Background for today's event:

My school has been having a recent (or so they say) theft problem. Several I-Pod's, Apple Lab Tops, MP3 Players etc. have been stolen around campus. Since no kids came forward about who was doing it or since the kids themselves didn't come forth they called in the police. They started an investigation and said whoever was found out to be the person or person's doing the stealing was going to face massive legal issues.

Today:

Some police officers came to our school. They arrested 2 kids at our school and left them in handcuffs infront of our school, with the door of the polic car open for the entire student body to see since it was still going on when school ended.

This is what I posted on how I felt in my personal blog.

..............................It just goes to show that (my school) has yet again proven itself as a "special" place and takes things like theft (which occur at every school and are dealt with in a less serious manner) to an extreme and made a mockery out of students to try and scare everyone else out of doing something wrong. Pretty pathetic if you ask me.

Agree? Because everyone or most everyone at our school is pissed. Should we be pissed? I mean, if I had done something wrong I wouldn't have wanted the entire school to know. Even if they may be guilty that does not mean the school should be allowed to parade them around as zoo animals and spread fear to the student body.

Any thoughts?

PS: I actually hate the kids who were cuffed. Well, most of the school hated them too. They were the stoner, asshole types who used the words "gay" and "fag" a lot and were a burden in class. So I honestly am proud of our school for standing by them even though no one but their own group really liked them.

I agree with the school 150%

Stealing is serious. If they had stolen your iPod then you probably would want to see them beaten with a baseball bat as well as paraded to the cop car.

Question is - how did the school catch them? somebody must have ratted them out.

I also agree

This is terrible!

If you don't want to do the time, don't do the crime. Public humiliation is a strong deterent to crime, especially among young people who are more sensitive to the need of the esteem of their peers.

On a side note, if you are in the market for a used ipod, mp3 player or lap top computer, see Overdose. For some reason he has quite a few of them hidden in his school locker.

I agree with the school aswell. It's just like a liberal to cry about a guilty person getting arrested in front of others. I Signapore, they flog people like that in public, and their crime rate is much lower.

I have had cd players, and bikes stolen from me,and I have been mugged imagine how the victoms must feel.

I now carry a gun with a perment from the FBI. (Not a good idea to try to mug me now.)


I also agree

This is terrible!

Are you in federal law enforcement, gmsisko?

Some police officers came to our school. They arrested 2 kids at our school and left them in handcuffs in front of our school, with the door of the polic car open for the entire student body to see since it was still going on when school ended..........everyone or most everyone at our school is pissed. Should we be pissed?

Yes, and I urge you to lobby school officials to contact the police dept and inform them that no more **show of force** such as that will be allowed at the school.

The pigs were obviously trying to use intimidation techniques to frighten the student body.

It is sickening that a progresive society in 2006 would STILL accept the draconian, barbaric tactic of *public humiliation* to force people to conform. It is exactly the sort of backward, repressive action a tight-assed Puritan fuckhead would advocate, such as putting people in stocks.

If these were adults, or hardened criminals it would be one thing....but high schools students?!?!?....they have to be HANDCUFFED and paraded in front of everone else?!?!?

Bullshit. It is a psychological conditioning tactic on the part of the police.

Plus, the two students had NOT been proven guilty of ANYTHING at that point....they were , it would seem, simply suspects. And for 14 or 15 year olds to be treated in such a manner --in a public show-- is truly despicable.....

....the police dept badly needs to rethink how juvenile offenders should be handled.

I agree with the school 150%
That's sad. These kids were only suspects.

Stealing is serious. If they had stolen your iPod then you probably would want to see them beaten with a baseball bat as well as paraded to the cop car.
I do know people who had stuff stolen and they were pissed about how it was handled too. I guess some people are just more mature then others.

You don't even know all the facts. As far as we know the correct people were arrested. Until you have proper evidence, you should keep quiet.
Are all cops pigs in your liberal mind?


Yes, and I urge you to lobby school officials to contact the police dept and inform them that no more **show of force** such as that will be allowed at the school.

The pigs were obviously trying to use intimidation techniques to frighten the student body.

It is sickening that a progresive society in 2006 would STILL accept the draconian, barbaric tactic of *public humiliation* to force people to conform. It is exactly the sort of backward, repressive action a tight-assed Puritan fuckhead would advocate, such as putting people in stocks.

If these were adults, or hardened criminals it would be one thing....but high schools students?!?!?....they have to be HANDCUFFED and paraded in front of everone else?!?!?

Bullshit. It is a psychological conditioning tactic on the part of the police.

Plus, the two students had NOT been proven guilty of ANYTHING at that point....they were , it would seem, simply suspects. And for 14 or 15 year olds to be treated in such a manner --in a public show-- is truly despicable.....

....the police dept badly needs to rethink how juvenile offenders should be handled.

No, but my permit comes from the FBI.

Are you in federal law enforcement, gmsisko?

Yes, and I urge you to lobby school officials to contact the police dept and inform them that no more **show of force** such as that will be allowed at the school.

The pigs were obviously trying to use intimidation techniques to frighten the student body.

It is sickening that a progresive society in 2006 would STILL accept the draconian, barbaric tactic of *public humiliation* to force people to conform. It is exactly the sort of backward, repressive action a tight-assed Puritan fuckhead would advocate, such as putting people in stocks.

If these were adults, or hardened criminals it would be one thing....but high schools students?!?!?....they have to be HANDCUFFED and paraded in front of everone else?!?!?

Bullshit. It is a psychological conditioning tactic on the part of the police.

Plus, the two students had NOT been proven guilty of ANYTHING at that point....they were , it would seem, simply suspects. And for 14 or 15 year olds to be treated in such a manner --in a public show-- is truly despicable.....

....the police dept badly needs to rethink how juvenile offenders should be handled.

Trust FT to be PRO-Criminal. Always looking out for the minority eh?

You don't even know all the facts. As far as we know the correct people were arrested. Until you have proper evidence, you should keep quiet.I just want to point out that until all the facts are out, you probably shouldn't go ahead and agree with the school either.

I agree with the methods of the school.
School kids get ready for real life.

(Not a good idea to try to mug me now.)

Many criminals are quite skilled at taking other's guns away. Many cops are killed that way. I hope for your sake that doesn't happen to you.

Violence is not solved by more violence. Protect yourself if you need to, but be aware that non-innovative means of doing so can be prepared for and dealt with.

I really do not think that the school should breed anti-police resentment in students. That leads to delinquency, bad attitudes, and clashes with authority.

That's sad. These kids were only suspects.
If they were "suspects" they would not have been arrested.

1. The pigs were obviously trying to use intimidation techniques to frighten the student body.

2. It is a psychological conditioning tactic on the part of the police.
1. As per Overdose's objective and accurate reportage, you're correct.

2. That's a bit overstated, no?
Conditioning requires a lot more than a one time event.

You don't even know all the facts. As far as we know the correct people were arrested.

It can be said with equal validity that neither you nor anyone else
"knows" if the handcuffed kids were guilty of ANYTHING.

At any rate, this subject is more concerned with the Gestapo tactics of the police than it is the guilt or innocence of the handcuffed kids.

I am hesitant even to ASK this, for fear of being appalled by the answer,........but do you and the rest of the RightWing faction here really think it is a good idea for us as a society to begin handcuffing and publicly humiliating 14 year olds at their schools in front of the entire school body, even if they DID swipe an MP3 player?

If your answer tends toward the affirmative, then think of this; what if one of the kids was guilty of doing it, but the other one was not guilty of stealing.

Do you realize the stigma that will be unfairly and unecessarily attatched to him for the rest of his school life, and perhaps even into his adult life?

Over in Ireland we get a lot of those 'police camera' shows on tv'unfortunatly',and the thing that strikes people here most are,how many US cops it takes to drag 1 kid out of a stolen car,and how every policemans first name is 'sir',strange..

1. As per Overdose's objective and accurate reportage, you're correct.
Brooks, stop being such a prick. I'm not going to "lie" about an event at my school.


If they were "suspects" they would not have been arrested.
Seeing as how this kid was <i>in</i> school today and seeing as how he <i>was</i> in the back of the cop car arrested they <i>did</i> arrest a suspect since he was allowed back to school the very next day.

Maybe he cut a deal, or the cops let him off. I think just being dragged into a police car would be traumatic enough. Who knows, mighta set him straight.

A police officer cannot arrest someone unless they have proper evidence.
If the police officer made a false arrest, he/she should be punnished.
If the kid stole somthing, he/she should be arrested in front of anyone who is watching.

When I was young, I was accused of stealng, my car was searched in a public place. I did not steal anything, and the cops let me go.

The officer needs evidence to make an arrest.


It can be said with equal validity that neither you nor anyone else
"knows" if the handcuffed kids were guilty of ANYTHING.

At any rate, this subject is more concerned with the Gestapo tactics of the police than it is the guilt or innocence of the handcuffed kids.

I am hesitant even to ASK this, for fear of being appalled by the answer,........but do you and the rest of the RightWing faction here really think it is a good idea for us as a society to begin handcuffing and publicly humiliating 14 year olds at their schools in front of the entire school body, even if they DID swipe an MP3 player?

If your answer tends toward the affirmative, then think of this; what if one of the kids was guilty of doing it, but the other one was not guilty of stealing.

Do you realize the stigma that will be unfairly and unecessarily attatched to him for the rest of his school life, and perhaps even into his adult life?

I think public humiliation is a good thing. Its something our society has forgotten and replced with public ridicule (for fashion, sexuality and class). A lot of problems would not occur if everyone knew what was going on.

However I do not agree with the stunt your school pulled because those kids were still innocent. They had not gone to court or signed a confession. They were suspects. It was complete and utter bullshit and I hope they get in some sort of trouble for it.

The theifs were stealing from the school/students. It seems only fair that the students find out who stole from them. Unfortunatly Cops like to pretend they are judge, jury and sometimes executioner.

I think public humiliation is a good thing. Its something our society has forgotten and replced with public ridicule (for fashion, sexuality and class). A lot of problems would not occur if everyone knew what was going on.

With the last sentence, you invoke the notion of transparency....in that when things are exposed to the light of day, everyone can see what is going on. And that --especially as it regards the political leadership-- is a very good thing.

But that is quite different than public humiliation.

I cannot believe you [or anyone else who is not some sort of eye-for-an-eye religious ignoramus] are in favor of public humiliation.

It is a holdover from a barbaric time in our past, and has no place in a modern progressive society.

__________________________________________________

"There was a time when religion ruled the world. It was known as the Dark Ages."

A police officer cannot arrest someone unless they have proper evidence.

I think you mean "should not"...

If the police officer made a false arrest, he/she should be punnished.

Indeed.

If the kid stole somthing, he/she should be arrested in front of anyone who is watching.

I have no problem with that either.


The officer needs evidence to make an arrest.

In a proper world of course, but bad arrests are occasionally made.

It is a holdover from a barbaric time in our past, and has no place in a modern progressive society.

I'm not so sure we've changed that much.

I'm not so sure we've changed that much.

Good point.

Thanks to having such a large percentage of the populace psychologically dependent on (and desperately clinging to) outdated, irrational and superstitious notions, we as a society have unfortunately NOT changed very much.

A police officer cannot arrest someone unless they have proper evidence.
If the police officer made a false arrest, he/she should be punnished.
If the kid stole somthing, he/she should be arrested in front of anyone who is watching.

When I was young, I was accused of stealng, my car was searched in a public place. I did not steal anything, and the cops let me go.

The officer needs evidence to make an arrest.

Police can do whatever they want at anytime they want, including killing you on the spot with extreme predjudice. It happens every day.

Seeing as how this kid was <i>in</i> school today and seeing as how he <i>was</i> in the back of the cop car arrested they <i>did</i> arrest a suspect since he was allowed back to school the very next day.
Overdose, by the next day he would not yet have gone to trial. That means if he's not a flight risk, he does not sit in jail.
-or-
as with most juvenile offenses, there will be no trial, this will get put on a juvenile record, which is sealed, and no longer exists when they turn 18.

I won't bother going into "probable cause" vs "mere suspicion" with you.

1. However I do not agree with the stunt your school pulled because those kids were still innocent. They had not gone to court or signed a confession. They were suspects. It was complete and utter bullshit and I hope they get in some sort of trouble for it.

2. Unfortunatly Cops like to pretend they are judge, jury and sometimes executioner.
1. Okay. They can't be cuffed until they are "guilty" which can't occur until after a trial or a confession. Can you see the problem with that?

2. How do you reconcile their actions in this case with that description?

Overdose, by the next day he would not yet have gone to trial. That means if he's not a flight risk, he does not sit in jail.
Do you really believe that the school would allow him to go to regular classes the very next day when he was just in the back of a cop car, arrested? You've got to be kidding me! If they were going to allow him to be taken out of the last two periods to be put into a police car yesterday, I don't see why they would all of a sudden allow him back to school if he wasn't proven innocent in some way shape or form.


-or-
as with most juvenile offenses, there will be no trial, this will get put on a juvenile record, which is sealed, and no longer exists when they turn 18.
Again, do you think that my school would have allowed him back if he were guilty? He would have been suspended for at least a week or so as well as it being put on his record.

I won't bother going into "probable cause" vs "mere suspicion" with you.
Ever since we got into that debate about the Downing Street Memo you've been a jackass towards me and basically have been a prick. You didn't bother proving or explaining why the Downing Street Memo was false (if you have a reason, go post it in that thread because I'd love to see it) And since you were left with nothing to say in response you've only been a jerk. Why won't you "bother" going into it with me? Are you oh so much more superior than thou? Seriously, even before this response you questioned I was telling the truth about the situation at hand. Get off of your high horse.

No, but my permit comes from the FBI.Are you sure about that? I can't find anything that indicates the FBI issues gun permits, nor can I find any evidence that there is such a thing as a federal gun permit. My understanding is that the FBI performs background checks for local law enforcement (usually sherriffs) who then issue the permits.

1. Ever since we got into that debate about the Downing Street Memo you've been a jackass towards me

2. Why won't you "bother" going into it with me? Are you oh so much more superior than thou?
1. Your perception of my attitude toward you should predate that particular debate.
2. I'm not superior, but some of your statements about this incident show that there are certain concepts about which you don't have even a basic understanding (ie: they were only suspects).

Freethinker, it is quite obvious that you disagree as to how the police handled the situation. I must ask then, how would you handle the situation, and if they were in fact those responsible, would you have handled the situation any differently? If you don't think that public humiliation is a good crime deterrent, then what, in your opinion, is? Also, is there any empirical evidence to support this claim?

Freethinker, it is quite obvious that you disagree as to how the police handled the situation. I must ask then, how would you handle the situation....

What would have been wrong with waiting till after school and picking them up at their homes? It's not like these were hardened criminals who were set to flee thru the swamps at the first appearance of the police.

If they had to do it at school, they could have taken the youngsters by the arm while classes were in session and in a low key manner escorted them to an unmarked police car. Better yet, send a plain clothes cop to fetch them. WITHOUT handcuffs.

If you don't think that public humiliation is a good crime deterrent, then what, in your opinion, is?

Humiliation might indeed be "effective", but that does not mean it is a *good* way for a civilized, rational society to treat those charged with crimes........especially to 14 year olds who have not been convicted of anything.

Also, is there any empirical evidence to support this claim?

I guess that would depend on whatever *claim* it is that you're talking about.

Background for today's event:

My school has been having a recent (or so they say) theft problem. Several I-Pod's, Apple Lab Tops, MP3 Players etc. have been stolen around campus. Since no kids came forward about who was doing it or since the kids themselves didn't come forth they called in the police. They started an investigation and said whoever was found out to be the person or person's doing the stealing was going to face massive legal issues.

Why are you saying they were only "suspects" OD? If there are thefts at school... EVERYONE is a suspect. It sounds like you dont know what is going on in the situation and are making premature conclusions. What if the cops got a tip from someone? Do you know that? Before you jump on the "cops arresting innocents" train... why don't you find out, or at least tell us, the whole story. Im sure talking to local police officials would solve that.

Today:

Some police officers came to our school. They arrested 2 kids at our school and left them in handcuffs infront of our school, with the door of the polic car open for the entire student body to see since it was still going on when school ended.

While you put all these things in bold... it really doesn't matter. What are they supposed to do, put walls up so noone can see who is getting arrested? While you are trying to make cops dealing with juveniles as some kind of "crime against humanity" for publicly arresting them... to me that is normal. I wouldnt expect them to arrest somebody any other way. If I stole something at school.. id expect to be arrested in front of my school, with door of the police car open for the entire student body to see....

And dont get the two issues mixed up. On this reply i am only commenting on your apparant disgust of people being arrested in public. I dont know FOR SURE if they are guilty.. and neither do you, but the percentages say they ARE if cops came to school and picked them up... wouldn't you agree?


This is what I posted on how I felt in my personal blog.

Agree? Because everyone or most everyone at our school is pissed. Should we be pissed? I mean, if I had done something wrong I wouldn't have wanted the entire school to know. Even if they may be guilty that does not mean the school should be allowed to parade them around as zoo animals and spread fear to the student body.

Come on now.. first off its not like everyone is not going to find out about it anyway. High school is gossip, pop culture central. So save me the "maybe we can get confidentiality" crap.

Second.. i would consider stealing mp3 players, ipods, and other things a much more serious crime than showing a public arrest. And saying they "paraded them like zoo animals" is a bit much... you are only exaggerating to further try to prove your "theory".. which you dont know all the facts to.

I would say you treating this situation as a "police scare tactic" without knowing all the details is a scare tactic in itself.

Some police officers came to our school. They arrested 2 kids at our school and left them in handcuffs infront of our school, with the door of the polic car open for the entire student body to see since it was still going on when school ended

As decka pointed out, you seem to have a problem with people being arrested in public. Would you prefer that they just come in the middle of the night, snatch them from their beds, and take them to a location never to be seen again? If anything, public arrest should be preferred because people know that it is taking place, rather than secretive operations by police, which is probably exponentially worse than the "atrocity" that you claim.

Humiliation might indeed be "effective", but that does not mean it is a *good* way for a civilized, rational society to treat those charged with crimes........especially to 14 year olds who have not been convicted of anything.

Then, if humiliation should not be used in a civilized society, then what should be used then?

But that is quite different than public humiliation. This is no different then putting a person's (who was convicted of a crime) picture in the paper saying what they did. If someone is 'humiliated' by having their crimes publicized then its their own damn fault. But again these boys were not convicted and it was therefore improper and probably illegal.

1. Okay. They can't be cuffed until they are "guilty" which can't occur until after a trial or a confession. Can you see the problem with that?
2. How do you reconcile their actions in this case with that description?
Sigh...brooks you can be a waste of time somtimes...

1. they can be cuffed but leaving them there in the car for everyone to see when they haven't been convicted of the crime is bullshit.
2. The cops were acting like judges in this case by parading these boys around as if they had already been found guilty.

Oh noes, they weren't convicted! Their rights at that moment of arrest were to be silent and that their trial will be coming up shortly. You live at a pretty weak school if you were offended by the way arrested criminals were treated. Would it have been better if the school had been locked down and they were dragged out then, such as when a student beat an ex-marine now teacher with a belt buckle? The cops did nothing wrong. While it may be better for 100 murders to walk free than for one innocent man to die, it is most certainly not better to give soon to be on trial suspects a tea party than it is for a wrongfully arrested individual to be watched while being shoved into a police car. Maybe they didn't do enough, they didn't teach you not to steal, only to whine.

They made the kids sit in the car for over an hour just so they would be seen by other students (as if word doesn't travel fast in schools). No one is calling for a teaparty. What we are calling for is the cops to do their job rather then what they think they should do. Their job is to arrest suspects and take them and charge them to await trial. Not parade people around as if they are guilty before hand. They probably are guilty but that still does not excuse the behavior.

So Blibblob you disappear for a while then come back sounding like knee jerk reactionary defending the cops in doing whatever they want just because your school overreacted?

This is no different then putting a person's (who was convicted of a crime) picture in the paper saying what they did. If someone is 'humiliated' by having their crimes publicized then its their own damn fault. But again these boys were not convicted and it was therefore improper and probably illegal.

Of course it's different. In the first case we have the convicted person's picture in the paper with accompanying text explaining their crimes. In the second, you have witnesses see someone being handcuffed and put in a squad car. Whatever conclusions are drawn by the witnesses to this event is certainly not the responsibility of the police. What "humiliation" will ensue in the second case if the arrested person is subsequently found innocent of any wrongdoing?


1. they can be cuffed but leaving them there in the car for everyone to see when they haven't been convicted of the crime is bullshit.

2. The cops were acting like judges in this case by parading these boys around as if they had already been found guilty.

I'm going to quote Bit/Byte because he made an excellent point...

you seem to have a problem with people being arrested in public. Would you prefer that they just come in the middle of the night, snatch them from their beds, and take them to a location never to be seen again? If anything, public arrest should be preferred because people know that it is taking place, rather than secretive operations by police, which is probably exponentially worse than the "atrocity" that you claim.

They made the kids sit in the car for over an hour just so they would be seen by other students
Over an hour? That wasn't in the story. It's also pretty standard for them to sit there while the cops then draw up the paperwork with the school. Otherwise, as you have already stated, word gets around fast and they bolt. For some reason criminals think they can't be followed or that running helps.

Not parade people around as if they are guilty before hand.
It's the most basic deterant around, and it is one of the prime reasons for punishment in the first place. To teach a lesson that this is what breaking the law does. It's a simple "we wont tolerate illegal, or even suspected, activites". It doesn't matter if the court finds them innocent or guilty, theft at that school will probably drop dramatically regardless. They weren't punished, an arrest was merely made public. The only possible punishment is psychological. Poor little emotionly unstable teenagers, nobody understands them.

Why are you saying they were only "suspects" OD? If there are thefts at school... EVERYONE is a suspect. It sounds like you dont know what is going on in the situation and are making premature conclusions. What if the cops got a tip from someone? Do you know that? Before you jump on the "cops arresting innocents" train... why don't you find out, or at least tell us, the whole story. Im sure talking to local police officials would solve that.
Yes, everyone is a suspect. However just because the cops may have had a "tip" on this student does not mean he is guilty. He could have just been an easy scapegoat, since he was afterall not the brightest or most popular with the student body. Have you ever heard the idea of innocent until proven guilty? How can you prove he stole it from just a tip?

While you put all these things in bold... it really doesn't matter. What are they supposed to do, put walls up so noone can see who is getting arrested?
Yes, they should. It is the only way to be respectful of that student and his innocence. Was he fully proven guilty? No. So until then he deserves no public humiliation. Plus, word of mouth that someone got arrested would have been good enough.

While you are trying to make cops dealing with juveniles as some kind of "crime against humanity" for publicly arresting them... to me that is normal. I wouldnt expect them to arrest somebody any other way. If I stole something at school.. id expect to be arrested in front of my school, with door of the police car open for the entire student body to see....
That's sad you'd expect that. Just because you did something wrong we can then do something wrong to you? That's hypocritical. Also, if you were in that cop car on only the assumption you had stolen something and you had actually not done it would you have been pissed off? Is that fair? No, it isn't.

And dont get the two issues mixed up. On this reply i am only commenting on your apparant disgust of people being arrested in public. I dont know FOR SURE if they are guilty.. and neither do you, but the percentages say they ARE if cops came to school and picked them up... wouldn't you agree?
It is one thing to arrest someone (in public for everyone to see) for driving drunk (using the breathe thingy) on the spot and is another to arrest someone for the assumption that he stole something a few months ago.

Come on now.. first off its not like everyone is not going to find out about it anyway. High school is gossip, pop culture central. So save me the "maybe we can get confidentiality" crap.
It does not matter. Word of mouth is not nearly as harsh as being actually seen in the flesh. If you hear of someone driving drunk it is far different than actually seeing them on the side of the road.

Second.. i would consider stealing mp3 players, ipods, and other things a much more serious crime than showing a public arrest. And saying they "paraded them like zoo animals" is a bit much... you are only exaggerating to further try to prove your "theory".. which you dont know all the facts to.
Well, he was again back at school today. Proving he was NOT guilty. So until you know for sure you shouldn't arrest someone. He was humiliated for something he did not do. That's wrong.

I would say you treating this situation as a "police scare tactic" without knowing all the details is a scare tactic in itself.
What details do I not know? He wasn't the person as he is back at school today. And even if he was that is still wrong to deal with it in such a childish way.

They made the kids sit in the car for over an hour just so they would be seen by other students (as if word doesn't travel fast in schools).
Well, I know people won't believe me. But he was taken out of his last two periods to sit in that car. However, people will think I'm lying. But regardless of this they knew when school was going to be let out. They could have moved the car or taken him to the police station.

You made a good point.

They made the kids sit in the car for over an hour just so they would be seen by other students

This debate would go much more smoothly if you didn't just blatently make things up.

Well, he was again back at school today. Proving he was NOT guilty.

No, it just proves that he was released from custody. Maybe they realized they had the wrong person, but it's also quite likely that someone paid bail or the judge didn't feel it was serious enough to keep him in jail until trial, what with jail overcrowding being a major problem almost everywhere.

Well, if they were truely bad, then the arrest would give them some street cred. If they were innocent, then they were let go, no harm no foul. Maybe a little traumatizing, but not mind breaking. If they were guilty, then they probably got off light and were set straight.

Although, to bring up an earlier point in this thread: I'm much more comfortable having a public arrest than one that's carried out in the dead of night. Say, where did Danny go?

It's the most basic deterant around, and it is one of the prime reasons for punishment in the first place. To teach a lesson that this is what breaking the law does. It's a simple "we wont tolerate illegal, or even suspected, activites". It doesn't matter if the court finds them innocent or guilty, theft at that school will probably drop dramatically regardless. They weren't punished, an arrest was merely made public. The only possible punishment is psychological. Poor little emotionly unstable teenagers, nobody understands them. So then anytime a crime happens the police should arrest whoever they think did it then scare the shit out of other people by parading them around like a criminal, just because it might deter future crime?

So are you proclaiming yourself a (neo)libertarian now? That knee of your just doesn't stop...

from lionel
This debate would go much more smoothly if you didn't just blatently make things up.
and blibblob
Over an hour? That wasn't in the story. It's also pretty standard for them to sit there while the cops then draw up the paperwork with the school.
and it would go more smoothly if people would read more carefully and actually put 2 posts togather...
posted by OD on pg 3
You've got to be kidding me! If they were going to allow him to be taken out of the last two periods to be put into a police car
and the opening post
Some police officers came to our school. They arrested 2 kids at our school and left them in handcuffs infront of our school, with the door of the polic car open for the entire student body to see since it was still going on when school ended. Now blib did point out that cops take forever on paperwork. However there was no reason to leave the door open.

Although, to bring up an earlier point in this thread: I'm much more comfortable having a public arrest than one that's carried out in the dead of night. Say, where did Danny go? Now it would be much better if people didn't try to obscure the argument with non-sense. The point isn't that they were arrested in public. The point is that the cops intentionally left them there for all to see as if they were already found guilty.

As far as we know, these kids were only suspects. Nothing in OD's report says there was some evidence they were guilty. It seems these kids are already quite marginals in their school. If they are innocent, I don't think that will help them to feel better.

It'll be interesting to see if there are any more thefts after this incident.

As far as we know, these kids were only suspects. If they were in custody, from which they felt they could not leave freely, they were under arrest. "Suspects" are not arrested (root: suspicion - not enough evidence by which to arrest).
To make the arrest, the police had "probable cause" which makes them more than suspects.

It'll be interesting to see if there are any more thefts after this incident.

Agreed, although that doesn't necessarily mean anything - the real perps could be laying low.

Yes, everyone is a suspect. However just because the cops may have had a "tip" on this student does not mean he is guilty. He could have just been an easy scapegoat, since he was afterall not the brightest or most popular with the student body. Have you ever heard the idea of innocent until proven guilty? How can you prove he stole it from just a tip?

Yes.. but if you have a tip you bring them in for questioning... cops go by tips all the time.. if they didnt noone would get caught.


Yes, they should. It is the only way to be respectful of that student and his innocence. Was he fully proven guilty? No. So until then he deserves no public humiliation. Plus, word of mouth that someone got arrested would have been good enough.

I think you value a high schoolers image way to much. These are only high school kids.. and while you probably value all the vanity and how people perceive you.. outside of the high school "fake reality", noone cares. What you call "public humiliation" i call normal. If they weren't guilty... then its not humiliation at all... everyone would KNOW they were innocent. Plus, they probably are ENJOYING all the extra publicity they are getting, they are probably getting more girls because high school chicks love jailbirds, and they are probably laughing about it if they are not guilty. Ive been in high school before i know how the story goes. "public humiliation" isn't a crime... unless its taking away from your business or something. Do girls get locked up for starting rumors about the other girl they hate? Nope...


That's sad you'd expect that. Just because you did something wrong we can then do something wrong to you? That's hypocritical. Also, if you were in that cop car on only the assumption you had stolen something and you had actually not done it would you have been pissed off? Is that fair? No, it isn't.

You value criminal rights way too much... I think as long as cops don't beat someone needlessly and physically abuse them... anything else is nothing. If you get arrested at your job.. its not a "crime" to be cuffed and carried out of the restaurant in front of all of your work mates... While you are so worried about their image.. cops dont have time to worry about that kind of stuff. They do their job, they catch the bad guy.. or attempt to, and they deal with people who carry knives, guns, and are trying to break free... cops have to deal with people in a worst-case scenario. Who gives a flying shit if a criminal is "humiliated".. they SHOULD be humiliated because they broke the law. And while you are trying paint a picture like cops are holding a gun to his head to scare anyone else away from criminal activity.. this is NOT that. This is police officers doing their job... People should know that if they steal shit they will be punished. You are bitching about normal police work... like someone said earlier.. i am willing to bet that noone will steal anything anytime soon... problem solved.. and noone was threatened or abused by the police officers.


It is one thing to arrest someone (in public for everyone to see) for driving drunk (using the breathe thingy) on the spot and is another to arrest someone for the assumption that he stole something a few months ago.

Hey, if you did the crime you do the time. Just because it was "a few months ago" doesn't take away from the severity of the crime. Stealing is a crime, defacing someone's image at a high school isn't. And they DESERVE to get their image defaced.. so what is your beef? Remember.. high school is fake, its a fake reality.. People in the real world look at high schoolers and know that its just a popularity contest. So while you view it as a HORRID DEFAMATION... i see it as some kid getting what he has coming to him.. and maybe he'll learn to grow up a bit. If he was not guilty, which you still don't know.. than at least the police are hot on the tail and trying to catch the bad guy. They probably apologized and like said earlier... the kids are probably enjoying the "bad boy image"...


What details do I not know? He wasn't the person as he is back at school today. And even if he was that is still wrong to deal with it in such a childish way.

Why don't you ask the kids what happened... maybe they did get released on bail, waiting for a court date, or something like that... get all the info.

Yes.. but if you have a tip you bring them in for questioning... cops go by tips all the time.. if they didnt noone would get caught.
Why couldn't they have questioned him in the principal's office? Why did they have to do it infront of the school, with the door open? It seems they had several options of where to question him but they picked the place where the entire student body could see him. I doubt they did that on accident.

If they weren't guilty... then its not humiliation at all... everyone would KNOW they were innocent.
Just because we now know he wasn't guilty does not change the overall impression of this student. He is a stoner, gets poor grades, has issues with other students and was just put in the back of a cop car handcuffed. Even if he was innocent that does not take away from the overall idea that this kid is such a fuck up that he was picked as the person who did this crime.

Plus, they probably are ENJOYING all the extra publicity they are getting, they are probably getting more girls because high school chicks love jailbirds, and they are probably laughing about it if they are not guilty.
Your sad assumptions are laughable. I highly doubt he is enjoying the extra publicity.

You value criminal rights way too much... I think as long as cops don't beat someone needlessly and physically abuse them... anything else is nothing.
I do not value the rights of a criminal too much. He wasn't a criminal. I value the rights of an innocent person being accused of something they didn't do. Please understand the difference. We are not talking about a guilty person.

And while you are trying paint a picture like cops are holding a gun to his head to scare anyone else away from criminal activity.. this is NOT that. This is police officers doing their job... People should know that if they steal shit they will be punished. You are bitching about normal police work... like someone said earlier.. i am willing to bet that noone will steal anything anytime soon... problem solved.. and noone was threatened or abused by the police officers.
Actually, you are wrong yet again. You keep assuming this student was guilty of the crime. But he was not guilty. The police and the school administration was wrong. Dead wrong. And they made a mockery out of a student who was innocent. That is not the police doing their job, that is the police abusing someone who is innocent to try and stop further crime. That is wrong. Also, they were doing their job in the most obvious place for the student body to see.

Hey, if you did the crime you do the time. Just because it was "a few months ago" doesn't take away from the severity of the crime. Stealing is a crime, defacing someone's image at a high school isn't. And they DESERVE to get their image defaced.. so what is your beef?
HE DID NOT DO THE CRIME. He does not deserve to get his image defaced because he was innocent and the police and the administration was wrong. Your entire post is 100% off target. I suggest you actually read the facts before posting a fucking stupid response.

Remember.. high school is fake, its a fake reality.. People in the real world look at high schoolers and know that its just a popularity contest. So while you view it as a HORRID DEFAMATION... i see it as some kid getting what he has coming to him.. and maybe he'll learn to grow up a bit. If he was not guilty, which you still don't know.. than at least the police are hot on the tail and trying to catch the bad guy. They probably apologized and like said earlier... the kids are probably enjoying the "bad boy image"...
You finnally admit that he might not have done the stealing. So until we know for sure (which I think we already do know) then don't assume someone who was guilty was punished in the correct way. Your entire response was based on the fact that he was guilty. That isn't the case. I consider your entire response an un-educated one that is talking about a criminal when this student was not proven as a criminal before he was arrested on spot.

Why don't you ask the kids what happened... maybe they did get released on bail, waiting for a court date, or something like that... get all the info.
If he was released on bail, waiting for a court date, the school wouldn't allow him back until the trial was over.

1. I value the rights of an innocent person being accused of something they didn't do.
We are not talking about a guilty person.
But he was not guilty.

---OR----

.... he might not have done the stealing. So until we know for sure (which I think we already do know) ...

2. this student was not proven as a criminal before he was arrested on spot.
1. Confusing. Are you saying he didn't do it, or he may not have done it.

2. This is what I meant by understanding basic concepts. People are NEVER "proven as a criminal" before arrest. That can only take place at trial and trial can only take place after arrest.

If he was released on bail, waiting for a court date, the school wouldn't allow him back until the trial was over.
Absolutely incorrect. I just asked my mother, a teacher and one who plans on running for school board in a few years, and is also a sister of a current school board member. Oh, and also taught EH and LD students and fully knows the laws surrounding these sorts of incidents. If a student is released to their parents or on bail, the school has little reason to suspend them. In fact, if he was released to his parents or on bail, and does not show up at school the next day, he is breaking the law. He would be, in fact, truant. The idea that he was back in school the next day is no clear indicator that he is innocent. Because, as you were saying, if he is innocent until proven guilty, the school cannot suspend him. This is disregarding the fact that schools bypass your rights and can suspend you without proper evidence, but the fact that they relinquished the case to the Police shows that they didn't want it in their hands, and therefore have no reason to suspend him.
And now what argument do you have left?

Absolutely incorrect. I just asked my mother, a teacher and one who plans on running for school board in a few years, and is also a sister of a current school board member. Oh, and also taught EH and LD students and fully knows the laws surrounding these sorts of incidents. If a student is released to their parents or on bail, the school has little reason to suspend them. In fact, if he was released to his parents or on bail, and does not show up at school the next day, he is breaking the law. He would be, in fact, truant. The idea that he was back in school the next day is no clear indicator that he is innocent. Because, as you were saying, if he is innocent until proven guilty, the school cannot suspend him. This is disregarding the fact that schools bypass your rights and can suspend you without proper evidence, but the fact that they relinquished the case to the Police shows that they didn't want it in their hands, and therefore have no reason to suspend him.
And now what argument do you have left?
Does your mother know the laws in the state of Oregon? I’d be curious to know if the laws were the same in every state or if they differed from state to state or even school district to school district.

I suppose him coming back to school may not be a 100% indicator that he is innocent and I agree with you that I may have misspoken in that respect. However that isn’t nearly everything I’m trying to argue. The fact that he is neither innocent nor guilty suggests to me that he should have been treated in a far more decent and respectful way. Putting him in the back of a cop car for two school periods while handcuffed for the entire school population to see, is presenting the assumption that he is indeed guilty (they knew this would be the assumption made if they left him infront of the school) Not to mention the administration and the police department knew putting him in front of the school would cast fear into the student body and that was done at the expense of only a potentially guilty person. That isn’t fair nor justified.

I never said in the legal sense they didn’t have the right to keep the police car there with the door open. I’m speaking about a sense of decency they didn’t show that student. They could have parked on the side of the school where the teachers park, they could have taken him down to the police department or talked to him in the principals office. All of those things are viable options they chose not to do. This was done to provoke fear which I find extremely distasteful especially if this student is found to be innocent.

Also, the way in which you present yourself comes off very egotistical. Your mother isn’t an all knowing person and what you said isn’t the word of God or anything. Step off of your high horse.

Does your mother know the laws in the state of Oregon? I’d be curious to know if the laws were the same in every state or if they differed from state to state or even school district to school district.
These sorts of things don't differ much. Intense felony charges result in suspension, such as armed robery, assault, etc. not petty theft, even if it reaches grand theft. Also, a student cannot be suspended more than a third of the school year, I believe. It's the point in which it causes a severe detrement to his grades because of the suspension. That's a student right, the ACLU would take that one up.
Also, the way in which you present yourself comes off very egotistical. Your mother isn’t an all knowing person and what you said isn’t the word of God or anything. Step off of your high horse.
Don't claim with absolute certainty that he is innocent. Your reasoning was false. Also, if I had merely stated what I already knew without justification, you would have claimed me to be ignorant, but now you just mock a person with far more knowledge of this subject than you. Unlike you I don't take my mother's word as law and I hardly ever agree with her, I do however agree with her in this case as it does fall within the realm of her speciality.

I never said in the legal sense they didn’t have the right to keep the police car there with the door open. I’m speaking about a sense of decency they didn’t show that student.
Suspects in a criminal investigation do not deserve a sense of "decency". They are suspects for a reason and the faster they're either ruled out or determined to be the one ready for trial the better. They only retain their rights as citizens and humans and can be neither beaten nor unjustly harrased. This case however does not fall outside the bounds of decency as all they did was sat there. Oh no! High school, my life, nobody likes me anymore because I was seen sitting in a police car! Oh boo hoo, I'm so humilated. If that's not whinny and unjustified, I don't know what is...

These sorts of things don't differ much. Intense felony charges result in suspension, such as armed robery, assault, etc. not petty theft, even if it reaches grand theft.
Where is it cited that grand theft would not result in suspension? I’d love to see the support for that claim and I’m not being sarcastic.


Don't claim with absolute certainty that he is innocent. Your reasoning was false. Also, if I had merely stated what I already knew without justification, you would have claimed me to be ignorant, but now you just mock a person with far more knowledge of this subject than you. Unlike you I don't take my mother's word as law and I hardly ever agree with her, I do however agree with her in this case as it does fall within the realm of her speciality.
Firstly, I’ve already revoked the statement about his innocence in my last post. Dwelling on that proves nothing in this debate. Secondly, you spoke about your mother who lives in a different state and who is in a different school district. I was not mocking her I was merely pointing out that her knowledge on this subject might not be golden. My school district is very different from most in many ways. The vast majority of our students including this particular student and myself come from out of district. He has an out of district grant to attend this school and since he is out of district I’m fairly certain they could kick him out of our school for theft or even the suspicion of theft. But that really isn’t the issue I’m talking about. I just want to let you know that until you know the details about my district or my state I wouldn’t jump to assumptions before asking. But again, I'm not really arguing about that in this debate.

Suspects in a criminal investigation do not deserve a sense of "decency". They are suspects for a reason and the faster they're either ruled out or determined to be the one ready for trial the better. They only retain their rights as citizens and humans and can be neither beaten nor unjustly harrased. This case however does not fall outside the bounds of decency as all they did was sat there. Oh no! High school, my life, nobody likes me anymore because I was seen sitting in a police car! Oh boo hoo, I'm so humilated. If that's not whinny and unjustified, I don't know what is...
You have a skewed perception in many ways. Just because you are a suspect does not mean you are automatically guilty and you still in my opinion deserve respect. Just because you personally believe it wasn’t harassment does not mean it wasn’t harassment in all reality. They kept him in that police car for two whole periods and while school was released. To me that is an unjustified amount of time to be kept inside of a police car. They knew the questioning would last a long time and even if they didn’t know this (which I highly doubt) you typically put someone in a cop car to transport them to the police department to be questioned. The police car is not designed or intended to be used as a place to question someone for an extended period of time. It is a place to transport the officers to do their job or to bring suspects/criminals back the police department. Proving they did this entire thing on purpose to create fear amongst the student body. They also had several other places they could have gone if they didn’t want to haul him to the police department, but they didn’t do that. They purposely let him stay in front of the school with the door open.

Just because you don’t feel someone should worry about their image does not mean the masses wouldn’t feel harassed. But I think harassment has a lot to do with if something is done to someone for the intent of embarrassing that person or the intent to do something cruel. Judging by the length of time they kept him there, the way they positioned the car suggests they intended for him to be embarrassed. Also judging by the fact that a cop car isn’t the place for being questioned (but something to transport officers, suspects and criminals), means they did this whole scene on purpose to put fear into the student body. I find that unjustified on the part of the police to do this entire thing on purpose.

Does your mother know the laws in the state of Oregon? I’d be curious to know if the laws were the same in every state or if they differed from state to state or even school district to school district. heh. While Blibblobs mom may not be an "official source" she is right. The school could choose to suspend them if they had evidence. Obviously they don't otherwise they would not have called the cops. This is a snitch. They handed it to the cops so their rooms could be searched. They would be considered truant if they weren't suspended.

Thats like saying you can't vote because you are under investigation. It doesn't make sense because it would needlessly burden innocent victims (as if the court system doesn't do that already...)