Slashdot Mirror
Children Arrested, DNA Tested for Playing in a Tree?
skelator2821 wrote in with another account of a police action gone way overboard. From the article: "To the 12-year-old friends planning to build themselves a den, the cherry tree seemed an inviting source of material. But the afternoon adventure turned into a frightening ordeal for Sam Cannon, Amy Higgins and Katy Smith after they climbed into the 20ft tree - then found themselves hauled into a police station and locked into cells for up to two hours." skelator2821's basic question in all of this: "What is this World coming to? Do you think they went to far?" Well? Do you?
and Yes
They only went too far, if the tree was less than 20ft..
Never happened. True story.
Where else is he gonna make out with 2 chicks when his Mom is home?
We shoot our children down from the trees.
That should teach you to mess with a tree.
I'm not sure. I, myself, have never been to far.
We recently had heard in the office over one of the Yellow Machine that's made by Anthology Solutions.
That's a pretty good way to introduce the kids to the way this country works - complete strangers can cause you large amounts of suffering for the smallest mistakes. That's not how the country SHOULD work, of course, but it is.
Did they lie about chopping down the cherry tree?
These children have nothing to hide. They should not be afraid of DNA tests, or being interviewed by police.
Besides, what if they got hurt falling out of that tree? The police are here to help.
--
make install -not war
I mean, if a police officer can't haul three twelve-year-olds to jail on spurious charges, take mugshots, and record DNA samples, how are we ever going to win the war on terror?
Push Button, Receive Bacon
The environmentalist/brave new world crowd has reached a paradox
Cops are dicks.
They always have been and always will be. I can count on one hand the number of run-ins I've had with cops that have been anything other than shitty - and no, I'm not a criminal.
Of course they went too far, they often do.
The culture of deliberate, misleading, trumped-up fear we live in today isn't helping anything either.
Frankly, we need more stories like this so more people realize just what the hell is going on.
disturbed by the "anti-social behavoir" remarks? Or is it just me?
Could they have been imprisoned for Climbing While Black? Sounds crazy, but so is the number of Afro-Carribeans pulled over in the USA for Driving While Black...
Tubal-Cain smokes the white owl.
12 year olds....DNA samples (and stored for X years) taken without parental or legal approval? Insane.
Is the law in Britain to take (and store) DNA samples when you are simply arrested? Convicted, yes, I can see....but just arrested? Insane.
(this does not even go into the complete foolishness of arresting them for what they actually did).
seems they went too far but if you ask me cops have been going a bit to far for at least 5 years+ now.
Superintendent Stuart Johnson, operations manager at Halesowen police station, said: 'I support the actions of my officers who responded to complaints from the public about "kids destroying" an ornamental cherry tree by stripping every branch from it, in an area where there have been reports of anti-social behaviour.
Since when was being anti-social a crime?
So in the UK they put kids into the same holding areas as adults and can gather DNA from them without some sort of court order or parental consent? And the criminal records of children can actually be queried by schools?
Not flamebait, not an attack on the UK, but serious questions.
"What is this World coming to? Do you think they went to far?"
No, I think they came from far and went to ridiculous.
In the article, the parents only had things like "the police went too far" to say about their children being arrested. I probably would have been harder on the police department, but one has to wonder about the 12-year-old's responses to their experience (one of the boys was crying uncontrollably, and one of the girls went back to sleeping with her parents). These infant-willed "preteens" didn't belong in a 20 foot cherry tree.
"And we have seen and do testify that the Father sent the Son to be the Savior of the World"
1 John 4:14
Now at least these three kids and all of their friends will realize firsthand what sort of world they're coming into rather than having to wait until they're all grown up to figure it out like most people do (if they ever do). The people who start the action that fixes these sort of problems are often the same people who have suffered because of them.
We do not live in the 21st century. We live in the 20 second century.
Read the article. The kids were white, and it wasn't in the USA.
Superintendent Stuart Johnson, operations manager at Halesowen police station, said: 'I support the actions of my officers who responded to complaints from the public about "kids destroying" an ornamental cherry tree by stripping every branch from it, in an area where there have been reports of anti-social behaviour.
:P
Why is it the kids that are anti-social? Why not the old (in spirit, if not age) curmudgeon that reported them? I can understand the Superintendent standing behind acting on the report, but what was done was overkill. What happened to just running the kids to their parents? I can understand if this was on private property (still overkill, but at least there'd be better justification for trespassing/liability concerns).
Since this is a UK story, I could understand if it was a tea tree. I'll email a modified synopsis to an english friend and see if they pass out or call for the death penalty
"Common sense will be the death of us all"
So, seriously, can someone explain to me what the eff "Anti-social behaviour" in a legal context means? Sounds to me like I'd be arrested in heartbeat there! While this and other "zero-tolerance" policies seem so offensive to us, just think about what our grandchildren will say. They'll be so accustomed to this type of law enforcement it won't phase them at all. "What do you expect, grandpa, they were climbing a tree for godsake! Somebody had to do something!"
In the criminal justice system, arboreal trespassing offenses are considered especially heinous. In the West Midlands, the dedicated detectives who investigate these vicious felonies are members of an elite squad known as the Halesowen police. These are their stories.
Feeling as I do that this power relationship brings out the uglier sides of human nature, I'm always sure to let them be the alpha male (or female) so I don't trigger any "I must prove that I'm a badass" reactions. But I'm one of the people who see the implications of the Zimbardo prison experiment in everyday situations, probably to an extent where most people would be rolling their eyes and saying "you're really reaching now."
I guess the cops are worried that they might be terrorists any by climbing the tree they'll be at a higher altitude, making it easier to shoot down planefuls of peace-loving citizens.
Engineering is the art of compromise.
Sorry to rant, but I feel disgusted with law enforcement agencies lately.
Why the parents have to be under constant pressure, whether their kids will be in trouble for doing something innocent over the web, that might qualify as hacking, the websites they visit, the files they download, the files they share and so on.[/rant]
Are we losing humanity in cops?? Makes me sick of them. Sorry...
hilarious
Superintendent Stuart Johnson, operations manager at Halesowen police station, said: 'I support the actions of my officers who responded to complaints from the public about "kids destroying" an ornamental cherry tree by stripping every branch from it, in an area where there have been reports of anti-social behaviour.
I don't know what is worse; that there was more than one complaint from the public that kids were being kids or that they stripped the poor tree of every branch. Not much of a tree house when all you have is a big stick in the ground eh?
Cherry tree stripping; the gateway crime to murder.
This makes me mad! Those police are going crazy these days. Why can't things be like they were when I was twelve? I'm so angry, I'm going to write a letter to those police and give them a peice of my mind! "Dear Aunt...
Oh, no! Three twelve year olds having fun! I better call the fucking cops!
The people who called in are probably chatting with those kids' parents right now about how the police over-reacted.
oh, wait...
I'm surprised that this valuable forest was not guarded by CCTV, then the police wouldn't have had to wait for neighbors to call them.
"Bob, forget screen 3, it's just a bank robbery. Look at screen 9, those kids! They're molesting nature! Call out the Worcestershire & Sherwood Foresters Regiment!"
Carp man, Brits need some real problems if forest molestation is a major police issue.
Why are women so complicated? Find out how little I know here.
FTFA (bolded text was done by me):
... civilized my ass.
Questioned by police, the scared friends admitted they had broken some loose branches because they had wanted to build a tree house, but said they did not realise what they had done was wrong.
Officers considered charging the children with criminal damage but eventually decided a reprimand - the equivalent of a caution for juveniles - was sufficient.
I can think of many other people to be arresting for criminal damage.
What the heck is this world coming to? Kids playing in a tree, break a few branches and get arrested (and DNA tested!? WTF?). Meanwhile, corporations are allowed to get away with this garbage. Yeah, there's nothing wrong with world
AirSpeak - http://itunes.com/apps/AirSpeak
This is the same country where police executed an unarmed and immobilized man for wearing a winter coat on the subway. These kids should count their blessings.
you can already get fined hundreds of dollars in my town if you're a kid (less than 18 years old) and out past midnight on a public sidewalk
heck, once i was pulled over under the guise of having out-of-date lisence plates, when in reality i was being pulled over because the police officer thought i had too many teenagers in my car and i looked suspicious.
the police officer actually asked everyone in my car for our IDs and looked each of us over before saying "you want to hear a funny joke? your plates aren't actually expired, i just thought they were when i started pulling you over and had to commit to the pull over"
yeah right, lady. real "funny joke"
I know that slashdot is a site where you can keep up on current world affairs and such. But if the police hadn't done the DNA tests or had the title not had DNA in it would this article even be up?
FWIW, I've had several run-ins with cops and they've been mostly friendly. I ran a red light when I was 16. I've been pulled over for speeding twice on the interstates. I had a minor fender bender [unrelated to the other incidents]. I've summoned police and/or medical for people in several life-threatening situations. I've dealt with local police, city police, campus police, state police, and the county sheriff deputies in several situations in different states and I really have no complaints. They were respectful, fair, and helpful. Maybe it's just because I'm white though.
it's a blue bright blue Saturday hey hey
It's just like the people who said "if it turns out Iraq doesn't have a WMD program, then I will oppose the war," and when Iraq was found to lack a WMD program, they still supported the war, because once you're in, rationalizations and prevarications are too easy to muster to maintain consistency. You don't want to waffle, do you? On the other end of the spectrum, leftists didn't want to acknowledge the excesses of Stalinism, because they had chosen a side. Loyalty to any party or ideology is incompatible with integrity.
Prosecuting criminals is hard; persecuting the innocent is easy.
No, it's a CHERRY tree. Cherry. Read the article, man. They say Cherry tree several times.
I cannot believe this could happen in the United States, the Land of the Free! Oh wait, the UK? Who cares.
I just hope that their parents reinforce this in the right way. "Yes, dear, the police shouldn't have done that. Sometimes the people in charge do bad things." and not "Well, sorry, dear, I guess you need to be more careful out there. These are uncertain times, and it's best just to go with the flow."
Your mind is clear / The things that you fear / Will fade with how much you / Believe what you hear
Where I live, some kids were charged with "terroristic activities" after they used baking soda to create "bombs" out of plastic bottles. As a result, the school system is now mandating that students use clear plastic backpacks at all times next year. Sure, everybody will know when little Suzie's on the rag now, but we all know kids will treat such subjects with maturity, and it's all worth it if we can save even one plastic bottle.
Granted, such activity should not be tolerated in school, but when I was a kid we called them pranks, not terrorist plots.
https://www.eff.org/https-everywhere
YOU'LL BREAK YOUR NECK!!!
No folly is more costly than the folly of intolerant idealism. - Winston Churchill
'West Midlands Police deals robustly with anti-social behaviour. By targeting what may seem relatively low-level crime we aim to prevent it developing into more serious matters.'
First off, how is this "anti-social"? I'd say that unless you believe in tree feelings, this has nothing to do with any kind of society damaging behaviour.
I am sick of the idea of dealing harshly with small crimes (does this even constitute a crime?) to prevent big crimes. I don't have the statistics, but i'd be willing to bet that the police in this town didn't do much research that confirms that playing in trees as a child develops often into society destroying behaviour in adulthood.
I honestly thought that this could be some kind of joke... I'd laugh, if I wasn't worried that neighborhood kids are going to be getting jailed for playing. Get inside kids, and no video games either. It will be sesame street and brocolli, and noone gets hurt. Pathetic.
You take it, I don't want it...
It seems unanimous that the cops went "too far". Probably so. And, yes, I hate the cops too. In the United States, most cops seem to me to be louts with too much power and too little education.
Nobody has commented, though, on the seriousness of the kids' behaviour. Destruction of a tree on public land is true vandalism. A twenty foot tree may be twenty years old--and much harder to replace than man-made targets of vandalism, such as signs, cars, or windows. The parents of these children should have taught their children to respect trees as common property of incalculable value.
I live near public land in the United States and the behaviour of children using the land is appalling. I've seen acres of land ripped up by dirt bikes, seedling trees intentionally pulled up for no apparent reason except boredom, and, yes, branches broken for the purpose of making "forts." Most of the land used regularly by children is simply barren, except for those trees tall enough to withstand constant abuse. Those trees, too, will eventually die, and there will be no young trees to replace them.
I wonder how the /. population will react when the news breaks that Sam was actually attempting to induct poor little Amy and Katy into the "20 foot high club." :-)
:P I kid. I kid. :)
I can hear the comments now: "Stone the bastard!!! I've never even gotten any at ground level, so why should a 12 yr old punk get two at 20 feet high???"
Ok ok. Just kidding. The real story is that Amy and Katy were trying to induct Sam.
Depending on how much has been mediahyped vs the reality of what happened... Police say "destroy"... media says "a few lose branches"... Police says "ornamental".. media says "a tree in a public area" I think the only mistake the police mad was to actually put them in a cell. They should of definitely detained them and kept them for holding while their parents came to collect and discuss the problem. Did the police have a suitable facility (ie not a cell) to hold children in while waiting for the parents? In my opinion they should of been DNA sampled (if that is the standard procedure) and given the reprimands which they were. What if their DNA samples linked them to a series of known other criminal and anti-social acts? Then we would all be touting how wonderful the new technology is working, not that their persons have been invaded by DNA samples being recorded. What they did was a criminal act, destruction of public property. It was not an intentional breaking of the law. They should not of been charged for it as they are just children and the Police did not charge them. There is no mention by the media how the children behaved... this may of purposely left out by the media to pain the picture they wanted? If they were being openly offensive to the officers (anti-social behaviour) they may of got exactly what they deserved. For all we know the children could be known trouble makers who were spitting and abusing the officers, inversely they could be the sweet little angels which todays society produces (yes thats sarcasm). How fast do Cherry tree grows? I would assume a 20ft Cherry tree takes decades to grow? How badly did they damage something which may take 10?20?30 years to fix? The short of it... yes I think they went too far... but only for putting them in an actual jail cell.
It's like the situation with Syria and Iran. We can't reward 'bad behavior'. Next thing you know, we'll be rewarding 'acting out' too. Much better to kill these lawbreakers, refuse adequate representation at trial, and force them to work with an essentially b0rked appeals system, then execuite them with drugs so inhumane that we don't allow dogs to be put to sleep with them. Right? RIGHT!? I mean, after all, we're KILLING them, why should we be humane about it?! MAKE THEM SUFFER, the little future terrorists!
Serves the little law breakers right!(/sarcasm).
See sig. Says it all, eh?
My honor and trust goes to the People of the US, not a particular party or government.
Necessity is the plea for every infringement of human freedom. It is the argument of tyrants; it is the creed of slaves.
Oh won't someone PLEASE think of the children?!?!?! ...oh wait, it looks like they are, and even the children are criminals.
The summary neglects to mention that the kids were causing damage to the tree in question, which was public property.
I'm not saying that those damages in any way justify the police's actions, but it's just damned irresponsible to simply leave this sort of information out of the summary.
Mr. Period: Nine is the one that's right by ten!
Nine: One day I will kill him. Then, I will be Ten.
Really, this tree might be a rare endangered species. Or harbor several. I bet it's got some rare Northern Reticulated Chipmunks in it!
How dare these kids endanger them!
Gotta protect the underage cherries.
That whole thing about power corrupting isn't just a saying, folks, but it's nice that people are starting to notice. The Drug War Chronicles have been doing a "corrupt cop of the week" series for years now. Drug enforcement is particularly succeptable to corruption because there's very little moral difference between breaking drug laws and enforcing them. As our privacy laws are eroded and the enforcement of laws becomes less and less differentiated from invasion of privacy, you can expect to see that kind of corruption creeping into normal law enforcement, too.
Wake up - the future is arriving faster than you think.
for just a moment.
"Stripping every branch from an ornamental cherry tree on public land." to paraphrase a bit.
How many hundreds or even thousands of pounds of damage would this cause? Would you be more outraged if they had spraypainted your car, fixable in a few days for a few pounds, than destroying a tree that took many years to grow, and is only replaceable by purchasing a mature tree, hiring a crew and excavation equipment, and having it attended to until it is established?
I was more upset about the tree in front of my house than the damaged car. I need to get new cars every few years, but I expected that tree to outlive me. Oh well, plant another just seedling and wait for some asshole to rip it down again. You might have had a bit of shade in a few more years, but go ahead and sweat.
Lose the DNA, and charge their parents for a replacement tree. Let's see who is outraged then.
The latest Slashdot meme.
I guess well stop seeig so many "good times" commercials on television with children climbing trees... Atleast when "COPS" isnt on.
______ F4ITH8
But the trees! Won't somebody please think of the trees?
What the hell are they testing the kids DNA for? Were there dozens of trees in the area, all standing akwardly... with little twigs laying in ruin around them? The police were dispatched to collect sticks from the entire area, scraping them, testing for human intervention?
I certainly hope it wasn't windy that day...
You take it, I don't want it...
It's not just any tree. It's an ornamental tree! C'mon, we all know it's fine to mess with a normal tree. But to fool around in an ornamental tree, why, that's terrorism!
While it was not (yet) as bad as The Sun when I left the UK in 2002, the Daily Mail was a strident, hysterical, sensationalist muckracking journal well on its way to parity. I would believe maybe 15-20% of what is reported here as "fact". The paper also carries a political/social agenda on just about everything, and I suspect very strongly that we are seeing an extremely distorted story that is being "economical with the truth".
So, if -- and that's a VERY big if -- everything reported is true I deplore it, but I have serious doubts as to whether the story is at all objective.
If the Mail was looking for a reaction, I'm sure it got what it was after.
It's interesting that Google News and Google proper only carry two reports of this, and there is no mention on the BBC web site (as of 21.38 PDT).
This has all the hallmarks of a carefully manufactured and groomed story deisgned to garner publicty and web page impressions.
Call me old fashioned, but I like a dump to be as memorable as it is devastating - Bender
Thank you, Tony Blair. Having created a crime-free paradise (by American standards), the British government has proceeded to outlaw merely unpleasant behaviour.
...in another topic we like the idea of a biometric vending machine.
We already crossed the border and there is no way back.
Welcome to the Brave World - it's no longer New.
"Nobody has commented, though, on the seriousness of the kids' behaviour."
If you're more concerned about kids breaking tree branches to build a fort than the cops locking them up for it, then you need to seek professional help. It's not even like the kids were doing it because they wanted to destroy something, they were trying to get some wood to build something -- so do you think that anyone who cuts down a tree to procure lumber should be locked up? If a kid breaking a couple branches is worthy of all this, then someone cutting down multiple trees should be given at least 10 years in jail *note sarcasm*.
I have a couple of questions here:
1. were the children informed of their rights
(not sure what rights they have in the UK)?
2. did the police obtain proper consent from either
the parents or their "lawyers"?
in this case, its sounds like the police definitely
overreacted initially, then the system ran roughshod
over these kids without thought to their well being.
it would have been simpler if the officer had simply
asked the kids what they were up to WITHOUT causing
any problems.
Understanding is much like a 3-edged-sword. in this: there are always 2 sides and the truth.
Yes.
Fucking hell, this question actually has to be asked?
Tomorrow I will go down to my local police building, climb a tree in the yard, and pull off a couple branches when I get to the top. I'll let you know what happens.
I read the story and the comments and when I read this one:
Have they lost their senses? Children play in trees, they always have and always will. Have tnhe police become so detatched from real people that they cannot see the difference between this and antisocial behaviour?
- Rob, London, UK - I thought to myself, well children used to play in the trees, but they will play in the trees no more.
I wonder why DNA was taken from kids? Are the police going to see if the tree brings out rape charges and they think they may need the DNA for evidence?
You can't handle the truth.
people go out of their way to respond in the biggest possible way
[Begin Rant]
Except in bars... Where innocent people are frequently beaten up for saying something social to the wrong girl. The bar usually responds by kicking them both out. Try calling the police, and the bouncers will explain to them that you were both at fault, and due to the fact the bars have some kind of agreement with cops that gives bouncers (the sick degenerate fucks they are) some level of power to make these claims, they always win. I am in disbelief at the stupid shit that the police waste their time with, while there are real injustices going on constantly with little or no attention. It really makes me sick.
Fuck the Police!
[end rant]
You take it, I don't want it...
Clearly, they raped the poor tree and should be put on the sex offenders list.
-- Neminem laede, immo omnes, quantum potes, iuva.
Everyone who thinks it's perfectly okay for "kids (to be) destroying" an ornamental cherry tree by stripping every branch from it' that isn't on the property of their parents doesn't seem to have a clue about landscaping costs and the cost of trees. I doubt any of the people who think 'kids just want to have fun' have any property at all. Every tree on private property belongs to somebody, every tree on public property belongs to everyone. If the tree was damaged the parents of the kids should be held liable for the cost, if it was damaged badly enough that the tree needed to be replaced that money should have come from the parents who obviously didn't teach their kids to respect the property of others. The article says "The children didn't realise they were doing anything wrong, they didn't deliberately set out to damage the tree." - That was the quote from their father, who further opines that the value of a tree is worth only a 'ticking off' by the police. Obviously he knows better now although it's hard to sympathetically judge the intelligence of someone who doesn't know that stripping every branch off of a tree would be damaging to that tree. Vandalism isn't 'good harmless fun' - anyone who thinks differently please relate stories of how you watched kids tear up your yards, property and valuable and how it wistfully reminded you of your childhoods.
Enjoy your Karma, after all you earned it. Feel your Karma Joe, feel it burn.
Now how is that newsworthy?
Tony Blair is history. Iraq will see to that. England used to be quite a country. I know the colonies are gone (that's a good thing), but when are you Brits going to tell our country to bugger off? When the fuck are you going to stand up?
What? No SWAT team? The government is loosening up too much these days
You are an enemy of the people. You will no disappear from all records and never be heard from again.
Great Intellect...
My stepfather, a immigrant from Holland, told me recently about his misadventures as a youth (here in the US). He was definely a wild one. He and his friends used to climb trees and throw eggs at passing cars.
Can you imagine if he had done this today? He would probably be on the next plane back to Holland.
Its sad when there is so much crime that goes unsolved because a$$hole meglomanic cops spend their time booking kinds for climbing trees. I am tempeted to wish thier parents hire a good lawyer and stick it to them, but its OUR tax money after all.
At the very least the parent should have the right to force the police to destroy the DNA samples. If not someday Jonny might be passed out at a college party when a crime occurs. The police collect DNA and run it in the database and up pops Jonny's name. A the least it will be hassle for him. At the worst, he might celebrate his next birthday at Leavonworth.
-- TMK
-OSCON just wrapped up. What do you think of it?
-Just in general, not specifically related to the treehouse story, are cops fascist thugs sometimes?
-Bill Gates has a bazillion dollars. Isn't that too much?
-Does this dress make me look fat?
its a long trip.
This space available.
Superintendent Stuart Johnson, operations manager at Halesowen police station (often referred to at the Halloween police station since the scandal of '94), thoughtfully examined the pages that were to be the public report of the incident. Yes, many in the town would have already suspected the true nature of the childrens' transgressions but it would not do to let any hint reach beyond the already frightened local citizenry. The problem had to be stopped here, before it became a threat to national security.
... to be continued ...
These 'innocent children', as the world press referred to them, had the upper hand at the moment, but the Superintendent was already laying plans to thwart the devious activities of these and the rest of the Satanic elements that terrorized the community.
It would be three weeks ago now that two of these presently involved and two others known to the police were involved in the most heinous
...omphaloskepsis often...
From the BBC News web site: "A group of youngsters has fallen foul of the law for playing hopscotch. (...) Several children were involved in the games resulting in several markings on the pavement. Police said they were also investigating complaints of anti-social behaviour." http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/england/west_midlands/5 233262.stm
-- Neminem laede, immo omnes, quantum potes, iuva.
Obviously the police in this case acting ridiculously, remember that it's only cases like these that make the news. For every story like this, there's countless untold ones where they're putting their lives on the line for our safety.
Just playing the Devil's Advocate, but what if the kids actually were "destroying an ornamental cherry tree by stripping every branch from it" ?? Of course it doesn't warrant being DNA tested, but it seems that's part and parcel of being arrested in the UK these days.
If the kids were actually destroying the tree, and not just breaking off some "loose branches" (are they not attached to the tree, as the definition of loose implies??), surely that warrants some kind of formal caution (which is what they ended up with). And it's just possible that the people who made the complaints were not confident or brave enough to approach a group of teenagers to tell them to stop.
Maybe there's more to the story than the kids and their parents are saying... like I said, just playing Devil's Advocate.
peace
.wook
Maybe they can get their act together and arrest this cherry tree chopping miscreant too!
Because of all of these "police going overboard" stories on Slashdot here lately, I think
a "pigs" category would be appropriate. It could even be called "oink oink" or something
like that.
A shrubbery, you say?
I have just one question, were these "children" in possession of a Herring? Ah yes, just as I thought. Indeed, plainly this caper was part of that infamous criminal cohort the Knights who 'til recently said "Ni", now commonly referred to as the Knights who say "Ekky-ekky-ekky-ekky-z'Bang, zoom-Boing, z'nourrrwringmm".
http://lorien.sdsu.edu/~carroll/shrub.html
"Don't you know you're going to shock the monkey?"- Peter Gabriel
Since they were ripping apart an ornamental cherry tree, that's vandalism, the cops went light on them since they're young and haven't commited more crimes yet.
Ok, no problem, any background check will turn up nothing. Only way these reports show up is if a court requests the full record. Let's hope the little vandals don't do something to land them there. And they'll be 17 when it drops off. A full year before they're 18.
Yeah, hardened criminals are given reprimands and released without charge to their parents as soon as they can come pick them up.
I think they UNDER reacted to a clear cut case of vandalism. The parents should have been charged for damages.
And to all those people claiming building a treefort or "playing in" a tree is not anti-social... RTFA, they're talking about the vandalism.
With help from the services of a dominatrix? I get that in the UK it seems to be normal for the MP's to get into that kind of stuff (google for british mp sex scandals), but I didn't know the police were in on it to.
Is this a government wide trend?
I can see how this made the local news in that town, but why the hell is one random British cop's one bad day at work on Slashdot?
No one even got their head smashed in! If you're gonna cover questionable police actions, there is much much more and better material, from closer to the Slashdot office complex to choose from.
And since when is tree climbing part of the "nerd" agenda? Is it the DNA part?
and maybe bad
the reason the kids probably got dumped into the cells are because the police probably had no other secure location in the police station. When they rebuilt the police station in my city they included a small windowed room that could be locked from the outside more or less for this purpose.
In California a 1987 law prohibits the detention of teenagers in the same jails as adults Children can be put in a jail cell if they have committed a violent crime/some felonies; murder, rape, assault with a deadly weapon.
If the cherry tree was actually owned by someone then the police would be justified for detaining the children until their legal guardians could be contacted.
I was expecting this story's location to be in the USA, but to my surprise is happen in the UK???
150 quid for littering, kids ordered to clean up hop scotch grid. This place is definitely one of the must see places in the UK. Unless you're from a civilised country.
.. paranoid crackpot leftover from the days of Amiga.
For a good portion of the history of this great nation, we have dealt with this subversive subculture in our society--- breaking into private property, and vandalizing our natural resources. These "children" as you call them, are simply bio-terrorists--- polluting our food supply, and natural resources. Did they wear gloves, or biological containment suits, when they entered that cherry tree? Who knows what diseases they've introduced to our population through contamination of our food supply. We do not want a temporary peace with these "children," a peace that just brushes over the surface of underlying tensions and conflicts. We've tried diplomacy, and yet "children" still continue on the path to terror, and are still a threat. We want a lasting solution--- which is why I believe we need to keep hitting the children, and hit them hard, until a true peace can be established with them, and our cherry trees can once again be safe.
Funny how everyone believes what the submitted story implicates (they were only playing), instead of the quite plausible alternative (they were wrecking the tree).
Well, this sounds a bit overboard, to be sure... but always consider the source. In looking at the articles posted on their home page, I think that this may not be the kind of publication you can trust. Articles covering the social lives of Mel Gibson, Tony Blair, and the Duchess of York, with others about who's sunbathing with who, and using inflammatory wording in the headlines to increase the shock value of an otherwise trivial story... take this story with a grain of salt.
Of course, DNA testing for such a crime does seem excessive... but I've got no problem with cops kicking kids out of a tree, and if they were being disruptive (if! I don't know, and I don't trust this paper, so I'm just tossing out possibilities!) hauling them downtown to give them a bit of a scare. 12 isn't all that young - I sure could have used an authority figure correcting me around that age, might have saved me a lot of headaches later on in life.
They are all pissed off with this Blair guy.
For a moment I wasn't sure if they were talking about Ian or Tony. Then I remembered that Ian's power was limited to London...
LedgerSMB: Open source Accounting/ERP
Darn kids, don't you know that's how you become an unperson? You totally pissed off Big Brother by climbing in his tree. The DNA testing brings forth images of Gattaca and the whole Police State + England thing (especially after I just watched V for Vendetta again) is really creeping me out.
Seems like this is just what the Bush administration wants - for us to live in fear.
http://www.fearofignorance.wordpress.com/
-Fear of Ignorance
If George Washington had been properly DNA tested after chopping down his cherry tree then maybe we could clone him now and let him run for prez again in a few decades.
well these UK police saw them destroying a cherry tree and we all know if you destroy a cherry tree you follow in George Washington's footsteps and become a terrorist against England...they should have probably just killed them on site for treason.
Would you rather chase the serial rapist, or arrest three little kids?
The best way to respond to cops is by projecting abject fear. A lot of cops are on power trips, and they really get off on it when you seem scared as hell.
Cops also like making life difficult for the people they see as "the bad guys," but the bad guys are used to cops and just don't care enough to act scared anymore (NOTE: running away isn't being scared -- it's just done for the convenience of not spending a week in jail).
So when the cop sees you're scared shitless, he's knows a) you're not a bad guy, and b) you'll do exactly what he says. (NOTE: advanced students of "cop fear response" have learned that inefficiently doing whatever you've been asked is also useful as long as it looks like your trouble completing the task is due to your extreme nervousness at the situation) Then he'll be a lot more likely to enjoy his petty power trip and let you go -- since you're obviously not anyone he actually cares about at all.
When you interact with police, always act scared. Act scared even if you're not scared. Act scared of them even if you're the victim. You'll end up better off each time, and you'll probably make the cop just a little happier too.
Putting all seriousness aside for a second, am I the only one who snickered at the inadvertent bit of poetry in the phrase "Children arrested, DNA tested"?
I can't help thinking about a quote or something I once read.
;))
It had to do with making so many laws and rules, that is becomes impossible for someone
to actually be completely innocent. This could then be used as a means of (social) control.
(anyone who knows where this came from? if you know about it, you'll know what I mean
IMHO this is an example of something getting awfully close to that...
You raise an interesting point: are the police responding this strongly -- too strongly -- because no one else will?
Today I was riding my bike home from work when I passed a car stopped by the side of a busy road, next to a small park with a bike path. The passenger's side door was open, and a girl about age 10 was standing by it crying. I stopped to watch, surprised. The girl was talking to someone in the car, and she would half get in the car, then step back, then repeat, crying all the time.
What do you think was going on? Doesn't look good, does it? Doesn't that make it remarkable that, as I approached on my bike, and while I was stopped, about three or four other people walked, jogged or rode on bikes past, and of course about two dozen cars drove by -- and no one else stopped? It was also in clear view of some new condos across the street that sell for upwards of $500,000 -- but no one came out of them.
I went up to the girl, and, staying well back (to help the girl feel safe), I looked more closely. In the car was a woman with another child. I asked the child her name, whether the woman was her mother, and whether she wanted to get in the car. She told me her name, said it was her mother, and that she did want to get in the car. The woman said it was her child, and that the girl wanted to get in the car, but wasn't being allowed to because she was in a "time out." I assume the woman was driving when she stopped and put the child out of the car at the side of the road as some kind of punishment. The girl would then be crying because she feared she was about to be abandoned.
After thinking it all through for a bit, I believed the woman. The girl and the woman and the other child in the car looked alike (all blonde wavy hair, similar face, and so on), and when I talked to the little girl she drew away from me and closer to the woman -- that is, she seemed instinctively to trust the woman more than me. The woman's story seemed unlikely for an abductor -- silly, unrehearsed, unlikely to soothe suspicion. So I didn't call the cops. (I did suggest to the woman that, as one parent to another, my advice would be to avoid disciplining her 10-year-old by pretending to abandon her on the side of the road. I said this rather less forcefully than I would have if her children had not been in earshot. For example, I did not call her a fscking idiot who should have been sterilized at menarche.)
I'm still bothered by whether I did the right thing, although the girl climbed in the car after I talked to her seemingly willingly enough, and the car drove off not in any obvious hurry. I hope I wasn't too trusting.
But my point is that it was very noticeable to me that no one else wanted to get involved. Dozens of other adults passed close by and saw what I did -- no one else stopped to take a closer look, make sure the girl was OK.
Perhaps we have come to delegate some of what used to be our normal social responsibility to our fellow man to the police. Small wonder that these things happen, then, although I wish they wouldn't.
Clearly, the kids in the tree should have been shot and killed, and their carcasses hung from said tree as a public display.
If the police simply killed every person who exhibited antisocial behaviour, we wouldn't have any crime at all. Our world would be a veritable eden. A paradise free from crime, poverty, bullies, and inequality.
So to all those pussies who think these anti social bastards were treated with excessive force and the police were overly jealous in their zeal for law enforcement, I say: go climb a tree.
i don't know if i should feel better or more sick that there are other countries with "justice systems" that are as screwed up as the usa. seriously, was that the worst crime those officers could be dispatched to handle?
let this be a lesson to all of you would-be-burglars: create several diversions by hiring kids to vandalize trees while you rob the city blind.
This is also posted to my blog which you can find in the normal place. (Yes, yes, I know the dangers of having an online blog. Thank you in advance.) Anyway, here is my story:
"Fishers Police Department - Keeping your streets safe one PI at a time."
As the door seals behind me I am left in a small room with two strangers, one who has just provided me with the means to escape the cement hell hole Hamilton County calls a "holding cell" and one who looks as eager as I am for the door in front of us to open. The door buzzes and what seems like an eternity later it opens, letting in a blinding light and an almost overwhelming smell of fresh air. As my eyes adjust to the light and I breathe in the sweet air it crosses my mind to lean my head back and yell "FREEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEDDDDDDDDDOOOM!" but if I recall correctly that did not work out so well for the last guy who did that so I instead walk over to my father and began my trip home.
Now that you know the ending, lets go back to the beginning. Kris and I had spent the night celebrating Jen's Birthday at Stardust. Having finished our beers and being kicked out for cosmic bowling we head back to Jen and Tina's place about 3 blocks away from our place in the same apartment complex. After having another beer there we decide to walk home.
We are about 3 buildings away from our apt and besides Kris stopping to take a piss the walk home has been completely uneventful. As Kris and I are talking amongst each other a car pulls up directly behind us. I wave my hands and do a little hop to be a jackass and to try and get the guy to go around us. The car stops as Kris and I take the turn. I hear the car door open and "Hey guys, I want to talk to you". Thinking nothing of it and not knowing who said that since our view of the car was being obstructed by the car garage Kris and I turn back around and head for the car. As soon as we round the corner we can see a cop with his hand on his gun who shouts something to the effect of "FREEZE! HANDS IN THE AIR!". I hear Kris say "Woh, calm down buddy" as both him and I raise the roof.
More cop cars appear and two cops approach, frisk, and handcuff us. After a few questions we determine the police are looking for two people in ski masks who were stealing things from cars. Since we have neither stolen goods nor ski masks you would think this would eliminate us from this investigation. However, as you can see when we switch our view over to Officer Dipshit, this is not the case.
Officer Dipshit thinks to himself: Hmm.. they don't have anything on them but they must obviously be the perpatrators. I mean, there are two of them! And they are young! I mean, they could have easily stolen all that stuff and then threw it into the pond or something. God damn kids. Well, lets see if the person who called this in can identify them.
Officer Dispshit to Lady who called the police: Are these the men who you saw?
Lady: Well, despite the fact that it was dark and they were wearing ski masks, these two are most definetly the people I saw.
Officer Dipshit to the rest of the equally moronic officers: Well, despite having no real evidence to suppport the idea that these two are the people we are after and that they have not resisted us in any way, shape, or form, I think we can all agree that this lady won't leave us alone until we find the people she called us about. So, lets breathalize, book them, and call it a night!
Officer Dipshit and CO put Kris and I in the police car and begin racing at around 80mph to the Hamilton County Jail
Curious as to where we are going and why in the fuck I am being arrested, I begin asking him questions which he answers with a big sigh.
Me: Sir, my friend and I did nothing wrong. Despite the fact that he was underage, we were disturbing no one and walking instead of driving home. Why are we being arrested?
OD, with as more venom and contempt in his voice than I thought was humanly possible: Well I have someone who positively IDed you as the ones looking into cars. So you know what that makes you? A liar!!
Getting nowhere I begin to contemplate, as I am sure you have already, how fucked up this was.
I keep telling myself I'm not the desperate type.
The article said the 'tree was stripped' - a twenty foot tree stripped bare. The kids said to the police officer 'but officer we only took a few branches that were dead' - If you are that police officer, do you wag your finger and say don't do it again now kids and walk away, or do you see a stripped tree, kids who are lying to you and decide you need to elevate this by taking the kids in and calling their parents? I don't think anybody except sex offenders should have DNA taken but the courts are seeing the DNA thing like fingerprints. That ship has already left the docks. You folks have missed that party a while ago. The police take you in, they are going to identify you. If you're a kid, you'll be identified and run through the database on missing and abused kids. If they find the kids are those missing kids whose mother/father ran off with them and no word left for the anguished custodial parent then the police are heros. If they don't run the check and the kids were missing/abducted and they all find out later after bad things have happened then the police are in a world of hurt for not doing their jobs. Instead we get the third option, the stupid parents who never taught their kids to respect property goes on the tube and whines about how his kids - after stripping a tree bare and were taken to the police station - were upset after getting caught. Now I'm assuming, after reading the article, that someone didn't call the police because they saw kids pull just one branch down and I'm assuming that the police who said the tree was stripped were not lying. I also don't think that wanting to build something is a mitigating factor when you destroy something else that doesn't belong to you to build that thing.
Enjoy your Karma, after all you earned it. Feel your Karma Joe, feel it burn.
Please let the brave officers of the West Middlands Police know exactly what you think of their brave efforts at crime control. Here is a link to the contacts page of their website. West Midlands Police
The DVD release date is 1 Aug 2006... Article is dated 1 Aug 2006... it's in the UK... Associated Newspapers UK (ANWS LN ) owns dailymail.co.uk... Parent company Daily Mail & General Trust... 39 major subsidiaries mostly in media... seems too much like viral marketing advertising to me...
Its better to get the kids jaded now. Hell, I wasn't bitter and cynical until I was fourteen. Think of all that wasted time!
what do you expect? Also the symbolism with George Washington and the cherry tree--they wouldn't get that.
Nerds everywhere should be deeply concerned about tree traversal being made illegal.
"A great democracy must be progressive or it will soon cease to be a great democracy." --Theodore Roosevelt
Even if the kids were doing exactly as the police claim they were, stripping every branch in a malicious manner, that is quite simply not a crime which warrants a DNA sample to be put on file. There's NO justification for that.
The parents really ought to sue the police department to have the DNA samples destroyed and removed from the database, then continue on and sue them for emotional damages. Magnify the pain: sue the department, sue the individual officers involved, sue their superiors, and drag it out as long as is physically possible. If they've got enough resources to spend time and effort jailing and DNA sampling 12 year olds, then they can certainly spare some for legal fees to defend their actions. I know this sounds like a sue-happy idiot talking, but the police went way out of line and are, as usual, totally unapologetic about it. The only way to get them to stop is to show them that there are brutal consequences for such actions. The entire department has to suffer in order to create a culture where they'll think twice about doing it again.
It's funny. Ok, it's not funny at all ... it's fucking sad. But I came on the computer right after watching "V for Vendetta" and what do I see? The god-damn government arresting some 12 year-olds, and TAKING THEIR FUCKING DNA because they were playing in a tree.
PLAYING. IN. A. TREE.
DNA.
TREE.
Jesus on bicycle, we are all fucking doomed. Every last one of us. When I see posts here saying that the kids will be better off, it makes me want to weep, then it makes me want to beat the hell out of someone. Something is very wrong with this world. And as pathetic as it is, it's also true: people are getting what they deserve. People are bending over and asking for it.
Excuse me while I go puke.
for some, 1984 is a warning/vision of a dark future..
for others (elected officals and the like) it's actually quite erotic..
every day http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Special:Random
I don't really know. From the details given in the article the Police were a bunch of incompetant idiots (that is even more incompetant than a normal idiot).
:)
However, all we hear from are the parents and the kids - not the best of sources as to what happened. Is there another story? Maybe, maybe not. The only thing we hear from police is that they though about charging them with something more (the part about what they did still came from the children)
I know I've seen some, shall we say, creative descriptions of acts. It's not uncommon to hear family and friends describe a murderer as a really nice guy that you would have never thought anything about. Only to find out they were arrested/convicted 10 times for assault with a deadly weapon, one for rape, three times for animal cruelty (sometimes *really* horrid stuf), and a list that goes on and on and on (and all violent). You wonder why they didn't lock the person under the freaking jail. I'm sure we have all seen some little kid do something horrid only to have them lie to their parents and thier parents defend them.
And then, maybe it is *exactly* what is described. I could be - I wouldn't put it past any police to do so. Just as the above example we have all seen All-Go police that do really really stupid agressive moves.
As is usual for any story that is written in this type of context (pushing you towards a viewpoint instead of simply stating facts and only telling one side of the story) I will reserve full judgment until I hear more. I can't think of anything that would really mitigate it - but just because I can not doesn't mean it isn't there. I feel *really* uncomfortable getting too riled up about writing meant to rile people up. Unfortunatly I doubt we will ever know more than than the totally lopsided story we read here - at least give us a paragraph on the police departments response (even if they only pick out the crappiest and weakest part).
Of course, this is the UK so I'm happy to bash them (I'm an American - I get it too much and I like to dish it out sometimes). Dang Limey's - all they do is arrest poor little kids just doing normal kid stuff
------- Sorry about the spelling, I suffer from two problems. Dyslexia makes it difficult to spell well, lazy makes it
When's the next chance for the voters of the UK to give the jerks in charge the old heave-ho?
On this side of the pond, ours is in November.
Race ya!
"A great democracy must be progressive or it will soon cease to be a great democracy." --Theodore Roosevelt
You go out and buy a tree, plant it in your yard, watch it grow and make things beautiful for many (this was a 20-ft tree) many years, and see if you don't get upset when three twelve year olds come by and start ripping off branches. Trees take time to grow and I can understand if people get upset when they are damanged.
Insert "loggers" for "children" and "forest" for "cherry tree" and see how the public opinion would turn. Sure, more trees are harmed but many more human lives are harmed as well. Seems to have a few things in common.
And police die everyday to protect people so these people can be called corrupt pigs.
</rant>I'm not trying to make people mad; I'm trying to make people think!
A ticket and fine or citation(with some community service like picking up trash) was the proper action not jail time
and DNA printing.
You only take DNA samples if it was necessary to prove the crime.
Has anyone here even considered the possibility that the three kids were spoiled brats that desperately needed the education they didn't receive from their parents?
Like being punished for destroying others' stuff (including public stuff) ?
This story itself is possibly a flamebait, on the "damn stupid cops" motto.
2e-2 euros.
The police are there to protect and serve. This did neither. The most I think that could be done to the children would be to charge them with destruction of property. The land owner, which I guess is the city and/or county, would be responsible for a lawsuit against the children for damage to the tree, IF they wish to persue it.
Seeing as the children didn't realize what they are doing is wrong, yes, the police over-reacted. You can tell if someone is knowingly doing something wrong. Spraypainting someone's property; toilet papering a house; riding a bicycling without a helmet through red lights while going the wrong way in traffic; all of those would be examples of knowingly doing something wrong.
I recall an similar incident happening to a friend of mine once when he was about 12. He just happened to be out at about 10pm, so the cops decided to bring him in, fingerpint him, let him sit in a cell for about 6 hours then leave him to make his own way home (cop station was about an hour's walk away from his house). The least of their crimes was that they kept his bag, and made vague threats about a non-existent curfew. Apparently they were responding to a claim that 'four youths had vandalised a storefront'. His complaints were dealth with the usual contempt.
On DNA and fingerprint collection, a few years ago (15ish), Victorian Police made apparent goodwill visits to schools, where they claimed to be taking fingerprints for 'fun'. The sheets weren't play sheets, they were the real deal. Of course, the poor naive kids all went for it. I didn't see them 'disposing of them' as they had stated they would - niftily dodging any form of parental consent. I'm wondering what lengths they'll go to fill their database.
I hope those smug people that say "it could only happen in the USA" will look more closely at what happens at home.
s _Crime_Squad
The west midlands police have some history see http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/West_Midlands_Seriou
The locals should give their police some grief over this
Why the hell does "think of the children" only apply to losing civil liberties, never to gaining them/getting them back?
Sendou Wave Kick!!
If climbing a tree consitutes a public danger, then this is the crime of the century!
heinous crime!
Police in the UK in the last few years have had pressure to crack down on young 'hooligans' roaming the streets at night causing damage. I don't think that these kids were doing anything wrong, but there were plenty of 12 year olds I saw in my time in the UK that should have definately been reprimanded for their actions, if not locked up.
Some examples.. My mother came over to visit me and on the first evening she was in London she had an (uneaten) apple thrown at her while walking from the station to my house, hitting her in the chest. This was delibrately thrown from across the street from one of a group of around 15 10-15 year olds.
When cycling home one day, a couple of kids on a scooter travelling in the opposite direction suddenly stopped. The kid on the back threw an egg, which hit me in the shoulder. I was going around 17-18mph at the time and it didn't tickle. My friend had the same thing happen a few years earlier, except it was thrown from a moving car in north london. It hit him in the eye and he has lost partial sight in one eye.
I couldn't park a car on the street for more than a couple of weeks, or it would get broken in to. I'm fairly sure it was kids, since the car was never driven away, just the window smashed or the lock broken.
When walking home through a small park, another one of my friends was struck on the back of the head by a full 2L PET drink bottle. The kid still had the bottle in his hand and when my friend turned around, there were 5-6 or so kids ready to "go at it". My friend just walked away.
One or two 12 year olds are nothing to worry about. But 10-15 little bastards, some with kitchen knives or metal pipes or whatever have the capability to kill 2-3 adults. And get away with it! because they know nothing will happen to them because they are kids. They know all their rights and none of their responsabilities.
It's situations like this that ABSO's were created, which is why I'm all for them.
What exactly were they "testing" the DNA for? Down Syndrome?
Well, I agree with you, but it seems that the police take DNA samples for the very slightest justification, and even if the police acted totally illegally, and you're totally innnocent, they still have no requirement to destroy the DNA sample.
The UK seems well on the way to becoming a police state. They have cameras on every street and they cannot own the means to defend themselves. Of course, we are seeing more stories like this on our side of the pond. The only way the US will resist this trend is to turn to Libertarianism and demand that the Bill of Rights be respected by all branches of government.
And you don't think it's going a little overboard to lock up 12 year olds and treat them like criminals for climbing a tree? We're not talking about shoplifting or vandalism here, we're talking about something pretty much EVERY kid did and does, or at the very least, should do!
We used to have a Bill of Rights. Now, with the rights gone, all we have left is the bill.
My (then 11-year old) cousin was arrested a few years ago by an armed response team in a suburb of the north of England.
His crime: falling asleep in a park with a water pistol lying across his chest (OK, so it was probably loaded).
Some diligent citizen reported an armed man threatening passers-by. He awoke to the words "Move a muscle, and we'll blow your fucking head off", surrounded by six black-clad, masked men pointing guns at his head and chest. The poor little bugger needed psychiatric counselling for months. I'm not sure if it's relevant to point out he is white.
I just can't help thinking that the ART commander's tactical analysis of the situation on arrival at the scene was flawed.
I for one welcome our arboreal overlords
Kids playing outside? Climbing trees? Being generally active? On top of all, acting like children!
What are they thinking? Where are the parents? Why didn't they fill them up with Ritalin 'til they wouldn't move willingly anymore? How are they supposed to become the good, passive citizen with the proper sheep mentality?
Jeesh, parents these days...
We used to have a Bill of Rights. Now, with the rights gone, all we have left is the bill.
Imagine what would have happened if they were chewing illegal gum at the same time!
"West Midlands Police deals robustly with anti-social behaviour."
And... being with two friends in a place where there is some privacy (out of earshot perhapse) is... ummm... "antisocial" ?
I must be cronfused.
-jX
Don't you just love politics? It's like a comedy of errors.
Welcome to Britainsville, the 51st State!
g00p.
It starts off with just cutting down one cherry tree as a kid. Then - I shall not tell a lie - it can lead to organising the overthrow of the British rulers in a revloution lasting years, assisted by the (gasp) French and the establishment of another country where people even drive on the other side of the road out of spite.
While I find it hard to believe this story, shooting would be too good a death for the officers involved in an action like this. Seriously.
The police in the UK are trying to build a DNA sample database of the entire population.
So far, they have only got permission to take samples if they arrest someone; this may explain their willingness to arrest everyone they can, for the most trivial reasons. The law then allows the sample to be retained indefinitely, even if the person is released with no charge (hence, the parents cannot sue).
The UK is rapidly becoming one of the countries with the most draconian social controls in the Western world.
...for inaction.
In today's sue happy (and criminal prosecution happy) world, people don't dare get anywhere near other people's kids. ESPECIALLY IF YOU ARE A SINGLE, CHILDLESS MALE. Just the the mere accusation of having molested a child is to be handed a lifetime sentence that will never escape you. Even if you are proven innocent without a doubt, people will ALWAYS think you just haven't been "caught" this time.
Bystander effect
I lived in a small town back east for a time, and I spent alot of time climbing trees. In these small towns there is "always" that one person who's purpose in life is to make everyone else's life miserable. One day the building inspector arivies... in regards to my treehouse. It seems even in small towns in order to build a treehouse you need a building permit. Extreme but fair enough. But the thing is, there was no tree house, there was no building or construction on ANY level. It was a cushion in a tree. It didn't even stay in the tree, it wasn't tied down. And the electrical inspector arived as well, which in "all" fairness I did own a radio but used batteries, so I *imagine* someone "could" have thought I was using house current. And then the fire department, the fire department arived, two trucks full sirens... I have NO idea why, by this point building and electrical went off to discuss the matter with the fire department. A police car drive by but didn't stop. While they wouldn't "say" who issued the complaint, it was rather clear who did as all three took a visit to that house down the street and gave someone a firm talking to about issuing false complaints. No treehouse, no electricity, no fire.
This being said, there will "always" be some bozo who complains. Perhaps the reason is justified, perhaps they are totally off their rocker. In this case, perhaps the kids needed a firm talking at worst, a friendly talking to at best. I lack any clear information at to the ownership of this tree.
There is no sanctuary. There is no sanctuary. SHUT UP! There is no shut up. There is no shut up.
It's not "where's this world going to", it's "where's the united states going to".
Given the flack the UK government is getting about the ID card and back end database of DNA, prints, retina scans etc they are trying to introduce, one does wonder if this incident is the thin end of a data gathering excercise.
If the people are marching in the streets complaining about giving away their biometrics for no reason, why not try a different tactic and haul in the kids on any old excuse and get the data nice and early.
I want a list of atrocities done in your name - Recoil
A tabloid for middle class women. Something akin to the American 'National Enquirer'. The next article was probably something about 'toning up bums and tums' or how to 'eat as much chocolate as you want AND look fab'. The readers comments are what makes this story hilarious reading. Paraphrased e.g. "OUTRAGEOUS, I am morally outraged at Blair's government lackeys for locking up these poor innocents. I am literally spewing croissant crumbs as I scream at my PC monitor. They should be chasing rapists. Moral outrage. etc.!" Well, that's how I read it anyway. Heheh.
For those unfamiliar with the British press, this story was printed in the Daily Hate Mail, a vile right-wing rag known to, errm, stretch the truth considerably.
...will someone think about the children.
Well, the story is scant on details/documentation of the state of the tree. They were apprehended for tearing off branches, not tree climbing. Now, if the tree is now bereft of branches (we can't assume it's not without more information), then the children got off lightly.
What is ironic is that the cop haters feel that the police did a disservice here, when the police have really done an outstanding job preparing a new generation to fear and hate the police.
It's not offtopic, dumbass. It's orthogonal.
is that this story is being run by the daily mail normally they would be the first to demmand the return of corperal punishment and that this kids get 100 strokes of the cane.
Saying Apple is better than MS is like saying Botulism is better than rabies.
But not with DNA. The police in Victoria can take your fingerprints if you are to be charged with a serious crime. In practice, they take fingerprints from everybody, whether the charge is serious or trivial, and whether or not the fingerprints will help them link you to the crime. They are required to destroy all original fingerprints, but they make sure that they have a copy first. How else does Interpol build up its database?
Oh, what sad times are these when parents can say Ni at will to policemen. There is a pestilence upon this land, nothing is sacred. Even those who arrange and design shrubberies are under considerable economic stress in this period in history.
It's not offtopic, dumbass. It's orthogonal.
The fact that the question "Well? Do You?"... is even being asked is probably more symbolic of the problem than the fact that the kids were arrested.
cops are not human beings. Humans are merciful, Cops are just pure Brutes!
sex is better than war!
A friend of mine recently resigned from the police for this reason. Apparently he had arrest quotas to be met, leading to him being effectively forced to arrest some people who he thought would be better served with a warning. Everyone nicked in this way had their DNA put on record, even though in a lot of cases there was no intent to prosecute. In the end he couldn't stomach the cynicism beheind this policy and resigned on principle, for which I salute him.
"Are you being weird, or sarcastic?" said Emma. I said I didn't know because I get the two feelings mixed up.
Exactly. You take normal people and put them into a position of power, and it changes them. In my experience, treating them with respect instead of antagonizing them tends to soften the effect. I don't see why more people don't give it a shot. Plus, out of all the cops out there, how many of them are truly bad people? I don't think there are that many.
It's amazing how many people have trouble with that concept. There are people who really relish exploding into a fit of rage when confronted by a cop giving them a ticket even if the ticket is being issued for a perfectly legitimate reason. This behavior even extends to starting to antagonize a neighbor for politely complaining that they can't get their baby pram past the SUV that this person parked (badly) in front of the neighbors garden gate. That's how neighborhood feuds start. Yelling at a patrol officer for handing out a speeding ticket or auxiliary police officer for giving you a parking ticket does not help you since you probably deserve it. AP officers even get physically assaulted when they hand out parking tickets, hard as that may be to believe, which in this country has resulted in them being issued with mace. I have more than once defused such a situation by simply being polite, conciliatory and most of all by convincing who ever was itching to start shouting at the cop to shut the f**k up.
Only to idiots, are orders laws.
-- Henning von Tresckow
In brief, in the UK they have passed laws allowing people to placed under a court order if they have "engaged in conduct which caused or was likely to cause alarm, harassment or distress to one or more persons not of the same household as him or herself...". Violation of the order can result in criminal charges being brought before the court. I am not making this up.
o r+order
http://www.google.com/search?q=anti-social+behavi
It is obvious that the track of the article is biased. For example, there are pictures of the children, but no pictures of the tree. The stuff about "loose branches" and "playing in a tree" completely clash with the officer's description.
It is also clear that from considerable time must have passed from when people decided to alert the police and when they actually arrived on the scene, so if the children were still going at it, we are not talking about "a few branches", and a few branches are certainly not enough to build anything worthwhile.
The age of the children also makes it likely that they have been working close to the ground, so the tree probably was not overtall. Fruit trees are often quite old and partly irreplaceable.
So it is likely that the story was rigged for effect, and it is a pity that neither the tree nor the damage to it have been actually pictured: that would have been the right journalistic thing to do. That it didn't happen is suspicious, to say the least.
In absence of that information, it is not improbable that the children were indeed killing off a tree or significantly damaging it.
And when thinking about the reaction of the police, one should consider _that_ instead of the cutesy "playing in a tree" stuff.
I think a strong reprimand, asking to see the parents, and possibly holding them accountable for the damage might all have been quite appropriate. Detention does not seem like the right idea for a first-time offense, though.
And the obvious rigging of the story basically makes it impossible to actually learn any lessons from it.
California law is based on English common law (as it is for most states), and I believe that in all of Britain, police are required to contact parents before children are allowed to be questioned. This articles makes it sound as if the children were interrogated first. have these officers nothing better to do with their time than to haul pre-teens to an adult jail? Better things to spend money on than DNA testing kids for branches? I hope the parents sue the living hell out of that police department.
It's a girl!
That whole law is utterly rubbish! The Law;
* dictates child rearing and punishment,
* allows police to disperse groups of any TWO people at will,
* bans immitation weapons,
* allows city councils to label any publicly displayed painting or artwork as "graffiti" and order the land owner to remove it at their cost (even if they weren't the ones to create it),
* if you have 20 or more people on your property, or in your house, police can label it a rave, and incarcerate everyone at said "rave,"
* allows city councils to set a hight limit on plants so as to not block the light onto your neighbor's property, and charge a fee to perform the maintainance if the owner is not willing to cut their plants down to size,
* Strengthens ASBOs which basically criminalizes behavior that is otherwise lawful.
If the United States were to pass such a law, I would call the USA a lost cause, and move to Mexico.
I haven't lost my mind!
It is backed up on disk...somewhere...
You can get an ASBO (Anti-social behaviour order) that can prevent you from doing things like looking at trees just incase you want to build a tree house without the burdon of proof that's normally required.
And ASBOs don't just last for a few months they last for years.
thank God the internet isn't a human right.
Everyone is guilty. Just because I know the kids were being twits and deserved to be beaten with a stick doesn't mean that the cops aren't fascist megalomaniacs who also deserve to be beaten with a stick. Unfortunately for the kids, the cops are the ones with the guns. I doubt that lesson was lost upon the little angels.
Of course, Satan too was an angel.
Read the article, they weren't climbing a tree, they were ripping it apart.
b ase
To the 12-year-old friends planning to build themselves a den, the cherry tree seemed an inviting source of material.
Climbing doesn't get you wood.
Officers considered charging the children with criminal damage but eventually decided a reprimand - the equivalent of a caution for juveniles - was sufficient.
They got off with a warning.
As far as DNA samples, well maybe if the UK wasn't so focused on getting everyons DNA they wouldn't have done so.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/UK_National_DNA_Data
I am so happy to be several thousand kilometers away from a society where this is possible.
The saddest thing about this is that it is quite clear what kind of adults one can expect when children are brought up like this instead of treating them and respecting them as thinking creatures. I do not see how this behavior was at all "anti-social" -- in other parts, people would be happy to see those kids do something different from sitting in front of TV commercials or 3D shooters all day -- but even if it was, maybe it would make more sense to explain to them why it was antisocial and how they could make up to whoever they did damage to, instead of bullying and frightening them?
Disgusting, dumb, insane and counter-productive.
Let's be serious here. We're talking about three 12 year olds, not a gang armed with axes and chainsaws. What damage could they possibly do to a cherry tree?
Also, weigh the damage done to the psyche of those kids against the well being of a tree. Usually, we get calls for cotton cushioning our kids from the "think of the children" crowd when such horrors like brutal games are in discussion, but for the life of a tree we may scar them for life? Something's wrong here, no matter whether that tree lost its branches.
We used to have a Bill of Rights. Now, with the rights gone, all we have left is the bill.
Only places in the world something like this can happen...
you shouldnt generalise too much - in germany you cant prosecute children younger than fourteen, and as such no dna test, too
better ask everyday, what is the us up to today?
The parents need to hire the nastiest, dirtiest, scumbag lawyer they can afford & file civil & criminal suits for Wrongful Imprisonment & Child Abuse. Even if the kids were *trying* to damage the tree, the actions taken by the police were hardly waranted.
Jaysyn
There is a war going on for your mind.
Something to note for those who aren't familiar with the UK papers is that the Daily Mail is not generally highly regarded. It has a reputation for scaremongering and articles which greatly exaggerate things (and are simply made up in some cases).
"Tony Blair has let in X million immigrants, and they're all armed with deadly nuclear warheads and taking our jobs! (Plus, doesn't he look fat?)" kind of thing.
I had a cop approach me today, said someone called 911 from my home. I know this is BS; nobody's home at all, cept for me and I'm heading out.
So they showed up with a bs story about getting a 911 call and you granted them a search on that? I'm all for being polite and cooperative but I'm not going to reward them for giving me a bullshit story. I would have asked for the dispatch non-emergency number and called them right on the spot. Helpful and polite, yes, but I'm not giving them permission to enter.
That's our life, the big wheel of shit. - The Fat Man, Blue Tango Salvage
... teach HATE of the police into them.
Just as the US is teaching HATE against the US around the world.
Do they ever stop and take a step back and ask WHY people HATE the US so much?
Closed eyes == Closed Minds.
A 20 foot cherry ?
Must be Dutch.
Wanna fight ? Bend over, stick your head up your ass, and fight for air.
Yes.
Had they stayed on the lower, stronger limbs, they likely would not have broken any.
Wanna fight ? Bend over, stick your head up your ass, and fight for air.
Where is far. Yes, the cops went too far.
Where were the parents?
-mark
I'm sorry, but I refuse flat out to have respect/deferrence for petty authority figures who are vastly inferior to myself.
I don't make this as an egoistical statement, merely as a matter of fact - I have a PhD in Physics, I run my own business, I *PAY* a huge amount to keep cops in jobs, so why the hell should I respect someone who probably dropped out of high school, and became a cop because no-one else would hire their slipshod self?
I have respect for police in principal, insofar as their role is purportedly to perform the arrest of people who have *potentially* comitted crimes (innocent until proven guilty and all that), and to investigate said crimes. I do, however, have no respect whatsoever for policemen - they are the flotsam and jetsam of society, who couldn't find gainful employ elsewhere. Policing is a last ditch career.
Crazy. Depends on what the kids were doing ofcourse, but in the sue their asses off category I totally agree with that tactic. Someone needs to be taught some basic, common sense manners.
As for damages the kids might have done if it was a reasonably healthy cherry tree and they were killing it, then both sides should be sueing, because the owner of the tree is certainly due damages also. The kids themselves should have to make recompense, split maybe 50-50 with their parents, who obviously were a little slacking in parenting skills or this wouldn't have taken place in the first place. Perhaps to plant a replacement tree and nurture it till its as big as the one they killed? Not out of line were I the judge.
Note that this doesn't change the first paragraph, they were way out of line with the DNA testing etc. Sue for destruction of the samples and for punitive, as much as they can get. Both sides are in the wrong here IMNSHO.
Someone whom I can't recall said something to the effect that "if sense was so common, how come common sense is in such short supply?"
--
No Cheers on this one, Gene
The kids were 12, and I bet the tree was well over 18. Sounds like the police arrested the wrong side there.
Land of the free, right. Hahahahaha.
this sig is useless
I mean... was there a computer in the tree or something? Was this a genetically modified tree that the eeeeeeeevil biocapitalists were trying to protect their patent on? Did the cops catch these kids by scanning RFID chips embedded in the bark?
What gives?
You are attempting to read sigs. Cancel or Allow?
Makes me think of something that happened to my friends and me recently. He lives in an area where people burn trash regularly. We had a fire going, and some of the neighbors called the fire department because of too much smoke. They came by and told us to put the fire out. This, of course, caused more smoke and put more ash in the air than the fire had in the first place. We asked if what we were doing was illegal -- no, nothing illegal about it. We asked if we could build another fire the next day -- sure, that's no problem, just not today.
I'm not sure exactly what the law is on fires, but the point is that people really need to learn how to deal with other people. We would have been happy to put the fire out if we'd just been asked to by the neighbors. Calling the FD was a waste of time and money in our case, and probably the same in the case of the children in the tree. I'd bet these parents are more than capable of disciplining their own children.
There should be a new punishment for police. If you go overboard, it shouldn't be "suspended without pay", it should be "suspended from a tree". That'll slow down on the bullshit.
I'm absolutely SICK of police. Not all of them, but the majority of them. The majority of them go to the job because they think they're better than everyone else and therefore need to control the rest of us. Very few, it seems, go to the job anymore to help, you know, protect and serve.
These kids will dislike and mistrust the police for the rest of their lives.
Well then, perhaps some good has come of this after all. If there's anything England needs right now, it's a nice, healthy distrust of law enforcement.
Oh well, there was that guy who was arrested for taking pictures (using his phone-camera) of Cops arresting a drugdealer. Charges: Obstruction of justice (eh?) and trespassing (he was on his own doorstep), and yeah, there are witnesses that can confirm both. Then we have that nice she-cop that decided to arrest two lost young women that asked another cop for directions (after only recieving rudeness as an answer from her) on charges of trespassing... on a public road. And now we have a cop who arrest 12 year old kinds for climbing up a tree and breaking off a couple of small branches. Yeah, somebody should have told them that doing that in a public park is not OK, but arresting them, DNAing them? Next time they go for exitement they better start shoplifting, that has less severer "first offense" outcomes. God bless America (and Great Britan) - they are on the best way to become a police state, wherer "to serve and protect" means "... the goverment and our own whims".
+++ MELON MELON MELON +++ Out of Cheese Error +++ redo from start +++
Read The Fine Article. The "Daily Mail" is an English newspaper, not an American one.
You're saying that vandalism is acceptable and doesn't warrant arrest? That's the problem with the world today, kids misbehave and you're not allowed to punish them.
Quite common here, nowadays. On the other hand, the prisons are getting overcrowded, and the percentage of real crimes solved and resulting in a conviction is down markedly.
with a condition not to congregate with three or more other youths.
They underreacted, the police should have called in SWAT and hurled tear gas at those pesky kids...
Yes, I am kidding. This kind of gestapo crap needs to be put in check and I hope that all the families sue and ask for nothing less than the cops jobs (rather than money).
For the win.
The perfect reply to this argument (which comes up every time someone mentions that most cops are assholes) is this: a McDonald's employee has more accountability than a cop does. As a 16 year old burger-flipper, if a customer acts like a complete asshole--even going so far as to yelling and cussing you out--you are NOT allowed to verbally abuse the customer in return in any way, shape or form. At most you can ask him/her to leave the building, that's it.
Years ago, I worked at McDonald's for four months and a very good friend of mine was punched in the face. Through a plate glass window. A woman tried to order at the pickup window, was told she needed to drive around again, so she punched through the drive-through window, hitting my friend in the face. If she (my friend) had hit her back, there's not a doubt in my mind that she would have lost her job. Instead, she walked away calmly and called her supervisor and the police.
Now, I'm not implying that the police shouldn't use force when necessary. I'm also not denying that they're human too, that it's a nasty, dirty job and I'm sure it's really rough on them. But you know what? Working at McDonald's is in many was rougher (if you doubt this, I could tell you some more horror stories... absolutely the worst 4 months of my life, period.), and yet their workers are held to a much higher standard than the police. Why is that? Why do so many of us make allowances for the police to exercise HUGE leaps of personal discretion, to bend the law whenever it suits them? It's a tough job, but they chose it and we shouldn't let them bend the rules (or ignore them) whenever they feel like it. I saw a TON of asshole customers at McDonalds, yet I didn't say a foul word to any of them. I didn't spit in their food either (no one did--they would've been fired on the spot.) I did my job as professionally as I could, regardless of how shitty I was treated.
And I was a fucking fry cook!
Please please please please PLEASE tell me we can hold our police officers up to the same standards as our burger flippers.
I have been pulled over, yelled at, harrassed by, and lied to by cops for doing such things as:
Driving 50 in zone that was theoretically a 35, but had NO SIGNS INDICATING SUCH, so I, along with everybody else, thought it was 55.
(Ticket knocked down to non-moving violating, thanks a lot.)
Driving an old BMW in the city at 30 miles per hour in a 30 zone, and breaking no laws, but looking like I might possibly be maybe on my way to buy drugs? (I was not, I was going home.)
(Cop left after yelling at me for a while.)
Making a completely legal U-Turn.
(Cop threatened me in court, lied to the judge, lied to me, knocked down to a 75 USD parking ticket. And I had to drive 3 hours there and back for court.)
65 in a 55. Everyone else doing 75. I was out of state. Fine, I was breaking the law. The cop then wrote the ticket for 65, but then wrote "actual speed: 75" in the comment box on the ticket to make sure the judge wouldn't knock it down. He was a jerk too.
I am white. I have all my paperwork in order. I am polite. I am respectful.
I thought I was going to have a good experience with a cop once. He pulled over to help when my car broke down. But then one of his buddies stopped by, and they proceeded to block traffic unnecessarily (my car was off the road), and chatted for a while before calling the tow truck.
So the only good experience I had was getting a ticket for an overdue inspection. (The cop was polite and did his job properly.)
Four out of five jerks.
The masses are the crack whores of religion.
Unbeknownst to these children we've secretly switched their country with new freeze-dried Third Reich. Let's watch and see their reaction.
The more I get to know people the more I like my dogs.
The kids are full of shit, and the article summary's got more spn than a Fox story on the inheritance tax ('death tax').
.... What was that about breaking off branches?
* They're on "public" land, and they "remove a few small dead branches from a cherry tree" is sandwiched between references that they were "playing in the tree".
Oh, you mean they were DESTROYING the cherry tree. Vandalism. OK
No matter. Those kind of trees grow like weeds anyway. Especially in the UK, where there are an overabundance of trees to begin with...
Here's what the story real says:
* The kids were looking for material to build a "treehouse".
It doesn't say if they were going to build it on THEIR property, or SOMEONE ELSE'S property. Most likely the latter.
As far as I'm concerned, they all aught to get switched, and then spend their next few weekends working for the park service cleaning up OTHER people's vandalism.
This boo-hoo about their "DNS" and all is a bit overblown. The kids set out to break someone else's property, cart off the goodies, and now they are deliberately misleading (or lying even) by portraying it as "playing in a tree". The details ARE in the story if anyone bothers to RTFA.
This is ridiculous. They were climbing a tree. They weren't dealing in dime bags or Colombia's finest. Hell, they left the China White out too. They were being kids, and now they're going to behave less like kids and more like paranoid basket cases. I'm not much for gratuitous lawsuits, but if anyone ever deserved a large chunk of change it's these kids. Also, to fault the "paper", there are no pictures of the allegedly damaged tree. What we do know is that three kids were locked up for committing damage that they themselves are highly unlikely to be capable of performing. Perhaps it was a larger group of older "kids" who laid siege to the tree? At any rate, I'll remember this episode of "kneejerk policing" in mind if we ever travel to the UK and I feel the need to lean on a tree to scratch an itch.
One of the 187.
A "big kick in the wallet" just makes me think the whle system is corrupt and a way for 'The Man' to steal from me. Around here, you do something with a measly $10 fine and they charge you $100 extra for "court costs". There's no way to avoid said costs...
Let's just say, for sake of argument, that the children were being as destructive as the police suggest. (I mean, parents have a tendency so spin the actions of their kids in too rosy of a light.) Let's even go so far as to entertain the idea that they were intentionally destroying the tree with no good purpose.
The only possible situation where the police actions would be warranted is if those kids KNEW that this tree was protected public property (like destroying cypress trees in Florida AFTER being told that it's illegal to damage them) and were intentionally vandalizing it just to be assholes to everyone else.
The problem is that that would be impossible for the police to prove. Nevertheless, the police acted as though the intentions of these kids were the worst possible. The police don't have that right, and they should be brought up on civil charges.
Of course that is always the result of excessive power being given to law enforcement officers, abuse. Which is why constraints are placed upon them in the first place.
A lot of people forget that over the centuries people have suffered the abuse of law enforcement and instituted laws to keep them in them in check, a bit of complacence and fear inducing politics and people think those laws accidentally invented themselves, rather than coming about as a result of abuses by law enforcement repeated again and again down then centuries.
Let them spy on you and control your daily life and you are no longer a citizen, you are a prisoner and they are no longer upholders of the law, they are deviant thugs.
Chaos - everything, everywhere, everywhen
this is exactly what the current public wants. The police acted exactly as the masses of "it for the children" have been requesting for years. People as a whole have stoped saying someone should talk to thier parrents, when a child acts with bad behavior. Now they are heard saying thier should be a law against that. This change has occured thanks to Barney and Friends making parrents too lazy to be a parrent and instead of a friend children see occasionally. I fear with this baby first network it may become evan worse.
Kudos for him.. It's always good to see someone stand up for their principles..
Unfortunately, however, this only means that his spot was filled by someone either without those principles - or who is unwilling to stand up for his/her principles..
SYS 64738
The parents are the ones flipping out here. The police were simply doing their job. I admire their professionality in the face of what obviously would be an unpopular action. The parents claim their children were "treated like hardened criminals" and "in the same room as rapists and murderers". Apparently not while rapists and murderers were present. This kind of hyperbole speaks for itself. Overall I think it's a good lesson: if you break the law, you will be arrested.
There is a mistake in the article. It states that the police records will be kept fo five years. This is not strictly accurate as the DNA samples will be kept indefinitely on the UK's national DNA database.
Here's a handy little editorial device you might want to learn: [sic]. From wikipedia, "Sic is a Latin word meaning "thus", "so", or "just as that". In writing, it is italicized and placed within square brackets [sic] to indicate that an incorrect or unusual spelling, phrase, or other preceding quoted material is a verbatim reproduction of the quoted original and is not a transcription error."
Proper use of this device will shift the blame for grammatical stupidity away from you and onto the submitter where it rightfully belongs.
Yours in pointless pedantry,
Acy
-- Too lazy to get a lower UID.
If a tree falls in a forest and nobody gets locked up, interrogated and DNA tested, does it make a sound?
Moderation is a system of punishment and reward. The standard punishment for 'FP' is "Offtopic"; being on topic is irrelevent. You can get offtopic for a bad, ontopic joke.
I agree that moderation would be better if it was wielded more precisely, but I'm afraid that that simply isn't how it's done.
Wikileaks, no DNS
Reduce, reuse, cycle
Back in the day (1976-ish) my father was in the Marines. We lived on a Marine base. My older brother (he was 12) and two of his friends were playing in a creek. They followed the creek (which was beside a road) looking for frogs. At one point a vehicle pulled up and out jumped two armed Marines - guns fully drawn and pointed them at my brother and his friends. They were hand-cuffed, arrested and tossed in a cell.
Then they made the requisite phone calls to their parents. They couldn't reach the first two kids' parents when they called my father. They told him that his boy was in the base brig. They also told him that if he knew the parents of the other boys that he should contact them. They gave my father the boys' names and my father grinned ear-to-ear.
Yadda, yadda, yadda.
The base CO had the two MPs severely reprimanded, stripped of rank and transferred for type writer maintanence in Poedunk, Alaska for pulling guns on his two boys and my brother.
Moral of the story - Don't pull weapons on the base COs children.
This phrase has seemed to pop up in a lot of British crime articles. Can anyone from across the pond explain to me what exactly it is?
They seem to be using it as an excuse to arrest, harass and imprison anybody for any reason, on the basis that they were doing something "anti-social."
And what's wrong with being anti-social anyway? Some people are shy, some people have strange tastes and interests. I know I am not the epitome of a social butterfly.
Worst we've got in America is a recent rash of police arresting people from photographing their encounters, which, given the number of police in this country, seems to be more rare than people in Britain being branded "anti social" for chewing japanese cabbage flavor gum or driving luxury cars.
"Let's be serious here. We're talking about three 12 year olds, not a gang armed with axes and chainsaws. What damage could they possibly do to a cherry tree?"
Are you kidding? George Washington was 6 when he took down his first cherry tree (apocryphal nonsense though it may be).
--
WHO ATE MY BREAKFAST PANTS?
Is that like loose teeth? In all my years of camping out I've never seen a 'loose' branch. It's either on the tree or off it. Sounds to me like their trying to dilute the kids' actions. It's like saying about a theif that he didn't steal it, it was just kind of sitting there and he grabbed it. Honestly, loose branches?
And outlawed things are the 'cool' and 'in' thing to do - Crapola, /. ....our days are numbered! We geeks & nerds can't be caught doing something 'cool!'
Now what are we going to do...?
An End. Yes.
Cherry trees usually branch very low and the branches spread very quickly. They're almost more bush-like than tree-like. They also split very easily.
If they were all on one branch bouncing quite happily they most likely split the tree and it will die.
Tree removal and Stump grinder service = $400-$800
New 2" cherry tree = ~$300
Wait 20 years for it to grow up again = $????
If going to jail was bad how about forced child labor in order for them to pay restitution? I know for a fact that's what I'd have had to do.
Now I know they are deadly serious and won't tolerate the slightest infraction of the law, on pain of being made to cry for my mommy.
No wait. They are pussies. This just proves it. Comes from not being allowed to use guns, I guess...
(And yeah, I'm pretty sure someone from the UK will mod this down as flamebait or troll. Wah wah, like I care).
In the darkness of future past, The magician longs to see. One chants between two worlds, "Fire, walk with me!"
This space intentionally left (almost) blank.
Did you notice that the victims of the ill-treatment were pictured in the article and clearly identified?
Did you notice that the policemen who exhibited a newsworthy lack of judgement remain anonymous?
Do you think police might think twice about such foolishness if the press did a better job of covering these incidents?
The important thing is that the children learned thier lesson.
... ?
What is the lesson
That most police officers are psychopathic a**holes, who should be avoided at any cost.
Long live IBOB - The [I]nternational [B]rotherhood [o]f [B]roomstickers
This is an example of why I teach my kids to run from cops.
If kids are allowed to build tree houses in the wrong places then the terrorists win.
I'm glad to see that some police have given up on the archaic skills of communicating and understanding. Just blindly follow the manual boys!
It is by the juice of the coffee bean that thoughts acquire speed, the teeth acquire stains. The stains become a warning
Incredibly, you seem to be both knocking "think of the children" and espousing "think of the children". In the same sentence even.
Rich
Comment removed based on user account deletion
And I was a fucking fry cook!
Please please please please PLEASE tell me we can hold our police officers up to the same standards as our burger flippers.
To some extent I agree with you. Sadly, the reason you are(were) held to a higher standard has nothing to do with standards. It has to do with making a buck off of ANYONE who isn't going to physically harm you or company property. A corporation has different priorities than a public institution. But consider the following - the customers who were rude to you at McDonald's were probably not just rude there. They were probably rude at the store next door, to the bus driver who took them there, to their neighbors, etc. If everyone is polite to an ass, what incentive does the ass have not to be one? Perhaps the problem is individuals at the various institutions we encounter in life are not given the authority to say, "Take your money and your business out of here, you rude SOB. Your business is not worth it." - if this was done commonly and routinely, perhaps there wouldn't be so many rude asses cruising through life and making others miserable. And perhaps cops would be more professional if they didn't have to deal with abusive people 95 times out of 100. Perhaps if it was only 30 out of 100, it would be far easier, as humans, to be professional with those 30, as they should be.
It's difficult to expect a large institution filled with humans, not to have one or two act like one from time to time.... Just my 2 bits.
I read the summary for this article and was outraged- then I read the article, realized it was in England and my reaction was "yeah that's about right." The UK has lost its collective mind. The English are the only people on the planet who could have read 1984 and said "Hey, that sounds like a nice place to live- let's give it a try."
-sirket
And this could be why he confessed.
Mama, I got 'dem ole cosmic blues again.
The Catholic church purportedly has a saying, something to the effect of, "Give me a child for instruction and by age six they are mine for life".
Apparently law enforcment agencies in the US are subscribing to the same model.
By enforcing draconian measures at increasingly young ages, it will be ever so much easier to get the sheep to slaughter in the future police state.
Pardon me, I must go now....I hear the helicopters.....
Some days it's just not worth
chewing through my restraints.
It's just a good general rule: Be nice to the men with sticks and guns. It's not subversive or revolutionary to hassle a cop. It's just self destructive.
I have had generally decent experiences with police officers. Hey, they're people, and they appreciate genuine respect and honesty more than most of us can imagine. It is rare in their world.
"Yes officer, I ran the light. Write the ticket. I was totally wrong, and there's no excuse. I thought I might make it through the orange but I should have slowed down, not accelerated. I also ride a motorbike, and I know running a light is deadly thing to do. Sorry to make you write the ticket." That worked well for me. He actually followed me, pulled me over again, and literally told me to tear up the ticket. Better than I deserved. Running a light is real *ssh*l* move.
They do have one of the worst imaginable jobs. The guy who acts somehow outraged at getting a traffic ticket is the absolute least of their worries, and we all know how irritating it is to listen to him at work when he retells his story. I hate that guy. How does he rationalize outrage when he broke the law on purpose? Act like a grownup.
I am _always_ respectful to police officers. During a baseless traffic stop, a belligerent officer asked me if I had been drinking. I was very respectful to him, especially because _he_ smelled of alcohol to me. I hadn't had a drink in weeks or months at the time, but I know the smell. That was just terrifying. If that rule doesn't matter to him, there's no telling what does. Every time I remember that I hope I was wrong somehow, but I don't think I was.
The good ones deserve respect, the bad ones demand it. When is it not a good idea? Be nice to the men with sticks and guns.
Redundant much? Unless they were checking for AIDS or some such before being admitted to the PMITA prison...
they have gone to far here
And I was a fucking fry cook!
Eww. I hope you washed your hands.
Rich
Bearing in mind I am only 17 I was arrested for criminal damage for punching a phonebox because it took £1 off me, I punched it once the police pulled up, slapped the cuffs on me too tight, when I asked them to loosen them they wouldn't and I had marks on my wrists for the next few days, then they put me in a cell just in my socks, shorts and tshirt (took my hoodie and shoes off me) and made me stay there overnight totaling 12 hours and never answered the call button and gave me an £80 fine, I wish I had have "resisted arrest" now it would have made the fine seem more worth while. Now I am glad I am moving to holland for university next year, holland is a lot better than England and the USA for a number of reasons.
And I was a fucking fry cook!
:)
Well, on the up-side at least you were fucking
This is not the greatest sig in the world, no. This is just a tribute.
In my town we have sheriff joe are pile of shit He is unable to run a jail so he put tents acrosst the desert because he is unable to budget. the news calls that tough when its really incompetents. We have several serial killers some with as many as 40 victims and more comming to town every day. Because no one will snitch on anyone for anything including killing randomly. yeah thats what you get when you have a police state. police are out of control. I am alot more scared of police than I am crime. And you better be to or you will be doing life in prison for smoking weed or on your way to church you have an accident.
> Sorry, but if they believe a 911 call came from within your home, they have probable cause to enter.
Don't try to BS your way through police procedure. If the officer could reasonably claim proabable cause, she'd simply have done so and gone inside without needing to ask. The fact that she did ask indicates that she didn't think she could stand on probable cause.
Virg
Depending on the area, I've heard quite a few stories where individuals who are black have often been pulled over (when driving, particular when driving a new car in a 'white' area) without strong reason. This is sometimes referred to as DWB.
While you might not have been harassed while being pulled over, have you ever run into incidents where your race seemed to be a factor in that you were pulled over in the first place?
I agree that there probably aren't *that* many bad cops out there, but like individuals of any group the really bad ones tend to stand out a whole lot more, and they can make your life rather miserable. I do think that one of the two primary reasons for being a cop would be either the classic 'to serve and protect' or 'to be in power', and a lot of people from group #2 do tend to be jerks.
Back in 1981 (I was 11) I had the same thing occur to me. We were playing a game and you had to get to the branches of the tree above everyones head before being tagged. Arrested and put on almost put on probation for a year. Seems like nothing changes to me.
The fact is these kids did serious damage to an ornamental tree. You simply don't build tree houses in cherry trees. They weren't just 'climbing' a tree, they were vandalising it and by the sounds of it they did huge amounts of damage. Then there's building a tree house on public land "generations of children" have played there, why should the kids make it so that it's their own private play area and ruin what is usually a beautiful kind of tree when it's in bloom
Throwing an object at somebody could fall under normal laws, possibly as assault or various others. Walking around brandishing knives, as a group, would likely designate them as 'weapons' and fall under existing laws as well.
There is a difference between behavioral issues (which might catch some of the foulmouthed, disruptive, but not actually violent buggers around) and criminal and/or violence issues.
It is interesting that police never give up the opportunity to finger print and DNA sample someone.
Having to work for a living is the root of all evil.
I don't think they went to this "far" place, being as how I couldn't find it on any maps. Then again, maybe my maps are just outdated. Must be one of them new-fangled towns.
McDonalds is a private business competing for your patronage. Perhaps we should outsource police work to competing agencies, and sign them to term contracts to police cities (or districts). That might also make the operations run more efficiently, since they are competing on price as well as performance.
But then again, if you emphasize the bottom line, then corners must be cut. The last time I was at McDonald's it took 30 minutes to get my food. Lower wages increase staffing issues (work ethic as well as number), and so response time suffers. Emergency workers are the last people I would want this to happen to.
Pay them more. Make it an employer's market, so they can be choosy about who they hire and keep on. Attract decent people with good work ethic, and fire those that abuse their position. Or, if you'd rather not deal with an increase regional sales tax, live with the current work force.
Just a thought.
It's defined as "conduct which caused or was likely to cause alarm, harassment or distress to one or more persons not of the same household as him or herself". So no, sitting in your house on your own and not coming out does not count.
this is from england, they remember what happened last time sombody destroyed a cherry tree.
Cogito Eggo Sum, I think therefore I'm a waffle
If she (my friend) had hit her back, there's not a doubt in my mind that she would have lost her job.
Are you suggesting that a police officer, when punched in the face through a plate glass window, should be reprimanded for fighting back?
Yeah, maybe they should just tell their supervisor and call the police instead. Oh, wait.
If that's not what you're suggesting, I don't understand the comparison between acceptable police behavior and acceptable McDonald's cashier behavior that you're trying to point out.
Davy Crockett was only three when he first kilt him a bar.
Eloi are stupid, throw morlocks at them!
What if their "playing" in the tree was K-I-S-S-I-N-G? As we know, this can lead to baby, in a baby carriage. The DNA testing was probably just a pre-emptive one for paternity or, possibly, cooties.
It is the 21st century and the time for Klax has passed.
I suppose George Washington should have been banged up for days, then - he wasn't just playing with a cherry tree, he chopped the thing down! Still, he pleaded guilty so might have got his sentence cut I suppose...
"'I pass the test,' she said. 'I will diminish, and go into the West, and remain Galadriel.'"
- JRR Tolkien.
So, you need to patent your DNA.
Then, when the police have a sample, you can send them a C&D, ordering them to destroy the sample, or you'll sue them for patent violation.
"City hall" in German is "Rathaus" Kinda explains a few things......
The unfortunate side effect being that when all the honest cops like your friend have resigned, what's left are the people who shouldn't have become cops in the first place. :(
~REZ~ #43301. Who'd fake being me anyway?
dudley-south@west-midlands.police.uk
!!!!
Spelling errors were made for your amusement only...
While you make some good points (we really *don't* know what happened, other than a lot of wailing and gnashing of teeth on both sides) the real point of all this yammering is that treating kids as criminals just for being stupid kids (as all kids will sometimes be) doesn't solve the problem, nor teach these kids anything about being responsible individuals.
So if they were indeed destroying the tree, a better solution would have been on the order of "Look what you've done to that poor tree!! how would you like it if someone ripped YOUR arms off?" Let the brats think about that for a while, then if punishment is indicated, hale them into some youth group that plants trees or caretakes woodlands. Get them involved so they understand exactly *what* they were destroying. Because the fact is, kids DON'T understand what they're destroying unless it's something they personally feel they have a stake in. That's just the nature of *kids*.
But hauling them off to jail accomplished nothing. The kids still don't understand what they did wrong (if anything -- *we* don't really know), and instead can only see the unfairness of how the cops reacted.
~REZ~ #43301. Who'd fake being me anyway?
When I was a kid, three friends and I decided to build a "fort" in the lush forest-y area just over my back fence. We spent a good majority of the summer building it and, as one of the kids had a passing familiarity with how houses are framed, this "fort" was quite sturdy. It had framed walls covered in sheet plastic (we didn't have enough wood to properly close them off), a solid, planked, level floor with a removeable panel revealing a storage area beneath the floor, where we kept alcohol we stole from our parents shot by shot over many weeks, solid, wood bunk beds, a proper doorway (no door) and a nice wood table for setting things on.
:)
The finished fort was about nine feet tall and about ten feet square.
We had many memorable parties in that fort until our last party in the fall. On that day, it seems enough of the leaves had fallen from the trees to provide a clear view of our fort from the vantage point of the local Canadian customs station located not 150 feet away. It seems we had built our fort on their land.
So, here we are sitting around in the fort, drinking vodka and orange juice from a large glass juice bottle, when three customs officers wander into the trees and into our fort. There they stood inside the doorway. We were dumbstruck. So, what did they do?
They didn't say anything at first; they just stood there looking around the room at our fort for a minute or two. Then one of them said with a slightly incredulous tone, "*What* is going on here?" We replied that we were just playing in our fort. They asked if our large juice bottle had any alcohol in it and we said it was just orange juice. They never took it from us and never bothered tasting it. Then another officer said, "Do you realize what you have here? This is classified as a *permenant* structure and you've build it on land you most certainly do *not* own. You're going to have to tear this thing down."
They made us tear it down. And then... that was it. End of story. No beatings, no arrests. They seemed more amazed and amused by the whole thing. We were, after all, just kids doing kid things, albeit with perhaps slightly above-average carpentry skills. How could we possibly be criminals? I mean, what rational-thinking group of people could possibly think it was a good idea to build their own party palace on Customs' land, less than a stone's throw from many officers?
Not long after that, my younger brother started going over to the customs station on a regular basis in the late evenings to play cribbage with one of the officers.
That was one of those golden summers. Probably around 1982, if I recall correctly. They never found our secret stash under the floor, by the way.
We've had this in the US for years. Only here we call it "disorderly conduct." Do something that's not technically illegal, but a cop doesn't like it and you're busted for disorderly conduct.
I think this was a bit excessive, but if they are destroying things it wasn't that bad. If they were just climbing around the cops should have just told them to go home and that would be the end to that. I doubt they were doing much damage, I doubt enough to warrant keeping them on file for 5 years. The DNA recording was creepy, I think if you aren't charged you should not be put into the system like that.
While I don't hate cops, I have a few friends who are, there are some that really scare me and make it so I don't trust them in general. I had a friend who was stopped at an intersection with a cop staking it out and waiting for some one to run it. All of a sudden the cop points a shotgun at him, so he takes off like a bat out of hell. He eludes him, but later they come to his house and arrest him. The judge asks the cop what the heck he was thinking pointing a gun at a citizen, he just replied he was cleaning it and wasn't thinking. No reprimands, nothing really said to the cop. The second was a friend who was sitting down on a curb waiting for a ride drinking a soda. A cop approached him and told him to put the bottle down and he was being arrested. All he could say was "Huh?" before the cop beat the crap out of him and arrested him. Apparently a riot or something was happening on the other side of town and they decided he was rioting too by throwing bottles at cars, I'm not sure how. Fortune tally the cop's car was taping it, and the cop was fired and his lawsuit was settled. However these incidents, and ones on the news, scare the heck out of me of what a cop will do to me when ever I'm approached, even though I've had more good or neutral experiences in the past then bad ones.
"Superintendent Stuart Johnson, operations manager at Halesowen police station, said: 'I support the actions of my officers who responded to complaints from the public about "kids destroying" an ornamental cherry tree by stripping every branch from it, in an area where there have been reports of anti-social behaviour."
I understand that one of the definitions of "anti-social behaviour" is essentially vandalising things, but how does this superintendent see a group of 3 kids, playing in a tree as being vandals? The complaint made "by the public" if true is a valid complaint, however I am absolutely baffled that the arresting officers perceived these kids to be vandalising this tree.
The other thing... aren't there laws about arresting children, taking DNA, etc. etc? I am pretty sure there are some very strict rules governing the arresting procedures for juveniles, and I have a good feeling that if these parents got a good lawyer, they could sue and win very easily. I do not support the "sue or be sued" lifestyle that America has become accustom to, but children should have privacy rights and, the DNA samples and what not should not have been allowed without a guardian present. Personally... I think this Police Department went to far.
http://www.denialofreality.com/
It's not easy to find good officers. It's not that easy to get officer's who can pass the psych tests and the physical tests. It is not easy to become a police officer. It's very easy to hire a teenager desperate for a job and it's no sweat off their ass if McDonald's fires you. It's nothing personal, you are just easily replaceable. That police officer on the other hand is not easily replaceable.
Read my short stories - You won't regret it.
This is the crux of the solution. Personal responsibility.
Your friend is a token of our salvation. When people gripe about just doing their jobs, or about just trying to get by (conveniently), or about how everyone else is doing it, what they're really doing is trying to belittle their contribution of damage.
I salute your friend, too. He is a hero.
Which, it's sad to point out, is rare.
I would not take seriously a single word that that rag published. A recent example: They published something about my website and claimed to have spoken to me the previously day - a lie. See http://www.dailymail.co.uk/pages/live/articles/new s/news.html?in_article_id=395688&in_page_id=1770. They lied, were factually incorrect, they nicked pictures and text without attribution, god help anyone who takes the DM seriously.
Charlie.
You can't, say, go 85 without a crowd around you. As my ticket suggests. Granted, this was up near 92. I think the venture capital shield may not extend that far.
Also, sanmateocourt.org's online traffic ticket system only works with IE. Even months after I submitted some JavaScript to them to make it work with other browsers. How's that for public service?
https://www.sanmateocourt.org/traffic/
i was in ontario, california and was pulled over by a cop for a trumped up charge.
i was driving along a long stretch of freeway, i saw the cop in the reviewfrom about 2.5 miles away. he caught up quickly as i had a "feeling" it was a cop so i drove the exact speed limit.
he slowed down and followed me for another mile or two. again, i was driving the exact speed limit and i was dead center in the lane.
when i put my blinkers on to turn off and go to black angus, the lights went on... as i'm looking at my destination.
"sir, i'm stopping you because you were swerving." i was stunned. the only "swerving" i did was to maneuver my vehicle into the left hand turn lane. apparently, any movement into a left hand turn lane can be deemed "swerving."
i bit my lip and played a long.
"Where are you going?" i point to black angus and tell him "Black Angus."
"Have you been drinking?" i told him i had two beers about an hour ago.
He whipped out his little flashlight deal and did his eye test.
"OK, you are free to go. you were driving according to the law and I found that exceptionally suspicious, so I felt compelled to stop you and see if I could find anything on my fishing expedition. I didn't find anything and you aren't of a race I find offensive, so you can go. Be safe."
Alright, everything after the first sentence was 100% true, but was left unsaid. i sucked up the wrong... but duly noted the incident for future reference.
Zip forward to a jury trial where I was a juror. mr police officer makes a statement - and his word is crucial evidence. according to his words, they made a "traffic stop" w/o using lights and bum rushing a vehicle as a guy was walking to pay for gas.
is "traffic stop" code word for "attempted drug bust," only to be used when "attempted drug bust" would be ILLEGAL? i guess these guys went to the same copper school the guy did who stopped me so many years ago.
at the end of the day, the cops thought this guy was guilty, but there were some holes in their case. i DECLINED to give the cops' judgment the benefit of the doubt... they lied when they pulled me over, they lied when they claimed the drug stop was actually a "traffic stop."
what else could they be lying about? truth is, i didn't know. i still don't. can't trust 'em.
lacking a smoking gun, but not lacking some holes in the case, i voted "not guilty beyond a reasonable doubt." the guy was probably guilty, but i know the cops were guilty of lying and obfuscating. too bad they weren't on trial. i mighta been able to convict them.
one of the cops was in the courtroom. i'll bet he was disappointed with the hung jury (8-8) and probably not smart enough to figure out why. half the jury didn't trust his judgment. worse, for very good reasons.
So, let's see. It's okay to destroy a portion of a national forest for profit, but it's not okay for a couple of kids to pull off some branches from a tree?
I'm sure with a chainsaw, the kids could do some serious damage to the tree. We should definitely outlaw the selling of chainsaws to minors. Without a chainsaw, what're they going to do? I doubt they could do much real harm to the tree.
A "warning" would've been a cop saying, "Hey! You kids in that tree! What do you think you're doing? Well, get down from there and don't do it anymore!" That would've been a warning. What they got was harrassed, which is a form of intimidation, which is far beyond what the situation as described deserved.
There's no defense for the actions of the cops. There's no reason to teach our kids to be scared of any adventurous actions, except to satisfy the sense of power our law-enforcement officers enjoy.
Microsoft is to software what Budweiser is to beer.
If this wasn't a time of pedophilic hysteria, I'd suggest giving them to me for safe-keeping. But since it is, I won't.
Forget magic. Any technology distinguishable from divine power is insufficiently advanced.
Having decided to run an article regarding this at Start The Revolution, and also knowing the DM's reputation for, shall we say, "toying" with the truth, I actually managed to speak with the boy's father, Nicholas Cannon. Due to a "media deal" he could not give me anything on the record but he did confirm off the record that the story was factually correct even though the DM had breached the "media deal" in quoting him when he did not provide the quote...Sound familiar?!??!
Anyway, suffice to say that, whilst the DM cannot always be trusted in terms of facts and sources (which is quite scary when you consider that they are supposed to be a news media outlet!) this story is absolutely true.
"There are none so enslaved as those who falsely believe they are free" - Goethe
These cops did go a bit over the line, but not as much as is described in the article.
Click Click Bloody Click PANCAKES!
Wonderful mix of comments from the DM readership: http://www.dailymail.co.uk/pages/live/articles/new s/news.html?in_article_id=397240&in_page_id=1770&i n_page_id=1770&expand=true#StartComments
Charlie.
Britons are confused right now. Scary isn't it? I am only glad that I got out but there are so many people that I wish I could have brought with me too.
I have to say that I do not miss it for a second though!
"There are none so enslaved as those who falsely believe they are free" - Goethe
Oh, and I meant to say, I did chuckle when I saw your artcle on Infowars and Rense!!!
Seriously, those guys really should do their research!!!
"There are none so enslaved as those who falsely believe they are free" - Goethe
...while going to the elevator in the morning, I heard some people fighting in a room down the hall... Afraid for my own safety, I got the room number, then went to the front desk...
Why were you afraid for your own safety? Did you think that they might hear the 'ding' of the elevator and come rushing out with pitchforks and axes? It sure must have taken a lot of courage to sneak close enough to read the room number.
Me?
I'd have arrested someone on the city council or anyone else in power on bogus charges and told them flat-out that it was just because I had to meet my arrest quota.
"Sorry Mr. Council Member, but I'm afraid that we have to hold you indefinitely with no charges at all. I'll look into doing the paperwork to even make anyone aware that it's YOU in here sometime next week. Until then, no, you don't get a phone call."
You decided to not believe the police statement that the kids 'stripped every branch from the tree' - and in even words you could understand -that would destroy the tree. And if the tree, stripped and damaged, still managed to survive and in ten years actually began to look like a tree again then you would still have the damage done by the kids. But again,if you won't believe the police statement in this then argue that point. Don't argue that the tree wasn't destroyed if it's branches were stripped. And destroying public property is still a crime. And if you wanted to go into a National Forest and cut down a Christmas tree - you - would - need - a - permit - for - it. Trees are there on public property for the public good. Not the individual desires if you happened to want the wood from that tree.
Enjoy your Karma, after all you earned it. Feel your Karma Joe, feel it burn.
Some Canadian numbers for you.
Roughly 55,000 kids go missing each year here. Vast majority are runaways. A few hundred get taken by their parents. A few dozen are abducted by "strangers"; note that "A Stranger Abduction is defined as an abduction by individual(s) other than the subject's parent or guardian."
A lot of these "stranger" abductions are actually other family members - uncles, aunts, grandparents. Basically, most kids that actually get abducted are the result of custody cases gone bad. The actual number of honest-to-goodness, being picked up off the street at random cases is in the single digits annually, from what I can find. Maybe a dozen or two if you feel generous.
Children are about as likely to be hit by lightning as be abducted by a stranger. But you wouldn't know that by listening to the media - or from the constant "Amber alerts".
Endless arguments over trivial contradictions in books written by ignorant savages to explain thunder in the dark.
Did you say "shrubberies"?
When you were a kid, climbing trees, did you spend a lot of time thinking about what you can and can't do in a public tree? Did you even think about if a tree was public or not?
Hell, YES! My parents made me carefully aware of the difference between public and private property before I was five.
If I had tried wanted to climb a tree which I didn't own, I would ask FOR PERMISSION first. In the case of a public park, I would ask my parents if it was okay to climb there, and they would say, "no". And that would be the end of the matter.
The point is, they were kids, doing kid things.
No, they were bad kids, doing bad things.
Destroying public property is bad. These kids weren't just climbing the tree; and a good kid wouldn't have gone that far without permission. No, these brats were tearing up the branches to make a tree fort! Good kids know better that you don't break ANYTHING, without asking a grown-up first! Bad kids don't care about the rules, and bad kids are a result of bad parents.
A kid, regardless of age, should not be out in public unescorted unless and until it knows the laws and customs of society, and can be trusted to obey them. If the kids can't be trusted to obey on their own, don't leave them unattended. If they break the law, then punish them; as severely as necessary.
I don't think I'm out of line for suggesting that 12 year olds should not be arrested for climbing trees, even if they break a few branches
I agree that it shouldn't have been necessary to call the police. The parents should have been monitoring their kids, and if the kids wouldn't listen to the parents' calls to leave the tree alone, the parents should have whipped the kids bottoms sore with the broken tree branches until they learned to respect public property.
Instead, the police should have been called on the parents; and the children given to someone who will force them to grow up, and learn respect for public lands. That didn't happen, and that's the real problem. The kids were let off without so much as a single slap on the wrist, or the bum.
The Independent - serious, reasonably independent
The Times - ditto, but owned by Murdoch
The Daily Telegraph - serious and generally responsible, but right-wing bias
The Guardian - reasonably serious, with left wing bias
From http://www.theregister.co.uk/2006/04/26/dna_databa se_removal/
The UK is something of a DNA record kleptocracy, with a national DNA database now well in excess of three million records, and with new sampling opportunities available to the police on remarkably easy terms. These days it's ever so easy to get onto the UK database, but how do you get off?
What's that you say? You don't? Well, up to a point - but it's not strictly true to say that once you're on the database you absolutely can't get off again. It's just very, very hard and it's going to take you a long, long time. Fortunately, would-be escapees now have the benefit of some guidance from the Association of Chief Police Officers.
Exceptional Case Procedures for Removal DNA, Fingerprints and PNC Records, released by ACPO on 24th April, is in part a response to recent decisions made by the Information Tribunal in connection with police retention of criminal records data. Alongside this, "recent widespread media coverage relating to the retention of DNA", ACPO says, is likely to result in a high volume of removal requests over the next 12 months. These requests will in the first instance be made to Chief Officers in their role of data controller, and ACPO feels that it is important that "national consistency" is achieved in their responses.
OK? So how does it work? "Exception cases will by definition be rare," says ACPO, and might well include cases "where the original arrest or sampling was found to be unlawful." Or, if it turns out to be absolutely clear that there wasn't any offence in the first place, that might count. And ACPO gives a specific example:
"For example where a dead body is found in a multi-occupancy dwelling and the cause of death is not immediately obvious. All the occupants are arrested on suspicion of murder pending the outcome of a post mortem. All arrested persons are detained at the local police station and samples taken. It later transpires that the deceased person died of natural causes. No offence therefore exists, and all persons are released from custody."
Find corpse, nick everybody within range just in case? One certainly hopes that's seriously exceptional. Fortunately though, the honest Chief Copper doesn't have to wrestle with these thorny issues alone. Or possibly, at all, considering ACPO's recommended procedure.
First, a request for deletion of a Police National Computer (PNC) record, DNA sample or fingerprints should be viewed as being "a request to remove all items." It is then "essential", says ACPO, that the DNA and fingerprint records are matched correctly to the appropriate arrest summons number on the PNC record. But here comes a gotcha: "Samples taken on other occasions should not be deleted." Which we take to mean that if you're not pursuing a DNA record specific to a PNC arrest record, then you're not going to get off the database. Close the door on your way out.
But what if it is associated with an arrest record? "In the first instance applicants should be sent a letter informing them that the samples and associated PNC record are lawfully held and that their request for deletion / destruction is refused" Oh, right... "unless the applicant believes the application should be regarded as exceptional." In that case, "the applicant should be invited to state the grounds upon which they believe their case to be exceptional."
And then the Chief Officer gets to decide? Well, not exactly. "The Chief Officer is asked to consider any response and either reply to the applicant rejecting the application for the removal of the record(s)" Oh, right... "or refer the case papers to the DNAFRP [DNA & Fingerprint Retention Project], thus ensuring that a consistent approach is adopted nationally."
Then DNAFRP will respond with advice taking into account any relevant precedents, and then the Chief Officer gets to decide. Using a response letter template supplied by DNAFRP. It may be occurring to you that one might easily die of old age while this process was under way. But don't you go thinking dying's going to get you off the database, sunshine, oh no... ®
WTF. The article clearly states they were breaking off limbs of a CHERRY tree, in a park.
Look at the PP's ID -- Slashdot ID's in the four-digit range clearly are not trolls.
Moderator abuse is why people are leaving for greener pastures (digg)
You're kidding me ... $300 for a 2 INCH TREE?!
Last I checked, burgers don't occasionally shoot the cooks.
Dealing with abusive customers/people is one thing, being wary of and dealing with potentially lethal violence is another.
There's PLENTY of potentially lethal violence at McDonald's. I saw it myself firsthand, and most of the veterans I talked to had been through at least one holdup.
And anyway, I don't think that these cops had anything to fear from a couple of fucking kids playing in a fucking tree.
Considering the direction the "war on terror" allied countries (US, UK, AU, etc, etc.) are headed in terms of domestic policy this shouldn't be surprising.
I mean, the UK is the most surveilled nation on the planet which, to most, I assume, is unacceptable. Right? Most people would rather not have cameras watching them everywhere they go. Following that logic it should be safe to assume that the government is unreasonable in their assertion of total surveillance. Therefore, why would you expect the police, who are a part of that mechanism, to be reasonable also?
One of the commonly viewed attributes of a free and democratic society is a non-intrusive government who's responsibility is the protection of the citizens. The citizens from which the government gets its power.
Also, it is the responsibility of the citizens to distrust the government and correct its unacceptable actions.
One might argue, "well, these cameras ARE for our protection."
My respons would be, "Maybe so, but if you look at history the tendency of government is always to overstep the boundaries it has been given. If you allow the government to have sweeping authority and unparallelled power of information gathering without any checks or balances that protect the citizens from that machine, then the oppression of the people will be soon to follow.
The united states is no different, I have witnessed over the past year or two the installation of video cameras on almost every major intersection in every city of california. Moreover, I have personally observed the obvious absence of these cameras in wealthy areas through which I have driven. In the US the assumed cause is obvious (9/11, patriot act, dept homeland security, etc) but what is the reason in the UK, and what was the catalyst?
Back to my point, what has brought us to this point where kids who make their way to a "wooded" area in order find material to build a treehouse, end up in jail? The article clearly said they were intentionally trying to break off "dead limbs." This tells me they were consiously trying NOT to be destructive and were consciously trying not to harm a living tree. When I was a kid a police officer would have told me to go home, but now I'd get arrested!!!
This just seems to be congruent with today's way of thinking...why can't they allow children to be who they really are? KIDS!
If I were the parent I would be pissed off too, they police have no right to take DNA samples and fingerprints. The sad part is the police are so propagandized and indoctrinated into this way of thinking they would be just fine with their own children being arrested and booked for petty misconduct.
At least there is enough outrage from people on this topic that tells me not everyone has been brainwashed...yet
No, I'm not suggesting that (and I said as much, if you were paying attention.) I'm saying that every organization has rules for acceptable behavior. I didn't say that McDonald's should be the same as the police's--just that at McDonald's, the rules are extremely rigid. With the police, they are nearly non-existent (at least so long as there aren't any non-police observers around.) Police officers can demonstrate an obscene level of incompetence and overreaction and disregard for the law that may even result in the deaths of innocent civilians, and yet they still usually walk away with (at worst) a repremand.
And even if the rules were actually enforced and the police had to stay within the bounds of the law at all times, there are still numerous gaps (e.g. uncompensated property seizure, selective/discriminatory law enforcement, laws that criminalize everyday objects such as crowbars as criminal tools or alligator clips as drug paraphernalia--depending on officer discretion of course, Patriot Act provisions that permit forfeiture of citizenship or indefinite detainment without trial, the "anti-social" laws in Britain which spit in the face of due process and presumption of innocence, etc.) that allow for an increadible level of harassment of perfectly law-abiding citizens. This is not why the police were created. The rules they are governed should reflect their duty (to protect us from each other) and the rules should be enforced much, much better than they are now. I'm tired of the police always getting the benefit of the doubt--THEY serve US, not the other way around. It's their job to make sure they don't fuck up, not my job to make sure I don't look at them the wrong way. And yeah, maybe their job will be a bit tougher but again, they choose the job, and I think it's far from being the worst one available. I'm not anti-cop--if you want to talk about giving them better equipment or better salaries, I'm all for it. Just don't ask me to look the other way while they shoot yet another innocent man in the back as he was running away, or haul more children off in handcuffs on trumped-up and/or unintentional misdemeanors.
Actually, at the time I was still a virgin. And that hot cashier wouldn't give me the time of day. Goddamn hellish teenage years...
Maybe the cops were scared shitless seeing, on their watch, three children at the height of 20 feet (that's 6 meters, enough to fracture something if you manage to avoid sharp branches on your way down) in a cherry tree: cherry tree branches break very easily. You don't climb cherry trees unless you want to risk getting killed, or at least to acquire impressive scars. Want to pick cherries ? Use a ladder. Want to climb trees? Chose some other tempting ligneuous vegetables ... pear trees are nice: hard resilient wood.
I would have sued the parents, and had "child protection" organizations involved in this, since it's clear that those responsible for the children either have no clue as far as trees are concerned, or did not care about the wellbeing of their children
About children ... from the picture they look more like teenagers, and the girl from the right side of the picture looks at least 14.
if you ever planted a tree and had it survive the operation you would have called this mindless vandalism. Breaking windows is punishable and a window can be replaced in 30 minutes. Why should damaging a tree that took some 10 to 15 years to grow to 20 feet go unpunished?Yeah, I should be in politics. Thinking about it, a pirate party just formed in my country...
We used to have a Bill of Rights. Now, with the rights gone, all we have left is the bill.
"Pay them more"--absolutely. And give them better equipment, including more nonlethal (or "less-lethal") devices. And give them additional training. And ordered to stop wasting resources on victimless crimes and trolling innocent civillians for petty criminals "You were swerving"--TWICE I have been pulled over very late for this, when I know for a fact I was not. It's happened to a few other people I know, too--always late at night. EVERYONE swerves a tiny bit in their lane, so the cops just wait for it to happen noticably and pull that person over. I get off work at 11:15 PM, and I've noticed there's one particular stretch of road where there's ALWAYS someone pulled over. Once I saw them actually pull the person over--and I can verify that he wasn't weaving or speeding. Maybe his registration was expired, I dunno, but I'd bet dollars to donuts that they pulled him over for "weaving".
I'm not anti-cop by any means; I'm just anti-cop mentality. You might have a practical reason why cops are given a looser leash than fry cooks, but that doesn't make it a moral one.
But I'll bet they won't fall out of any 20-foot trees and sue the township for their injuries, and they will think twice before helping themselves to property that they know damned well isn't theirs, even if it isn't marked as someone else's.
The kids say they just took a few loose branches. I'm sure it started out that way, just as I'm sure the tree didn't have enough loose branches to make a den. The police received complaints that the kids were "stripping every branch from it." The truth probably lies somewhere in between. Too bad this reporter didn't haul his ass out of the newsroom to go view the tree and photograph it. But that would involve journalism.
And poor Amy! I wonder where she got the idea that a juvenile's police reprimand might destroy her college career, or that "murderers and rapists" left cooties in the cell she occupied for a mere two hours? What sort of bed does her mother provide, that the poor girl couldn't bear to sleep in it for a week because it reminds her of jail? Could Mommy Dearest be the one whose reaction was "unbalanced?"
The cops did a good job of impressing upon these kids the seriousness of what they did, and giving them the faintest taste of crime's consequences. I'm sure the kids' characters would be much improved, if their parents hadn't convinced them that they are "victims."
ie. death row
and bad HMO, and hospital staff killing the Katrina victims.
oh and prisonplanet.com will fill you in on the rest of the evil in usa/canada, yes UK is a bad boy too
Liberty freedom are no1, not dicks in suits.
In Belgium, a playground was recently closed because the kids created too much noise...
More evidence we expect all children to be Stepford sons and daughters... The police obviously need something important to do, and unfortunatley, we don't have much for them.
To have a right to do a thing is not at all the same as to be right in doing it
In Soviet Russia, cherry trees build dens on you!
I want to see the damaged cherry tree, the cops, and their "sticks" they got from the cherry tree.
You're saying that vandalism is acceptable and doesn't warrant arrest?
When the damage is as inconsequential as this, yes. I'm willing to bet that the damage done to the trees was less than the cost of transporting, booking and extracting blood samples from the children. The people who should be disciplining the kids are their parents, not bloated police agencies with too much time on their hands.
They might have been hiding in that cherry tree to attack someone with fresh fruit.
_ Fresh_Fruit
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Self_Defense_Against
These kids learned a valuable lesson:
Do not place complete trust in authority figures, they do make mistakes, and are sometimes malicious.
How often is another question that I will not attempt to answer here and now.
I hate Liberals and Conservatives.
If you are a Liberal or a Conservative, then HAVE A NICE DAY!
Courage.