to do with the school or any of the other students.

The officer might have even asked the kid repeatedly to stop talking, and I'd imagine so he can talk, and still continued to do what he was doing. We don't really know. But that type of scenario is more realistic than what some are drawing up.

"14 year olds talk, that's what they do", lol, really now, to knowingly and willingly annoy a cop repeatedly is not something the vast majority of 8th graders would do.

14 year olds also have poor judgement and beat other students up, gawd just let them beat up the occasional kid, they're only kids!



posted on Jun, 17 2013 @ 10:19 PM
link   

Originally posted by Turq1
...and if the student was throwing a verbal temper tantrum, then perhaps the officer was correct in what he did. Some seem to think he quietly, and well mannered expressed his opinions, but it probably was something rather extreme for him to get an obstruction charge...


Unfortunately, the Federal district courts have affirmed OVER AND OVER that police are valid targets for verbal abuse, to the point that they have started setting aside LEOs qualified immunity and allowing the plaintiff to countersue for the LEO's personal possessions.

As long as the kid did not become physically abusive, the LEO can not charge them with disorderly conduct for saying "F# you" or shooting them the bird, I can't for the life of me imagine that they will permit an obstruction charge for disagreement, however irritating.

What needs to happen in this case is that the prosecutor is censured with prejudice, the LEO has his qualified immunity set aside and is allowed to be sued for his nice bass boat and car, and the school district has to pony up a huge fine in Tinker violations.



posted on Jun, 17 2013 @ 10:21 PM
link   

Originally posted by Turq1
"14 year olds talk, that's what they do", lol, really now, to knowingly and willingly annoy a cop repeatedly is not something the vast majority of 8th graders would do.

14 year olds also have poor judgement and beat other students up, gawd just let them beat up the occasional kid, they're only kids!




Apples and oranges. We're not talking about a physical altercation between a cop and a kid. We're also not talking about a situation in which the kid was following a cop around badgering or annoying him. Hell, why was a cop involved in this in the first place? CALL THE KID'S PARENTS AND HAVE HIM TAKEN OUT OF SCHOOL. As a tax payer I certainly am offended that my tax dollars could be used to call the police on something as serious as a tee shirt when there are actual crimes and actual matters of significance the police need to be dealing with. My God it's great to know that that community is so peacefull, so crime free, and such a gem of the nation that they can afford to call in the police for a tee shirt.

You're telling me that you see no problem with a kid being arrested for sassing a cop? If that is true then we've got a very different opinion of the world and the direction it should be going in vs the direction it is going in.



posted on Jun, 17 2013 @ 10:42 PM
link   
Interestingly, the West Virginia state code for obstruction only permits a felony obstruction charge to be brought for fleeing arrest. Linky

Well, you can also be charged with felony obstruction of a LEO if you try to disarm them, I assume that didn't happen in this case.

Perhaps there is some city or county ordinance that permits a felony obstruction charge for talking. I can't find it at Justia. However, there IS Houston v Hill, in which it was established by the Federal court of appeals that talking at a cop non-stop during an arrest CANNOT lead to a charge of obstruction. Ever.

There is one precedent that says if you stand there and "use fighting words", i.e. you start describing the LEOs mother's street corner behavior, you might verge onto non-protected speech. However, Houston pretty much sets the bar against that sort of thing.


Houston v Hill



Held:

1. A municipal ordinance that makes it unlawful to interrupt a police officer in the performance of his duty is substantially overbroad, and therefore invalid on its face under the First Amendment. The ordinance in question criminalizes a substantial amount of, and is susceptible of regular application to, constitutionally protected speech, and accords the police unconstitutional enforcement discretion, as is demonstrated by evidence indicating that, although the ordinance's plain language is violated scores of times daily, only those individuals chosen by police in their unguided discretion are arrested.


Given that there is very very clear precedent both on speech not being permitted as an "obstruction" or "disorderly conduct" charge by the Federal court, and that these precedents are pretty much unarguable, I would expect any lawyer worth his salt could just drag this into Federal court and massacre the cop over Houston and the school district over a Tinker violation. I would toss $500 bucks of my own money at it if the kid set up a contribution account. I would like to see him get the cop's personal property and torch it for him on YouTube. Then have the guy fired in the aftermath as the city and school district get raped in the ensuing civil case.

eta:

I might add here that another reason that the cop in question tried to add in "terroristic threats" and was slapped down by the city attorney (who should have also recognized that trying an obstruction charge for being yappy was going to get him nailed by HvH) was that he "arrested" the kid in the lunchroom in front of his peers...and the other kids got up, circled him, and started heckling. He probably peed his pants and had to get back at the kid to recover his self-image as a steely-eyed SWAT monkey.

etaa:

I just HAVE to see how many votes chose the Superintendent and board members in the last Logan County election. If it's smaller than the senior class, I *might* have to see if I can pony up enough money to buy a email list and try to groom one of the seniors for the new position. Argh. My co-workers constantly berate me for jousting windmills but I would LOVE to put one of these guys on the street with a cardboard sign. "will poorly administrate for money"

edit on 17-6-2013 by Bedlam because: (no reason given)



posted on Jun, 17 2013 @ 11:07 PM
link   

Originally posted by burdman30ott6
Hell, why was a cop involved in this in the first place? CALL THE KID'S PARENTS AND HAVE HIM TAKEN OUT OF SCHOOL.


The problem here is, there is no Logan County bar against pictures of firearms on shirts.

It's strictly a Tinker issue. The thing was a non-issue until the kid's parents filed suit against the school district. The district should have settled. It will become a big stinky problem they will not be able to dodge. The WV ACLU has already filed an amicus, and they've offered (if I understand it) to represent pro bono.

eta:

I might add in 2012, the biggest turnout was for one seat on the board of education and only 3800 votes resulted, although in most cases only about 1000 votes were cast for any board member. Easily within reach for the senior class. Not sure when the sup's seat opens up yet...
edit on 17-6-2013 by Bedlam because: (no reason given)



posted on Jun, 17 2013 @ 11:26 PM
link   
Well, private youth prisons are now very, very big business in the USA.

This poor kid will find himself put into a system that will try its best to keep him there until he's at least 18.

These private prison contractors get paid by the Government per full cell, they have local judges paid off and are making billions from the misery of teenage misdemeanors that anywhere else would get a slap on the wrist.



posted on Jun, 18 2013 @ 07:44 AM
link   
I'm sitting here with my jaw on the floor as the search function has finally worked for me.

On topic. I'm really surprised that this story has polarized this forum the way it has. I didn't think there would be anyone defending the dispecable actions of the school board and police. Shame shame. A complete waste of resources all the way around.



posted on Jun, 18 2013 @ 08:44 AM
link   
reply to post by AuranVector
 





"Good" kids are brainwashed into obedient corporate slaves who never question "higher management."


You've just summed up in one concise line of text...exactly what this story is all about, bravo.

It wasn't the shirt...it was his the boys bare faced refusal to give up his rights and squirm around on his belly in submission that they didn't like.

The 'management' don't like you refusing to following orders in quick fashion, regardless of being within your rights or not.



posted on Jun, 18 2013 @ 10:04 AM
link   
reply to post by Gazrok
 

Actually no, a bikini is not within the dress code, as it shows too much thigh. Also, the only people who seemed distracted by the shirt were officials. I read nothing about any actual disturbance in the class.

Originally posted by spyder550
If I were judge I would put him in jail for a couple of days for being stupid, along with his father.



posted on Jun, 18 2013 @ 08:29 PM
link   
reply to post by skepticconwatcher
 




Oh, please.
Don't pull that projection crap with me.
I'm not the weak one. The kid was at school.
He doesn't get to do as he pleases at school.
Like I said, deliberately picking a fight to play the victim.
Can't really blame the kid .He was obviously raised by a coward and an idiot. Like father, like son. I was raised to understand that if I pick a fight, I better be prepared to win it. I don't just go around deliberately trying to get in trouble with the establishment with the sole purpose of whining like a beech when I don't get my way. No sympathy.


I suppose a Black Panther Party shirt would be fine, though?

Don't forget your history, nor your destiny.



posted on Jun, 19 2013 @ 03:42 PM
link   
reply to post by Gazrok
 


I think they could try but it's just a shirt! It's not like he is wearing a shirt that says defy authority!
If we lived in a reasonable society there would be no precedence for a denial of ones expression!
Until it has been shown to be reasonably disruptive to others and not just an annoyance he should have
the right to free expression!



posted on Jun, 19 2013 @ 04:12 PM
link   
The moral of this story that is expected to be taught...

OBEY. KEEP YOUR MOUTH SHUT. OBEY. DON'T GO AGAINST THE SYSTEM. OBEY.

To the person who said he was "picking a fight". Good for him! If my kid was told to change his clothing because some bureaucrat thought it offensive, I would have told him to fight back as well. And if some punk cop on a power trip arrested my kid on trumped up charges, I would sue him, his department, the school and everyone else involved.

America.. you better wake the f$@! up. Or this crap will keep getting worse and worse.



posted on Jun, 19 2013 @ 09:06 PM
link   
A 14 year old kid who disobeys a school directive from his principal is NOT A CRIMNAL. He disobeyed NO laws. Disobeying the principal is a disciplinary problem not a criminal case. So someone tell me what these adults are doing by trying to ruin an 8th grader's life. Because this WILL do just that! What we have here is a case of a school principal having no control and no imagination when it comes to discipline, and in my opinion is a lazy principal in having this young boy arrested. I could understand a suspension, but calling the police? This goes byond all reason and puts this principal's judgement at question. When I was in school, our parents were called so that they and the principal could deal with these things. But noooooooooo, it's too easy to call the police . So what happens now? Are they going to sit on this? I am so grateful that my kids and grandkids are grown and out of the indoctrination system.

We are living in a police state folks.
edit on 19-6-2013 by Lindarm because: (no reason given)



new topics

top topics



 
41
<< 5  6  7    9 >>

log in

join