Slashdot Mirror

← Back to Stories (view on slashdot.org)

Daylight Savings Time Puts Kid in Jail for 12 Days

Posted by Zonk on from the yeah-that's-a-woops dept.

Jherek Carnelian writes "Cody Webb was jailed for calling in a bomb threat to his Hempstead Area high school (near Pittsburgh). He spent 12 days in lockup until the authorities realized that their caller-id log was off an hour because of the new Daylight Savings Time rules and that Cody had only called one hour prior to the actual bomb threat. Perhaps it took so long because of the principal's Catch-22 attitude about Cody's guilt — she said, 'Well, why should we believe you? You're a criminal. Criminals lie all the time.'"

9 of 881 comments (clear)

  1. Can you say... by Jaysyn · · Score: 5, Insightful

    ... wrongful imprisonment? I thought you could.

    --
    There is a war going on for your mind.
    1. Re:Can you say... by kisak · · Score: 5, Insightful

      Feel free to tell his principal how you feel about the whole guilty until proven innocent thing she has going on.
      Guilty until proven innocent is common practice in the USA these days.
      --

      --- guns don't kill people, people with guns kill people ---

    2. Re:Can you say... by annodomini · · Score: 5, Insightful

      I think it's kind of silly to post the principal's email address on Slashdot, but sending someone an email is not "trying, convicting, and punishing" someone, and not even remotely comparable to locking someone up for 12 days.

    3. Re:Can you say... by Alchemar · · Score: 5, Insightful

      Please let me take a moment of your time to explain the difference between expressing how one feels, and putting someone in jail. Emailing someone to complain about the way that they have handled a problem is considered the proper way to handle things in a democracy. A principle of a public school is a represenative of the school and its policies. The principle is given an extrodinary amount of power over the turnout of the next generation. That is why their emails are made public. If the person feels that they have done nothing wrong, the can ignore the emails. If they care to defend themselves, they can hit reply.

      If however you are put in jail for a crime that you did not commit based on "evidence" that was not fully investigated, and denied your right of innocent until proven guilty, it violates your constitutional rights. While sending emails could be considered harrassment if done excessively, by giving false information as to the origin of the email, or including threats. Putting someone in jail just does not compare. People in public offices can be convicted if they bread the law, but more importantly, can be removed from office if they go against public wishes. These wishes need to be known, and I think that sending an email is a good means to that end.

    4. Re:Can you say... by iamhassi · · Score: 5, Insightful

      "Technically, he could have been out a lot quicker had his parents hired a lawyer and bailed him out..."

      What horrible parents! You're absolutely right, every parent should have at least 100 grand in their pocket to hire attorneys or bail money to rescue their children from the "legal" system when the police make a little boo-boo.

      In my wonderful state you can only sue for twice your loss income or 20 grand, whatever is greater. So this kid could get a whopping 20 grand from this mess from the police. Yippy! I'm sure that'd make the police think twice.

      I'm tired of the illegal justice system in the US. The one that lets the rich go free and throws the poor in jail because they can't afford lawyers and don't want to sit in jail for a year for minor offenses while their public defender argues in court for months. Better to plead guilty to something you never did and get a few weeks in jail and probation and be labeled for life than wait in jail to see what happens only to find out they still found you guilty and you're getting even more jail time.

      --
      my karma will be here long after I'm gone
  2. But what does the principal have to do with it? by 91degrees · · Score: 5, Insightful

    The principal is an ordinary member of the public. She didn't arrest the kid or charge him. She supplied mistaken evidence that this was the culprit, which was pretty inept, but the rest of the system should have caught this.

    Why wasn't he interviewed by the police in the prescence of an adult immediately? Isn't there meant to be some advocate protecting the accused rights, especially with a 15 year old?

    Surely a decent investigation should have gone something like:

    cop: We have this recording of the threat.
    Defender: Uhm. That doesn't sound much like this kid. Are you sure you got the right guy?
    Defender and cop disappear. Re-appear later.
    cop: Sorry about that. You're free to go.

    1. Re:But what does the principal have to do with it? by Himring · · Score: 5, Insightful

      Hi.

      You've had no run-ins with police have you?

      --
      "All great things are simple & expressed in a single word: freedom, justice, honor, duty, mercy, hope." --Churchill
  3. The principal didn't put him in jail by GoatMonkey2112 · · Score: 5, Insightful

    Last time I checked, high schools do not have jails. Maybe the principal pointed his finger at this kid, but it's the police who were dumb enough to believe him without doing the proper investigation.

  4. What a shocker! by MikeRT · · Score: 5, Insightful

    A public school worker who doesn't believe in the rights that our forefathers shed blood for and died for? Anyone actually surprised by this?

    The public school system is the love child of 1984 and Lord of the Flies. I would have thought that people would have learned by now that it is unfixable.