Slashdot Mirror


Irish Judge Orders 13-Year-Old To Surrender Xbox

An anonymous reader writes "In Belfast a High Court judge has ordered a 13 year old to surrender his Xbox to the authorities. The boy was charged with a series of robberies and in the bail application the judge asked the boy what he owned that meant a lot to him. The teenager said it was his Xbox games system. The judge told the youth that the surrender of the Xbox would show him what it was like to have something he really valued taken from him."

13 of 445 comments (clear)

  1. Excellent! by msobkow · · Score: 5, Insightful

    I love it when a judge thinks and makes the punishment fit the crime. Having his parents pay a fine would have been pointless. Gotta make the punishment hurt for it to have any effect.

    --
    I do not fail; I succeed at finding out what does not work.
    1. Re:Excellent! by Announcer · · Score: 3, Insightful

      Exactly! This might actually do something USEFUL: "Teach him a LESSON"! With proper guidance, this also could turn his life around! Kudos to a judge that actually DID use his head!

      --
      Willie...
    2. Re:Excellent! by davester666 · · Score: 5, Insightful

      Yeah, now the kid has to go out and shoplift another XBox...

      --
      Sleep your way to a whiter smile...date a dentist!
    3. Re:Excellent! by Mashiki · · Score: 4, Insightful

      Right. And criminology is still in the dark ages, and we use leeches and blood letting as the main sources of medical treatment today. Dig your head out of your ass, there are competing theories on crime. And many criminal theories rest into two specific schools. Those being:

      Bad parenting+lifestyle+societal factors = criminal action
      and
      Chance+opportunity+risk = criminal action

      I believe that the second is more appropriate. As even in average, society roughly 40% of people will steal if they feel they can get away with it, and 30% will steal no matter what. This is your basic material covered in your crim101 courses.

      --
      Om, nomnomnom...
    4. Re:Excellent! by Sabriel · · Score: 4, Insightful

      Chance+opportunity-risk-empathy = criminal action

      Further refinement?

    5. Re:Excellent! by Belial6 · · Score: 3, Insightful

      Because our system does not punish people for committing crimes. It punishes people for being an annoyance to the wrong person, being in the wrong place at the wrong time, having a penis, or not having enough money. This is one of the reasons the "unenforceable laws" are so bad. They whip them out when someone with influence wants to screw over someone without. The person the law is used against isn't being punished for breaking the law. They are being punished for annoying the wrong person.

      It isn't the harsh sentences that are the problem. It is the inconsistent punishment. And a system that is designed to make sure that everyone is always in violation of some law.

    6. Re:Excellent! by YeeHaW_Jelte · · Score: 3, Insightful

      If fear of punishment is your only reason not to transgress, you've got some pretty shady morals.

      --

      ---
      "The chances of a demonic possession spreading are remote -- relax."
  2. Re:harsh, but... by Osgeld · · Score: 5, Insightful

    harsh? really? johnny jackoff is involved in a series of robberies and you consider taking his fucking video games away harsh

    piss off, my mom would hide the power brick to my sega for weeks at a time for failing to keep my grades up and this stain gets the same treatment for robbery and you fucking find it harsh???

    first it was the pepsi generation, now its the pussy generation ... fucking wonderful

  3. Re:Punished before found guilty? by theNetImp · · Score: 1, Insightful

    While it may or may not be "unreasonable bail". It still seems to me like he is being punished before he is even found guilty. He should have been told to pay a normal bail like any other person and if he couldn't afford to pay bail then the xbox would have been a reasonable means for him to secure his bail. The Judge out right gave punishment before a trial. Forcing the child who was yet to be found guilty to be punished. It was IMO unreasonable.

  4. Re:Punished before found guilty? by ohnocitizen · · Score: 3, Insightful

    Maybe a liberal* utopia where the punishment follows, rather than precedes, the guilty verdict? But some people are just old fashioned that way I guess. Pre 9/11 mentality. (That being said, if it was done after he was found guilty, a punishment like this seems far more just than having a child serve a sentence or have his parents burdened with a hefty fine. Even better, have the kid meet the people he stole from. Nothing changes perspective like removing the "otherness".)

    *Sadly, maybe that is a liberal utopia. Conservatives and Liberals really should be united on stuff like that.

  5. Re:Excellent! said the kid by Locutus · · Score: 5, Insightful

    not likely. He told the Judge it was his Xbox because he really liked his PS3 and didn't want to lose that.

    LoB

    --
    "Anyone who stands out in the middle of a road looks like roadkill to me." --Linus
  6. Re:Punished before found guilty? by mysidia · · Score: 1, Insightful

    . And it's not like it's gone forever, he will get it back if he shows up to court.

    You know what would be 'gone forever'?

    His save game files. And any artistic or other creative work or game progress saved to the console's memory. (He he....<eg>)

  7. Re:Accused but not yet convicted by metacell · · Score: 4, Insightful

    ITT: everyone on slashdot but a few misunderstands what bail is.

    It's a guarantee of showing up to court. He gets his xbox back if he shows up to court. If he doesn't, it becomes property of the government. Explain how this is unreasonable.

    *sigh* No, people here are not misunderstanding what bail is. They're misunderstanding what the issue is. From the fine article:

    The judge told the youth it would show him what it was like to have something he valued taken from him.

    That's clearly using bail as a form of punishment, not as a way to ensure the person returns to face trial. It's a misuse of the bail system.