Slashdot Mirror
No Charges For Child-Whipping Judge Caught On YouTube
theodp writes "Federal prosecutors will not charge a Texas judge seen lashing his teenage daughter with a belt on a YouTube video taken seven years ago and posted online last week, closing the door on the possibility of criminal charges in the case. The viral video, uploaded by now 23-year-old Hillary Adams, shows her father, Aransas County Court-at-Law Judge William Adams, whipping her with a belt for downloading music when she was 16 (full video, requires login). 'F*****g computers,' the judge tells his now ex-wife on the video. 'I told you I didn't want one in the god damn house. See all the problems they cause?' Judge Adams issued a statement asserting that his daughter released the tape to retaliate against him for withdrawing his financial support."
Nope. She's posted about it elsewhere, but basically, she saved the video in order to blackmail him. Fast forward to a week ago, and he threatens to stop allowing her to borrow his Mercedes. So she posts the video in response.
They're both horrible people: the judge for beating his daughter, and the girl for blackmailing him over it.
If she wanted him punished, she had the chance. She didn't. She wanted money from him.
Ho ho. I got beat left and right for stuff I did as a kid. This video is so much BS, bunch of wormy liberals complaining about a real person taking control of their family, after their daughter has stolen stuff off the internet. Yup. That's what I thought until I watched about a third of it before I couldn't stomach any more.
I'm for discipline, and I'm for corporal punishment, but that was a sick individual getting his kicks punishing his child. You lose the moral battle when you curse as much as he did, when you seem to enjoy it as much as he did, when you won't stop even when your child is a weeping wreck in front of you.
What sort of parent looks back on that I thinks they've helped mould their child into a good citizen?
There's a lot of talk about how she only showed this after he took away her toys. Because you expected adult, rational behaviour from her? Yeah, that's how she was raised. Wasn't it?
I don't normally get angry at Random Q. Internetguy, but that wasn't an Internet meme, that thing you just saw, that was the repeated, planned, brutalization of a child by her parent, and it was appalling.
As a native Texan, I'm all for corporal punishment as a method of last resort. But not in the manor in which this was delivered. But if you have to go there, you have much bigger family problems in the first place. Such as lack of respect for others. Second, the parent delivering the punishment should never be in a state of hate and rage. Remember, corporal punishment is about sending a message of last resort. *NOT* to be used an excuse to vent rage and frustration like her parents did. The later only perpetuates family problems down the line.
Case in point. The daughter never forgave the father (big issue) to this day, and she blackmailed him for money (so he says). Either way, they're are much bigger problems within that family we do not know about. Absolutely broken! Sad.
Life is not for the lazy.
You don't beat a child to make a moral point. You can, and should, smack a child to teach them when they can't understand - for example, if a young child is about to touch a hot oven, you smack them to shock them and reinforce the point, something you can't do with words when they are young. But that is about shock, communicating and not real harm. You should never be beating a child with an object, and never repeatedly. It should never be more than enough to cause a bit of mild pain and shock to grab attention and make them realise. By the time they are 16, you should be able to talk with your child a reason with them. If you can't, consider the idea you might be wrong. Sure, sometimes kids won't listen, but beating them is never an answer. Kid, adult - they are people. Beating them is wrong.
-- Lattyware (www.lattyware.co.uk)
And that's what everyone is missing. They think she is a spoiled brat blackmailing him for cutting her off. As you said from all appearances that car was her only transport. Given that's she got palsy she's probably very limited in what kind of transportation she can use. Although it doesn't excuse the fact that she should get her own transportation he's clearly using it as a form of control. He probably gave it to her with the intent to use it to control her, when she failed to do whatever it was he wanted he'd yank the chain and try to force her to obey. I'm willing to bet up to this point he's exerted immense influence over her and her life.
He needs serious help in the form of counseling, and I dare say she does as well because I really don't think this was an adult response to the situation.