Slashdot Mirror


"Clock Boy" Ahmed Mohamed Seeking $15 Million In Damages

phrackthat writes: The family of Ahmed Mohamed, the boy who was arrested in Irving, Texas has threatened to sue the school and the city of Irving if they do not pay him $15 million as compensation for his arrest. To refresh the memories of everyone, Ahmed's clock was a clock he disassembled then put into a pencil case that looked like a miniature briefcase. He was briefly detained by the Irving city police to interview him and determine if he intended for his clock to be perceived as a fake bomb. He was released to his parents later on that day and they publicized the matter and claimed Ahmed was arrested because of "Islamophobia".

15 of 818 comments (clear)

  1. Re:That won't last long... by slimdave · · Score: 5, Informative

    ... the kid was not arrested ...

    Purely on a factual level, yes he was arrested, after being questioned for an hour and a half (how is that even possible?), and was taken to a detention centre, fingerprinted, photographed, and questioned further.

    He was not charged. Possibly that's what you meant.

  2. Yes, he was arrested [Re:That won't last long...] by Geoffrey.landis · · Score: 5, Informative

    The school certainly overreacted, but...

    1) the kid was not arrested

    Yes, he was. He was taken away from the school by the police in handcuffs. That's an arrest.

    I think what you meant to say was, the kid was not charged. That's correct. He was arrested, but released without charges.

    --
    http://www.geoffreylandis.com
  3. Bullshit. by khasim · · Score: 4, Informative

    Assuming there was not communication among the staff that knew it was just a stupid clock to those other people, I can see who it would meet a standard of 'reasonable suspicion' to justify an arrest.

    Of course you do. But that's only because almost every person believes that THEIR opinion is a "reasonable" one.

    I remember back in the day (I'm old) when a student would bring something distracting to school the teacher would confiscate it and the student collect it at the end of the day.

    At worst, a student's parents would be called in.

    But students were never arrested for bringing toys to school. That's just stupid.

  4. Bringing a hoax bomb to school is illegal ... by drnb · · Score: 3, Informative

    ... the kid was not arrested ...

    Purely on a factual level, yes he was arrested, after being questioned for an hour and a half (how is that even possible?), and was taken to a detention centre, fingerprinted, photographed, and questioned further.

    He was not charged. Possibly that's what you meant.

    Bringing a hoax bomb to school is illegal. Steve Wozniak, co-founder of Apple Computer, was arrested and spent some hours with law enforcement when he brought a hoax bomb to his high school. A box that ticked, and then ticked faster when it was moved.

    As for whether what this kid did was a hoax bomb, any Iraqi / Afghanistan vet can explain to you how the detonators of IEDs are sometimes made from the components of off-the-shelf consumer devices. So, its not unreasonable to see disassembled clock parts in a negative light.

  5. Re:That won't last long... by DarkOx · · Score: 1, Informative

    He did not build shit, he put the guts of a commercial clock in another box. So first off clock-boy does not deserve credit for being some kind of STEM hero. Here that is the kind of stuff I would expect a fifth or sixth grader to be doing.

    Second schools are what they are. They are full of little people that we all worry about and place a higher value on the safety of than we probably should. Look 'zero tolerance' is stupid but its the governing priciple. This isn't a case of discrimination really, its not. Schools have ejected white children for biting pop-tarts into the shape of hand gun. Its a panicky place, just like an airport.

    You can be safe or you can be sorry. You can be safe and still end up sorry. I suggest we learn to be more tolerant of being sorry on occasion so we don't create problems like this in the way of safety. What I can say is knowing what I know about schools, and the whole of the situation, if I were on that jury the kids family would not be award one thin dime.

    --
    Repeal the 17th Amendment TODAY! Also Please Read http://www.gnu.org/philosophy/right-to-read.html
  6. Re:Litigious Much by theArtificial · · Score: 5, Informative

    History of the Big Bang Theory cites a Belgian Catholic Priest named Georges Lemaître as the originator of the theory.

    --
    Man blir trött av att gå och göra ingenting.
  7. Re:Litigious Much by Billy+the+Mountain · · Score: 5, Informative

    For the genetics part see Gregor Johann Mendel https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/.... Mendel was a monk.

    --
    That was the turning point of my life--I went from negative zero to positive zero.
  8. Re:Litigious Much by njnnja · · Score: 5, Informative

    Please excuse the karma whoring but you did ask: Gregor Mendel was a monk who did pioneering experiments on heredity. Although it seems obvious in retrospect, even after Darwin first published the theory of natural selection it wasn't until it was put together with Mendel's work that evolutionary theory as we understand it today came about.

  9. Re:Litigious Much by drnb · · Score: 4, Informative

    You could also say "The big bang theory began with the Belgian Army", because he was also in that.

    He was no longer in the Army. However he was teaching at a Catholic university at the time.

  10. Re:That won't last long... by PRMan · · Score: 5, Informative

    He actually was invited to visit the fair—which he declined—and Olivia's ebola test won first prize.

    --
    Peter predicted that you would "deliberately forget" creation 2000 years ago...
  11. Re:Citation required. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 3, Informative

    He did not receive first place, he was just the featured "scientist" of the photo in which the finalists appeared.
    http://mashable.com/2015/09/22/ahmed-mohamed-google-science-fair/#1U20iipN1sqm

  12. Re:Step to the right direction by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2, Informative

    In the case of Ahmed, I think a lot of people were quick (and right) to jump the gun on the discrimination part.

    However, as more information came to light about his father, it started to look more and more like a setup. Does this make the situation worse? indeed. Considering the racial tensions with police lately, It wouldn't surprise me if this was meant to increase Ahmeds father's standing among his peers rather than Ahmed.

    Still, I if this happened again I probably wouldn't try to tear down Ahmed for what amounts to a clock in something that looks enough like a hollywood bomb, but might be more suspicious of the motives. The original social media pictures showed a Ahmed being taken away by the police, not the clock.

  13. Re: Litigious Much by Noah+Haders · · Score: 4, Informative

    No, people admired that he built a clock, when in fact he just took apart a working clock to make a shitty clock that looked like a bomb, then took it to school to "show people."

  14. Re:Step to the right direction by cbraescu1 · · Score: 2, Informative

    Purely on a factual level, yes he was arrested

    Actually, he was *NOT* arrested. He was detained.

    --
    Catalin Braescu
    Ofaly.com
  15. No! by s.petry · · Score: 2, Informative

    Being arrested requires that charges be filed. Ahmed was not arrested and not charged with any crimes, he was detained. Your twenty minutes is plucked out of the air and meaningless. Twenty minutes for a vehicle stop? Okay. Twenty minutes for charges relating to weapons or drugs? No way is that twenty minutes. The legal limit varies, but 24 hours is generally the limit that you can be detained without having charges filed (at which point you are arrested).

    Ahmed was hauled off and _DETAINED_ for a reason. YOU may not agree with the reasoning, but that does not mean there was no basis. How people keep modding this lie up when law dictionaries are pretty easy to find is astounding (https://www.law.cornell.edu/). Well, not really.. it suits a narrative.

    --

    -The wise argue that there are few absolutes, the fool argues that there are no probabilities.