E-mail updates
Follow on Twitter
Subscribe to RSSA judge told a girl who cut the hair off a three-year-old child that he would reduce her sentence if her ponytail was lopped off in his courtroom, and now the girl's mother says she has filed a formal complaint, NBC station KSL of Salt Lake City reports.
Kaytlen Lopan, 13, was accused in March of assault. Police in Price, Utah, said that Lopan and an 11-year-old friend met a 3-year-old girl at a McDonald's and used scissors to cut several inches of hair from her head, KSL reported Friday.
KSL said it was given an audio recording by Lopan's mother, Valerie Bruno, of a May 28 hearing on the case and another stemming from a series of phone calls Lopan was accused of making to another teen that included threats of rape and mutilation. In the tape, KSL said, 7th District Juvenile Judge Scott Johansen ordered Lopan to serve 30 days in detention, pay restitution and serve 276 hours of community service.
But in the recording, Johansen tells Bruno he'll slice the community service. Here's the exchange as reported by KSL:
"I'm going to give you this option: I will cut that by 150 hours if you want to cut her hair right now," Johansen said.
"Me, cut her hair?" Bruno asked.
"Right now," the judge said. "I'll go get a pair of scissors and we'll whack that ponytail off."
(Mindy) Moss, the victim's mother, was in the courtroom and fully supported the penalty. She even spoke up when she didn't believe Bruno had cut enough of Lopan's ponytail off.
"Satisfied? Is it short enough?" Johansen asked Moss.
"No," she replied. "My daughter's hair that had never been cut, that was down to (the middle of her back), was cut up to here."
"Take it off clear up to the rubberband," the judge told Bruno, who protested that the scissors he'd given her weren't up to the task.
"Take a little bit at a time," Johansen said.
KSL said Johansen also had ordered the other girl involved to have her hair cut, but allowed it to be done by a salon.
Utah court and state officials told KSL that because of the girls' ages, they couldn't confirm that a complaint had been filed or even say that Lopan had been in juvenile court.
KSL reported that Bruno told the station that she regretted accepting the offer.
Read the whole KSL report here.
More content from msnbc.com and NBC News:
- Title IX broke barriers beyond athletics for women
- Juror: Sandusky's lack of emotion at verdicts was 'confirmation'
- Analysis: Number of victims persuaded Sandusky jurors
- Iran sanctions trap both clerks, customers
- Video: 10-year-old gets tattoo, grandpa gets in trouble
Follow US News on msnbc.com on Twitter and Facebook
Leave a Comment:
He should of let the 3yr old girls mother cut the girls hair.
With a dirty, rusty, running lawn mower blade.
That's a little sadistic Sirlafalot.
I would have preferred that the 13 year old's mother's hair was chopped off instead as it was her responsibility that had caused the damage.
There's a lot worse going on here than cutting off a 3-year old's hair. I don't even want to know the motivation for that-- but obviously this girl has more troubling behavior that needs to be addressed. I don't know that cutting off her pony-tail is, in any way, going to address these sadistic tendencies. This is the kind of girl who will grow up to kill her own children, or make there lives miserable at the very least. And the apple usually falls near the tree. What is the mother (not) doing that results in this abhorrent behavior from her child? Obviously a sh*tty parent making sh*tty children that will make a sh*tty parent, ad nauseum.
"Should of" makes no grammatical sense.
Agreed 100%. That brat didn't give the 3 year old an option why should she even get one. She deserves the punishment, the fact that the parent is getting pissy about it doesn't reflect well on her. That kid needs some serious help for her poor attitude and the parent needs it as well.
Honestly, kind of a strange punishment. Sort of An Eye for an Eye. Didn't even know it was still done in our Court Rooms. I think the defandant will learn something from all this, maybe. I'm not even sure if the Judge is within his limits to have this done. I am bewildered.
Lyrica, you are correct. The fact that the girl's mother is getting "... pissy ..." about it explains why the 13-year-old is the way she is ... just one more bad parent. This is the epidemic plaguing this country. I’m tired of the courts having to do what lazy, ignorant, incompetent parents won’t do.
@deweydan: my thoughts exactly. I was going to post essentially the same thing, that "an eye for an eye" is Old Testament" which was supposedly rescinded by the New. Now, we are supposed to be seeking justice, not revenge.
let the girls mother abuse the 13 year old in a court of law. well.
The Lohan child needs serious psychiatric help.
Otherwise, she will end up always in trouble and possibly a career criminal.
Because many parents support the bad behavior of their children, their children never learn right from wrong.
It sounds like the judge was trying to force the teen girl to empathize with the child whose hair she cut. Not so much a punishment, but a lesson in what it feels like to be the victim. Not completely sure I agree, but I think I understand the judge's reasoning.
What I definately don't agree with, is the mother's response. She went along with the agreement and cut the teen's hair, then complained afterward. Sounds like maybe the mom is part of the problem.
"Lopan was accused of making to another teen that included threats of rape and mutilation."
Now there's a real sweet girl for you, that Lopan! A young, budding rapist and serial killer, I would say. And her mother wants to file a complaint?
Should have (should of, for you Styro) let the 3 yr, old loose with sheep sheers on her head for about 10 minutes.
I see nothing wrong with "an eye for an eye" in this case. And I don't think the judge overstepped because he gave the mother the option. As far as I'm concerned, she has no legal standing. And I agree completely that she is part of the problem here. Her 13 year old threatens another teen with "rape and mutilation" and the mother is only concerned that she cut her daughter's hair? She should be complaining that the judge didn't order psych counseling. I can only imagine how she will complain when the judge locks her daughter up after she mutilates another person.
First off, one's upbringing makes no difference...EVERYONE comes of an age where they know the difference between right and wrong...so blaming the parent for the childs' actions is an anemic argument at best...EVERYONE is responsible for THEIR OWN actions ultimately...and secondly...if we're going to bring the old and new testament into this debate.....let's get our facts straight, shall we? Jesus sais, and I quote, " I have not come to 'do away' with the law, but to fulfill it".....He never claimed to REPLACE the Law...He said He made the Law COMPLETE. This was not about "an eye for an eye"...this was an object lesson illustrating The Golden Rule...you know that "silly" old addage, "Do unto others as you would have them do unto you"? When one lives their life by The Golden Rule...they just won't commit awful acts such as this girl did to the 3yr old.....and Mama's complaints? Well, you are correct that she's not setting a very good example for her daughter to follow, but c'mon...I knew better than to cut someone's hair without their permission by the time I was 5...and yes...since the girl is not of 'age'...the mom's hair should've gotten cut as well...for NOT teaching her child The Golden Rule....I'd be she'd teach it then....
Okay, I can't help myself, I have to go there; is that Mitt Romney's grand daughter? Maybe she thought the 3 year old was gay and needed to be taught a lesson.
Mitt has his bubble - and 13 year olds have their bubble - and me, I like to pop bubbles (silly string is cool too)... snicker.
Styro; what should I have used instead of "olds"?
I believe these types of punishments for this type of offense, where hurting someone just for fun, should be "a head for an eye", the offending girl should have been given a Sinéad O'Connor.
So does he reduce the sentence of rapists if they agree to be raped in his courtroom? How about wife abusers? If he stands there and let's his wife whip his butt, does he get a lighter sentence?
An eye for an eye? Do we really want to reduce ourselves to the levels of these barbarians?
The title of the article is DELIBERATELY misleading....the judge didn't order anyone's hair cut. He ordered conventional punishment such as community service, etc. What he offered was a plea agreement of sorts...that the sentence would be reduced if the "defendant" took certain actions...like allowing her hair to be cut in court in the presense of the victim's mother.
I don't see anything wrong with the judge offering the option; I do, however, see something VERY wrong with deliberately misleading stories on what is allegedly a mainstream news outlet.
No, we SHOULD, however, if we wish to be considered "civilized and intelligent", want to raise ourselves to appreciate and practice The Golden Rule...
I fully agree with the judge. This teen needed to be made to feel what its like to be something like a victim. I also believe he should have ordered her to counseling as well as the parents to attend family counseling. Bullying, threats, actions that aim to hurt another should not be tolerated by anyone and this girl is headed down that path at a gallop. She is one of those kids where the mother and father never spanked her for misbehavior and now she is getting out of hand. I hope all judges start to figure out this kind of punishment.
Agreed JR
Joy, I agree with you 100%
The judge was wrong. He should've mandated the full sentence along with cutting the crotch-snot's hair off and then ordered her paddled until her dupa was swollen with welts.
drainbramaged or braindamaged or whatever...
Introducing your politics into this thread is as stupid as your comments.
That delinquent girl's mother is a major reason why her daughter is so screwed up. You'd think when your kid is assaulting toddlers and threatening others with rape and mutilation that you'd, maybe, want to be a bit more reflective about your parenting instead of blaming others for trying to teach your messed up kid lessons that you should've taught.
Anyhow, she didn't have to cut off the kid's hair - the judge offered her that as an option for shaving off 150 of community service. If she didn't like it she could've just let her kid put in those hours.
Lynseypug,
It's that kind of flawed logic that that seems to permeiate our country. How does this bullying of a 3 year old by a 13 year old equate anywhere near to rape or spouse abuse? You should be commending this judge for letting this 13 year old knows how it feels to treat someone that way and hopefully send her a message to think before you act. You equate that to a "barbarian" Little overdramatic are we? Its that type of flawed logic that helps put this country in the mess it is in.
Both girls and their mother should have had their heads shaved and gotten the full sentence of community service.
You people are whining about a kid cutting another kids hair. This deserves a spanking or grounding, nothing more. Get over your bloodlust to severely punish everyone for everything.
While what the judge did may seem satisfying to some, it was still completely wrong. The idea of telling someone I will reduce your sentence if you allow yourself to be assaulted the way you assaulted the three year old is just wrong. The judge may very well find himself removed from the bench for his actions. This is not the type of behavior one should expect from a judge. Our legal system is not about an eye for an eye and for this judge to even propose something like this was out of line an probably illegal in itself.
Exactly! To allow it opens Pandora's Box. This can be classified under Cruel and Unusual punishment. It certainly isn't normal.
so the 3 yr old said mom im going to meet some friends a mcdonalds,where the hell was the mother
Well, JS, I can see that you are a "firm believer" in The Golden Rule.....but I'll bet you'll be screaming the loudest when YOUR rights are violated by some sadistic thug.....
Does that justify it? The victim should never be allowed to decide a punishment. They are often the most emotionally irrational people in the world.
If he does do something like that and there is a story about it posted on here, then you can remind him of what he said here today.
If you read the article...the victim didn't decide.....the perps MOTHER decided...the judge made an offer (plea bargain? Happens all the time) and the perps MOTHER chose....sorry...try again
JS in SD,
Sometimes an eye for an eye is justifiable...
You totally missed my point. My comment was in reference to your comment about what JS wrote. Not about the article. Try to keep up.
He should have ordered a bowl cut for the little brat...and she needs to see a shrink ASAP! Bullying a 3-year old? Mutilation and rape? Very troubling.
your "point" is about as useful as a screendoor on a submarine, or should I say your argument is as "pointless" as a white crayon...but if I must connect-the-dots for you, yes, The Golden Rule IS very applicable in this case and yes, it DOES justify the penalty levied....the 13 year old violated a 3 yr olds human rights, the cutting of the 13 yr olds' hair (once again, the perps MOTHERS' choice) was an attempt to teach the 13 yr old WHY she can't just go around imposing her sadistic will upon others...it's called an object lesson, it has nothing to do with payback or revenge or an eye for an eye...try elevating your thought process son
Seriously...what the hell is with you people? Can you not read? The judge did NOT impose this hair cutting punishment; he imposed conventional punishment consistent with the law and OFFERED a reduction in the legitimate, conventional punishment if the defendant agreed to having her hair cut instead. The choice was made the the MOTHER OF THE ABUSIVE LITTLE BRAT to go ahead and cut the hair...probably because the amount of community service would cut into her schedule. The mother was not REQUIRED to cut the hair....she was offered a reduction in her child's sentence to which she agreed.
As for the idea that the defendant was "abused" by having her hair cut...that's just bull. What she did to the little girl was abusive....not getting a bit of her own hair cut voluntarily by her own mother.
This was not an extra-judicial punishment....it was a plea deal so that the abusers mother wouldn't have to miss work, appts, etc as well as the costs involved of all those hours of community service and instead just chop of a bit of hair. The hair will grow back....I promise.
Anyone sincerely opposed to this has their head firmly up their own backside. The lessen the brat SHOULD learn is that your punishment for committing a crime may actually be something you don't like.
Thank you for your opinion. It has been noted.
Common sense judge, not like she had to take that offer. She accepted the deal and I see nothing wrong with that punishment. I can see why the girl has behavioral issues if her mother is getting hysterical about this. What a waste of air.
"Does that justify it? The victim should never be allowed to decide a punishment. They are often the most emotionally irrational people in the world.
If he does do something like that and there is a story about it posted on here, then you can remind him of what he said here today." ~ SillyBilly
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
Newsflash, genuis...the victim DIDN'T decide what the punishment was. Your entire "point" is a non-starter. Thanks for playing "Who wants to look stupid on the internet today"....will you be joining us again tomorrow?
In my opinion the Judge erred. "Two wrongs don't make a right." An act of bullying and assault by the court doesn't mitigate acts of bullying and assault by a teenager.
Justice (and a meaningful life lesson) would be better served by many, many hours of community service during which the young perpetrators would have plenty of time to contemplate their her act, and reevaluate the content of their characters.
Right on point once again JR. You are absolutely correct in your assessment of the circumstances. Jan, your comment is also right on point. Kudos to both of you :-)
OK, so with your logic it is legitimate that if a rapist is sentenced to 25 years but can't handle the sentence, then if he allows himself to be violated in the same or similar manner he can have his sentence cut in half. That is just ridiculous. If that is too extreme for you. Replace it with someone that was stabbed or spit on or beaten with a pipe or any slew of other crimes. Just because it is something as benign as cutting hair, does not justify it. What you're failing to realize here is that although this is not that extreme of a case it opens the door to the practice, then we tippy toe in the direction towards more extreme instances.
Continue reading the next few comments after the one you quoted, then read the last line of your comment again. KTHXBAI!
"SeptikSkeptik
@deweydan: my thoughts exactly. I was going to post essentially the same thing, that "an eye for an eye" is Old Testament" which was supposedly rescinded by the New. Now, we are supposed to be seeking justice, not revenge."
You don't think that is justice? What is justice by your definition? Wait for her to die so Jesus can judge her? Your on crack! I'm a firm believer and I dont agree with your thought process. Live a life of sin and burn for eternity. Sounds more harsh than cutting hair that can re-grow. If Jesus is perfect and he deals in Justice, then why is this non-life-threatening verdict revenge?!
yawn.....
I've been reading the comments after what JR posted and I'm still waiting for your point....seems that your opinion is out-numbered in this thread...
....but, that's ok...you can be right if you want.....
Oh, boo-hoo. Things who assualt, including 13-year-olds, deserve to be assualted equally if not more to make sure they never offend again. The only thing the judge did wrong was to say if that 13-year-old should've-been-an-abortion brat was forcibly hair-cut, she could get a reduction on her sentence. The judge should've imposed both upon her. As for your constant stating that rapists should get off if they are raped, it's no. They get imprisoned and raped. Things who commit crimes don't deserve any protection of the law. They deserve to be brutalized.
So? That means squat. It was the opinion of the people in Salem Mass in 1692 that multiple people were witches. You're argument is flawed.
This would have been a mote point if that had been my kid. her head would have been shaved bald the moment that I learned what she did and she would keep it that way for the rest of the school year. I would also have committed her to many hours every week donating her time to what ever charities that I could find including shoveling dog poo at a shelter.
You do realize that the average American commits 3 felonies a day right? So you deserve to be brutalized is what you're saying?
online.wsj.com/article/SB10001424052748704471504574438900830760842.html
Here's a link for you, just so you can fact check. That is, if you're interested in that sort of thing.
1st post...
SillyBilly-3587160
Does that justify it? The victim should never be allowed to decide a punishment. They are often the most emotionally irrational people in the world.
If he does do something like that and there is a story about it posted on here, then you can remind him of what he said here today.
2nd post...
Does that justify it? The victim should never be allowed to decide a punishment. They are often the most emotionally irrational people in the world.
If he does do something like that and there is a story about it posted on here, then you can remind him of what he said here today.
my post...
STFU silly billy, we can all read and you are still stupid in everyone's mind. Your defending the fact that you said that in response to JP that the victim shouldnt be allowed to make the virdict... that you said you only said that in response to JP. Either way, no matter how you meant it... it still means the same thing. Try again Moron!
Kudos to J R Browenstein. Silly Billy is as exactly how his username sounds... A stupid hick. LOL sorry, just had to
I believe YOU were the one to say watch the comments...correct me if I'm wrong...did you NOT say that? I was just following YOUR suggestion. I'm sorry if I mis-understood your suggestion. But you can STILL be right if you want to....
'Jerry-1903677' wrote:
RESPONSE: Wow! Um, Jerry, I wonder if you, rereading your own post (and how it reflects your personal character) ... somehow consider yourself a better and more civil person than those teenagers?
It seems to me, reading your words, that you have a very similar agressive mean streak in your nature.
I'm just sayin' ...
hey watch it Nick...I resemble the hick part! LMAO
Maybe you can read, but you sure can't quote because you completely misquoted me.
Also you seem mad. Why are you so mad? Did some mean girl cut your hair off when you we're a toddler?
3 felonies a day??? LMAO! What might those be? Maybe YOU commit 3 felonies a day...I can't say as I don't know you personally...what makes you an expert in that field? Your, um Stat-Sheet? Once again, you can be right if you want....know your material...don't just regurgitate what you heard or read....
Interesting comments. If my sister had done something like this my mother would have gladly jumped at cutting her ponytail right there in the courtroom and then told the judge - No Need to Reduce the Community Service!
As for punishment for the rapist - the judge knows what the guy is going to get when he gets to jail so no need to have it done in the courtroom. :-)
Yeah, because the Wall Street Journal is known for its disreputable reporting. There in the same league as the Enquirer. Lol! Seriously, maybe you should try reading the link I posted for you before commenting.
Even if some of us are below average, those numbers are so high that if we each commit 1 a week we still all should be in jail for life. BTW if you've ever copied a movie from one VHS to another, downloaded copyrighted music without a license or burned it to a CD you've committed a felony. And each instance of it is a separate count punishable by up to 5 years in a federal prison. Think about that for second before you respond.
well, I really wouldn't know what you're talking about as I've never done ANY of those things, let alone once a week or 3 times daily...come to think about it, I don't know anybody personally that does that either...if you do, perhaps changing your friends would be in order...I agree, I WOULD rank whatever BS the Wall Street Journal excretes is about as toothless as the junk the Enquirer spews out into public...please tell me they are not your 'sources'
I agree with what the Judge did. First he handed down his sentence for the crimes she appeared before him for. 2nd he OFFERED the mom an option to the community service hours. HE DID NOT FORCE, COERCE, INTIMIDATE OR THREATEN THIS WOMAN IN ANYWAY TO GET HER TO COMPLY WITH THIS OFFER, SHE MADE A CHOICE OF HER OWN FREE WILL!!!!! Now she wants to turn around and bellyache about it likely because her little nightmare of a child is raising holy hell over it!!!! Nothing at all wrong in letting an juvenile offender feel what they put their victim through. This child was not physically harmed or mentally damaged in any way and I seriously doubt any HONEST and SANE mental health professional would really disagree with that. IF they do they are probably QUACKS!!! This mom is a BIG part of this girls problem and if she doesn't get with the program of tough parenting she will have a jailbird on her hands and the behavior will continue far into her adulthood. The only thing I think the judge failed to do was sentence the family to counseling. Mother and daughter BOTH need it, BIG TIME!!!!!!!!!
Everyone take note. Random dude on the internet is more credible than the Wall Street Journal. You heard it here first.
He's into the cruel and unusual category. What's next - blow the bailiff to reduce a prostitution sentence?
Really? You actually BELIEVE the BS the Wall Street Journal Excretes? Really?? I KNEW you were simply regurgitating what you've read. I guess you actually believe what politicians tell you too. Tell ya what Einstien, I've got some ocean-front property in Nevada I can sell to ya real cheap! Heck, I'll even throw in a trip to the hole-in-the-earth at the North Pole for nothing! LOL! Oh my my my my my.....
It's "should have (for the contraction should've) ," not "should of."
I don't have the time to get into any silly internet debates today...but I had to say thank you to those of you who get the meaning behind what the judge did and see it as just. I would have liked him to do more like add family therapy and possible get the girl involved with a program where other adults can help her see life from a different view. It would have a greater impact than punishment for punishment's sake.
And to the rest of you...however few of you there are....abuse? So the brat kid calls people, threatens them with rape and mutilation, cuts off a kid's hair in a public place---mind you it was never ever cut prior---and people want to call what her mom agreed to abuse? While I am not sure if it will help this girl, that is the type of punishment that would help a great number of kids understand the idea of respect. Something missing from our society that has disastrous effects.
Dan Howley...I could have read it wrong but in your first post you said this had nothing to do with the parents of the girl. However, later, you agree with people who say the mom is part of the problem. Not that I need a response but I found that first view curious.
In my experience with children, be it kids I grew up with, ones I see know whose parents I grew up with, or what have you...9 times out 10 the lack of responsibility by the parent leads to behavior like this from the child. I even see it now...when those kids are adults which is so very sad.
SillyBilly...you are entitled to what your stats say if you choose to believe it but no, I have never taken a VHS and recorded it or stolen music. I have always paid for it so when I do burn it to a CD, I do so legally. Thanks though...for being ignorant enough to judge everyone in this country. Says a lot about you.
If your example intended humor(I know it didn't but people would have gotten your point and not reacted negatively to it)...then you could have mentioned any number of dumb laws on the books like in Utah...
a) It is against the law to fish while on horseback.
b) It is considered an offense to hunt whales. (Who knew whales lived in a land locked state...)
c) It is illegal to sell alcohol during an emergency.
They went to a store and bought what they needed to cut this child's hair off. This was pre-mediated they may have been watching her for a while. Wasn't there 2 boys in England who took a little boy out of the mall and killed him for the fun of it....I had a neighbor back in the 90's whose 5 year old cut her 3 year old sisters hair off 1/8 inch from the scalp in the front. Mom took both girls and they each had a hair cut. One to straighten up the mess the older one made and the older one to teach the 5 year old not to cut anyone else's hair...cut her piggy tails off and she sure wasn't happy...never cut any one elses hair off again...
They need to make sure the girl and her parents are watched closely because her mother seems to think that grounding her was good enough. How long was the grounding? What was she grounded from? Grounded for 2 hours without her phone....she needs more than that. This happend at a McDonalds and last summer a 5 year old was raped in one of those play structures...I don't want my granddaughters any where near those structures or Chick-fil-a.
Cutting someones hair without their consent is assault.
The judge offering that same act as an alternative may also be assault, or even coersion.
Put it another way. If someone assaults you, do you than have the right to assault them back in the court room months later?
Why not institute cainings and lashings while we are at it?
Is retribution the kind of justice you people want? Rather simplistic don't you think?
I call that third grade mentality.
That's a great idea. Works is Singapore.
@ sillybilly
I factchecked. Your article states nothing, just makes wild accusations about irrelevant (to this article) legal scenarios with no data. It is pure gibberish as are most of your comments. Who are you really trying to defend. Nonsense article making a big deal out of nothing. As stated previously this is probably intended to reduce the demands on the mothers time and is a useful lesson for the child. Assuming the child is not a career deviant (if it were mine) I would prefer the judge give this option as opposed to mandating massive amounts of community service with soon to drop out teens on their 3rd DUI that my child would have to be exposed to. The lesson is more convincing and the justice more fitting.
I oppose this sentence as cruel and unjust, something that the Constitution is supposed to prevent. If you want to cut her hair, let the parent decide. But that judge ought to keep his damn mouth shut. If it is to be done, let the parents decide. Unfortunately, I think that this will be the only way that she will learn. Take it from a youth like it; this might be the only way she'll learn.
@ ApacheRosePea00...what was intended with the 1st comment is that just blaming the parents is a cop-out...yes, parents ARE responsible for their childrens' actions to a certain extent....however, ALL children come to a point in their lives, regardless of their upbringing, regardless of their parents level of responsibility, and regardless of the examples (or lack thereof) that the parents have set, those children know the difference between right and wrong, and they prove it every day, as they will get upset when someone does THEM wrong.....they know the difference, and when a child CHOOSES to do wrong to another, they KNOW it's wrong because they wouldn't want someone doing that to THEM...I hope that I've cleared up any confusion concerning my 1st comment. :-)
@ Freshieee.....The 13 yr olds' mother DID decide to cut her daughters' hair...the judge did not order it done.....he offered it as an alternative solution only....nobody forced her to make that decision...she just as easily could have accepted the judges' original sentence that fell WELL within the boundaries of the Law, but her MOTHER chose the alternative....so if we were to crucify ANYONE for cruel and unjust, then you should be looking at mom....as she made the choice, AND carried out the sentence......
Fresh, I gotta agree with Dan here, the judge gave her a choice and Mom said "I'll Take It."
Dan, I disagree with the cop out comment. When you bring a child into this world you are accepting full responsibility for that child until they are of an age where you are no longer to be 'at fault' for anything they do. If an 16 year old bring drugs into the house and somehow the house gets raided, the parents are to blame, if an 18 year old brings drugs into the house and gets caught by the cops then the 18 year old is to blame. If you start blaming the kids too early you relieve the parents responsibility before the govt says they are able to be responsible for themselves. Then you start getting into parents no longer being parents, they stop parenting bc the govt will do it for them. What amazes me is that charges where brought up in the first place. In 4th grade a little black girl ( who later became a great friend) Cut my hair from the seat behind me, all the way to my scalp, my mother did not press charges, her mother whipped her butt right inside the principles office, then to top that off she had to write an apology letter and read it in front of the whole school during lunch time. This was her mothers idea and she cried the whole time she read it, I felt so bad I got up on the stage with her and gave her a big hug and told her "it's okay, don't cry." She and her mom took me to a salon to get my hair permed to hide the bald spot.
So in my case, the mother dealt out a harsh punishment but she kept apologizing to my mother and me over and over, taking responsibility for the acts of her child . All my mother said was " kids do dumb things, it happens. You are just lucky your daughter still has hair bc this one here ( points to me ) shaved her brothers head while he slept last year when he threw her barbie in the pond." Apparently I was more fond of barbie than my own hair!!
Fresh what you have to keep in kind is that they brought the law into it and some might deem ANY punishment that was given as cruel and unjust. I think it was cruel and unjust to even press charges. Welcome to this great society we now have where parents wait for justice to be handed out by the govt instead of the parents, kicking the stone down the road much!!!
logic,
You must not know much about copy right law then. Copyright law says that you do not actually own the songs you have purchased. What you purchased were not the songs but a license to listen to them. Any time you rip music from a CD you are breaking copyright law. Anytime you convert those ripped songs to MP3s you are breaking copyright law. Anytime you burn that music back on to a CD you are breaking copyright law. If you drive down the road with your windows down and your radio up you can be charged for each and every person that hears the song that is playing if it is on a CD that you have bought.
These are real laws but they are not enforced because too many people would be arrested. Same with downloading music, if you do not download more then 1000 songs a day you are likely never to be charged with anything.
@article
I do not think it was within the judge's purview to even offer the hair cutting as an alternative. To those saying the mother was not forced to take that option, of course she was. Most parents, if given the choice, will opt for a lesser sentence for their children if it is given; it is just genetics/hormones/instinct; just like most parents will sacrifice a lot to help their kids.
That said I do not think we should be giving lighter sentences for incidents like this one, either full or none. The problem with the system right now is that we have parole. I do not agree with it in most cases except for the most minor of jail-able crimes. Everything else should not be eligible for parole or getting out on good behavior or any of that bull.
A better judgement would have been ordering psych evaluations of the kid in addition to the original sentence.
The punishment should fit the crime. We need this style of justice for assault and murder cases.
That's because most people here have a third grade education level.
Oh really?! so in that time you:
1. Read the article
2. Bought the book(Written by a prominent Civil Rights attorney) the article is about and read that
3. Googled 3 felonies a day
4. Watched the Youtube video about it
5. Visited the website and poured through all of that
6. Read the Reason.com article also about this topic
I think not. So much for your fact checking.
Keep in mind that our prisons are already overcrowded. We put more people in prison per capita than any other nation on earth. We also have stiffer penalties for crimes than any among Western Civilizations and we still have the Death Penalty where as most of Western Civ has abolished it. It's not by a small percentage either that we're in the lead. To top in off keeping the 2,000,000 prisoners locked up is not cheap. Roughly $70 billion each year. Also it's about 10 times cheaper to put someone on parole than it is to keep them in prison and 20 times cheaper for probation.
www.nationmaster.com/graph/cri_pri_per_cap-crime-prisoners-per-capita
Thank you for being ignorant enough to think you've never done anything wrong and for judging me as you have just done. You should probably read that post by Geowil 2 posts up. Isn't hypocrisy grand?
I agree that it was a proper punishment, they will consider what happened before they pull something like this again. And I agree that the mother whining about the punishment shows that she is a big part of the problem of why her kid is like that.
"I don't have the time to get into any silly internet debates today...but..." kiss my ass and here's my point anyhow.
drainbramage what a stupid f^ck... i have nothing more to say
Do you think when a child comes out of the womb they automatically know the difference between right and wrong? Right from wrong is learned behavior. Children learn and imitate behaviors they have observed in other people, beginning with their parents and close family members.
Grant you there are genetic influences and every child is born with inborn tendencies, and these tendencies can work both for and against a child. When a child is born with a genetically predisposed tendency toward mental health problems, the environment becomes more critically important. It is the responsibility of the parent to know their family mental health history so that they can support and guide the child in a positive, healthy direction.
This child clearly "learned" her behavior from her parent, which is clearly seen by the mother's response to the Judges option for punishment. It was the mother who chose the option of cutting the hair to reduce the sentence. Then she turns around and blames the Judge. What lesson is her daughter learning? Its not her fault its the other persons fault and I should never be treated this way although its okay to treat others this way. Learned behavior...
if i had to make a comment...we'll i only fish with my wormy friends...because bait is plentiful...dang...ya'll going at each other today...
I wonder how he handles guilty murder verdicts???
shameful of the cutter
I hate to say it, but the level of punitive thought among you people reminds me of Iran.
An eye for an eye has made the whole world blind.
i dont see the problem with this- we used to allow judges discretion in sentencing, and remember the days when men were told they could go to jail or join the army - their pick. without discretion is where we are now, where a 13 year old first time offender gets 10 years for an ounce of pot- regardless if its his or if he even tests positive for drugs- no sentencing discretion just do not pass go do not collect $200. I think he was trying to show her how it felt for the little girl she mutilated. I really find it funny how people are so quick to call for pedophiles,murders, rapists to have the smae or worse done to them but when the same is put upon a criminal you all coward out and whine
This is Justice, the Mormon way. It is simple Noahide Law. Eye for an Eye, Tooth for a Tooth, and Hair for Hair. It is Retributive Justice. And while it may not be cruel, it is certainly unusual -- and therefore forbidden by our Constitution, despite what the Mormons and/or Jews say to the contrary. And retribution is not appropriate for young girls.
And this is the same sort of Judge we can all expect Romney to push onto this Nation's top courts should he win the election. Mormonism is Christianity on its way back to Judaism. It's Greco-Roman, minus the Greek.
The 13 y/o did not abuse the 3 y/o, she assaulted that 3y/o child period. The 3y/o was incapable of even fighting back. Frankly the 13 y/o got a light sentence as it is, as she seem to be a litte thug in the making (with her enabler mother ) as she was also accused of making phone calls threatening rape and assault to another teen.
If she were a boy or a minority and had made those phone calls threatening rape and assault on another teen, plus had cut the hair of a 3y/o against the child's will, what would have been the sentence then? Wonder if he would not have been given a more substantial and lengthy stint in detention/juvie?
The mother should be sentenced to parenting courses and probably should have had her head shaved as she seems to be an enabler to her daughter's bullying behaviour with her also filing a 'formal complaint' about the judge and his sentence thereby giving her daughter the impression that no matter how disgusting and illegal her behaviour that she can get away with it by either she or her parent filing a complaint or suing the or any other person i.e. using the old 'the other person did worse' or the 'I am being mistreated' thingy. The mother should have been thanking the judge for trying to nip her daughter's bullying, harrassing, abusive, assaulting behaviour in the bud before she really ends up in adult prison with a stiffer sentence for a bigger crime. The 13 y/o needed to be taught and learn that there are consequences to these unsociable behaviours. That what she did was a crime and was unacceptable in our society.
Kids learn discipline, proper manners/ common curtesy and how to interact positively with others and the rules of the road of life at home and at school. Seems some parents are falling down on the job and are leaving this up to teachers who have course work to teach, many other children in the classroom who need their attention, and may not even be allowed to do anything about the child's behaviour except send him/her to the principal's office....or they will be fired, suspended or even sued by the parent.
Teachers are blamed for the failing grades of their students and the children's inability to learn and even the students untoward behaviour etc with the usual parental etc refrain..'why didn't the school put a stop to this or that negative behaviour', 'why didn't the school notify us' blah blah blah.
Teachers are expected to teach and be educators - including finding innovative ways of trying to get their charges to learn- as well as be parents, cheer leaders, and disciplinarian ( supposedly using behaviour modification) to students/children from a variety of backgrounds, behavioural standards and family life ( eg. absentee parent, divorce etc) as for example students like this 13 year old, her friend and her mother/parent.
Teachers must be diplomats and find ways of navigating the minefields of parental expectations, beliefs and behaviour, from some with high expectations for their children and rightly so as these parents and children work hard to achieve set goals, to even those other parents (who oftentimes are the loudest complainers and accusers) who have unrealistic achievement expectations regarding their offsprings' ability, interest in or wanting to learn, succeed etc, when they don't even work with their children to make sure they are actually attending school, studying and completing assignments /homework etc. Some of these parents are only interested in wanting or needing or making sure that their children is somewhere safe duing the daytime hours when they (parents) are at work. Sometimes the only parenting some of these kids get is when they are at school.
Added to this are expectations from polititians and others with their own agendas and who are or may be using these teachers and kids as pawns in some scheme or other, whether it is to set up private for profit charter schools, close public schools, get rid of the dept of education, closing access to any education at all thus keeping the populace ignorant/dumb or as a means to breaking the backs of the unions etc in this new mad dash to privatize everything from Social Security to now the public schools/education system.
So now we have where teachers are being downsized, pinkslipped, let go, demonized etc while increasing the amount of children/students in these classrooms, while may not be providing enough or current text books and equipment yet expecting them to provide a stellar education to all students, whatever their issues -behavioural or otherwise eg learning disability etc,- may be. Will the for profit charter schools be taking those students who have behavioural or learning problems etc or who are from certain areas like the underpriviledged or less priviledged areas? And if the students don't pass muster or should act up will they be shunting these students back into the underfunded public school system or will they be working to make sure these kids do not drop out and become fodder for the private for profit prison system.....?
Wonder what the behaviour of this this 13 y/o and her friend and partner in crime is like in school?
Peace....
Well, I guess this will be colapsed but I have to say it. I wonder how much difference there is here and in Mitt Romney holding down a kid in his school and doing the same thing. In fact, Mitt was older than 13 and therefore more culpable. If I'm wrong, I'd love to have someone explain why. Both victimized a helpless person who couldn't resist.
For all those who see this as a barbaric use of the "eye for an eye" mentality...
First off, the mother and daughter were given a choice: the full sentence or get her hair cut in trade for a reduced sentence.
Secondly, this sets up teaching the girl a lesson in "consequences of her actions." Not only did she get a chance to experience the effects her actions had on her victim, she had the choice of doing that or serving the standard sentence. Given what she chose, she now gets a little of both instead of the larger time in community service, and maybe that will stick in her mind enough to prevent her victimizing someone else's kid instead of just finishing more hours of community service and learning to only to be intimidating enough to threaten her next victim into silently enduring the abuse to lower the risk of her getting caught.
Third, if she isn't broken of this behavior, it could end up causing the deaths of other people's kids. I'd like to see more bullies that cross a line that lands them in a court room face similar options to reduce their sentences. If even one life is saved because someone like this teen learns their lesson and doesn't drive someone else to consider suicide or a retaliatory school shooting, it's worth it IMO.
While it's not applicable for every situation in a civilized society, a little "eye for and eye" option may be better than the regular setup in some cases, especially if it's left up to the convicted to choose the option or the regular sentence.
Oh My People listen to yourselves. It's because of poor parenting. it's illegal. It's Barbaric. It's against her human rights. We don't need any of that eye for an eye punishment. it's third grade mentality. this whole thing is ridiculous.
1. There was an assult on a 3 year old child.
2. The perpetrator was brought to justice.
3. We live in an eye for eye justice system.
4. The judge offered a lighter sentence if the Perpetrators mother taught the 13yr old a well deserved lesson in humility.
So as far as i can see there is nothing more to this then informing the public of the occurrence. The 13 year old wasn't abused by the court in any way so please get off your high horses and look for ways to solve some of the more important issues of the day (Unemployment, the State of the economy or even just how to survive) Rather then sit back and be arm chair parents and judges most of you probably haven't got a clue how to look up a law let alone institute them. We sentence Murderers to lethal injection and child molesters, pot smokers and prostitutes to jail. they are all humiliated by this and it is the same as an eye for an eye mentality.
this is a joke, other than hair of a three year old, the 11 yr was sentenced to 30 days and 256 hrs of community service? wow the dwi defendants get less. The judge deciding to rescind part of the comm service in exchange for reduction of sentence to accept public humiliation in a state room is cruel and unusual sentencing and this judge should be removed.
@Dan Howley #1.15 you start off by saying a childs upbringing as nothing to do with it. that at somepoint in ones life they know the difference from right and wrong and should be held accountable by their own actions. But then complete your post you say the mom's hair should also be cut since she "failed" in raising her daughter to know right from wrong. You even claim that blaiming the parents is an "anemic argument at best" but to cut the mothers hair would admit you find her at fault in this matter too...so which is it ?
In order for a child to learn the "Golden Rule" they have to be taught it, and usually the teaching is done by the parents. This childs mother has failed at being a mother in every sense possible. Just like the middle school thugs on the bus...I guarantee the first time they had ever heard "If you do not have anything nice to say, then do not say anything at all," was from Klein herself. Not their parents. Failed parenting IS what is going to be the ultimate demise of America. Failed parenting, absent parents ect. Its an out of control epidemic in America that hoepfully can be stopped.
Oh and btw, in a later post you go on to argue with another about how much of the hair should be cut saying it was left up to the perps mom and not the victims mother, but you are wrong. The judge asked the victims mother if it was short enough after the cutting and she said no, my childs hair was down to her back and now is above where the ponytail holder was. So the judge instructed the perps mother to cut more off and she complained the scissors werent sharp enough.
and Lastly, maybe we should go back to an "eye for an eye" judicial system. Would have ALOT less crime.
missy, your thinking of imposing your single minded opinion on others is equal to dictatorship, is this what you want for our Great Nation?
Should have SHAVED the girls head and cut the Mothers hair.
if this option (which was selected and carried out by the mother) is cruel and unusual, then what about all inmates that when they enter the system have their heads shaved initially? If that is not cruel and unusual, then why would this optional plea deal be cruel and unusual?
Nice little Freudian slip there!
Hey, what's happenin'? Cutting someone's hair...sounds a little like a 5th grade Ed Kefgen deal!
Most of you are MORON'S! Her HAIR will grow back, the girl that did the cutting, cut her hair the same amount, ground her, take away some of her perks. The lil' girl was not injured forever. DROP IT!!!
This should have never made it to court. Parent's today are PANZIE'S!!!
By some of these comments I can see why we are having so many discipline problems coming from school age children. Discipline in this instance was justified, and as the mother seems to fail at doing it the judge did and offered her an option. Honestly no wonder we have a bunch of spoiled brats tormenting old people, people are afraid to hurt a childs psyche.
News flash, lack of discipline is far more damaging than consequences. Children need and want limits, it shows that they have the safety to fall back on and they will push them just to make sure they are there. Any parent that can't bring themselves to discipline their child, is doing them a huge disservice.
This is insane- the article is insane, the comments on here are insane.
Really? Cutting hair is assualt? This made it to the courts? You people want even a tougher sentence? The adults couldn't have defused this beforehand?
What the @!$%# has happened to the world. Did we wake up one day and desire only to see vengeance carried out in the courts. These are childern that acted like dumb @!$%#ing childern. A stern talking to perhaps was in order, but not court ordered punishments or legistation.
Again I'm blown away, what the @!$%# is wrong with the country I grew up in.
Billy - I know you mean well, but do you seriously mean to imply that EVERY offense is an equal offense? Following this line of thinking through to its logical end would mean that every crime, no matter how great, or how small, would warrant the same level of punishment.
Without any permanent damage here whatsoever, the judge has a chance to teach this completely disconnected girl what it feels like to be violated in this manner. And if someone thinks that This is harsh.. just wait until she stands before a judge as an adult one day - the consequences may be Far greater than just short hair.
(When I was a child, before the days of advanced security and cameras everywhere, my brother and I became pretty proficient at shoplifting. Nothing huge, just some candy here and there and some other small stuff - we were flying high and just full of ourselves - until one day my sister ratted us out to my mother. Instantly, we were in the car, in tears... on our way to the store where we'd perpetrated the crime.
There stood my mother with her arms folded, while we stood sobbing in front of that kindly, smiling store manager, hands outstretched, offering our next several months allowance to cover the damages.. completely humiliated.. but we sure got the message. And that promptly ended the shoplifting spree - as well as any desire to do so thereafter. To this day, I can't begin to explain how grateful I am that my mother took the hard route, and didn't opt to be my "Friend" or any of that "Time Out" crap. Sometimes you just have to take the medicine without the sugar.
The one bit of mercy she did extend to us however, and I'm sure it's the reason I'm able to write this today.. is that she opted not to tell my father ;) Good gal. )
This forum is an excellent example what I have been stating for months, Americans are emotionally challenged. As soon as the mother cut her daughter's hair, she realized she violated her daughter the same way her daughter violated the 3 year old. She realized she became her daughter's perpetrator, she betrayed her daughter's trust. She violated her against her free will. A mother is supposed to love their children unconditionally. A parents guides their children with love, they don't alienate them. I have faith that this will work out for them because she realized she had done wrong. The suggestion the judge made was harmful and it should not have been suggested by him.
Parents should NOT leave their children unattended in a public place especially defenseless toddlers. I don't agree with any parent that think it is proper to betray their child's trust. Children are children they make mistakes, it is the duty of parents to properly guide them.
If a child has emotional issues that parents can't solve then they need to seek professional help! They shouldn't be causing them the same harm they do do to others for it will only make the problem worse.
There is a difference between disciplining a child and violating a child. What the mother did here was no better than what her daughter did to the three year old. How is what the mother did going to help her figure out why the daughter wants to cause other people harm? Do you seriously think the daughter will trust her mother after doing something like that to her.......would YOU?
Mr. Miller-447368, the point is your mother didn't steal from you to teach you the lesson did she?
For this little girl to do this shows complete lack of parenting,
I can only conclude with no doubts that she spends most of her life on a computer.
@J R Browenstein,
RE:"Newsflash, genuis...the victim DIDN'T decide what the punishment was. Your entire "point" is a non-starter. Thanks for playing "Who wants to look stupid on the internet today"....will you be joining us again tomorrow?" :):):):) Loved it!!!
Ummmmm............Either you must be new around here or are just plain lucky. I've seen SillyBilly around enough to tell you that is his favorite game and seldom if ever misses a chance to play it.
Someone help me here!!
Huh????? How is it that a 3 year old is alone long enough for this to happen and at a McDonalds!! AND they already had a pair of scissors, so they planned this??? Am I missing something??
This 13 yo "child of the corn" is indeed not right in the head. The fact she befriended a little 3 year old so she can cut her hair off is extremely creepy and scary.... There are definitely more underlying issues going on in her head and her mother seems to be in total denial... Pretty volatile future coming up.
I'm glad the judge did what he did...in the courtroom to humiliate this teen. Just wish he'd have used a bowl like "SanityCheck" suggested! Or shave a GIANT L for LOSER on the back of her head!
She'll be on the news again.....I'm sure of it.
This monster got just what she deserved. I regret her hair will grow back.
@geowil
I think your understanding of copyright laws is greatly misconstrued, especially about playing within earshot of others... it just takes common sense to realize that it's just not true. and especially regarding copyright laws, which is much less about basic right/wrong than about interpretation and what a bunch of lawyers can make up to argue about. one day you can copy your CDs as backups, the next day you can't...
@silly billy
STFU. you're probably not stupid, but that ego of yours makes you sound like it. any precedents set from this would be a welcome change back to fundamental/sound family-oriented values. you know, the ones where people are accountable to their own actions and such... your perspective simply misses by a wide margin what's truly at stake and the real issue, that of the long-term welfare of both the 3-yo victim/family and the 13-yo assailant. The victim family needs to feel justice, while the 13-yo girl needs a drastic change in the direction of her life.
Is anything you've been saying relevant to that?
It's not the governments job to establish or enforce family values. Also the child was arrested, convicted and sentenced, so justice in our systems eyes was served.
Notice you said "The victim family needs to feel justice" instead of "The victims family needs to think justice was served" Your words are a reflection of your thought processes. You are having an emotional reaction to this instead of a well thought out mental one. As I stated previously victims should not be the ones who decide the sentence ever. That moves us into revenge territory.
Seeing that many folks in the USA like to believe that they are christians or that we are a christian country, even when we have separation of church and state... let me at least attempt to quote a passage from the Bible..."Train up a child in the way he should go, so that when he is old he will not depart from it". There is also a passage about.... 'not sparing the rod and spoiling the child' too.
So the Bible tells parents what they are to do with regards to their children.
It is illegal to use the 'rod' on children these days as a means of modifying negative behaviour.... due to some parents going overboard with their use of this type of punishment to where it came down to being simply abuse and assault period and with that, resulting in bringing in 1. the govt into deciding what is acceptable punishment etc versus what is parental criminality against their children and 2. add pychologists, behaviourists and their viewpoints etc into the mix, 3. even as societal standards, norms and laws are changing quickly, 4. globalization, media/internet access of information of all types entering the home, helping to change beliefs, values etc, 5. children are growing up faster, having less respect for and less access/guidance to and from their parents (who must work longer hours to make ends meet resulting in children being latchkey kids and who are therefore given things/gifts as a means of showing love etc, to replace or make up for parental absence) plus these kids are oftentimes even bigger and stronger than their parents, and are being accessed and pressured by peers of all stripes/behaviours through a variety of means (many of which the parents are not even aware of or savvy to).
These parents who decided to go overboard into assaulting and abusing their children on the pretext of punishment, has made it difficult for the rest of the parents to even find and use other means of modifying their children's negative, distructive and disruptive behaviour that is not soley based on the 'talk the child to death until they tune you out' method.
Even if the parents should use the old truism that 'behaviour has consequences' method, with from 'timeouts' to increasingly stiffer consequences (as apparently the term 'punishment' cannot or should not be used lol) of taking things away/denying them something they (child) want... eg. grounding with increasing time/days/weeks, not being able to use their mobile, not being able to drive, no pocket money/allowances etc it is questionable if this method will work at this stage anyway- especially with the time constraints and access to their children that parents have these days.
Poor pay and stagnant wages in a country with a high cost of living has consequence too, as it affect children negatively. Worrying about leaving debt to children and grandchildren in the future is going on the supposition that you will be able to afford to have children and grandchildren, that these children will survive without healthcare, food or education- including post highschool education, and not end up in a private for profit prison system due to their distructive, disruptive, negative behaviour perhaps because of absence of parental guidance and protection because the parents must work long long hours outside the home to support those children in the first place. How many parents can afford to have one spouse stay home and make it financially, in this day and age or even for the past 30 years?
Latchkeying kids started in the 1980s and on, lowering and stagnation of wages forcing more both parents into the workplace working longer hours etc, including that old talk of parents spending 'quality time' and applying 'tough love' including where kids were sent to private for profit (if the parents had healthcare insurance) places to have their children's behaviour modified.... LOL... Lest we forget....
The idea that you can modify a teenager's behaviour through the time consuming behaviour modification method at home is questionable at best, if it was not a method used from an early age where and when the child would have been taught to have respect for him/herself and his or her parents and others etc, that there are rules, regulations and the oversight and the consequences of breaking those rules, and if the parents were not versed in it to begin with and have the time and will to carry it out (oversight), especially in this day and age imo. Eg. if the mother of that 13 y/o had taken away her phone, couldn't the child have used her computer to make those threatening calls anyway as or if she was in timeout in her room with no doubt a tv, access to the internet, music etc?
How versed are parents in media/internet etc and the various access to these, these days? Are parents actually monitoring their children's internet/mobile usage or are the parents worried about impringing on their childen's rights to privacy even as the children may be taking part in sexting, or talking to strangers some who are even pedofiles?
There are those parents and others who will find the actions of other parents abusive or intrusive, no matter what some parents do to raise their children well, or to protect them. They will still be saying 'it is only kids being kids', 'you have to give them room to grow up', 'they are old enough to make decisions on their own', 'the child is too young to be learning about pregnancy and sexually transmitted disease prevention' even when it has been shown that there are children as young as 10 y/o who have engaged in sexual activity and 13 years old being pregnant and many know where the liquor cabinet is and where some have been abusing alcohol.
So what are parents to do these days? Let their children act out like that abusive 13 y/o and her friend or try to stop this behaviour, nip it in the bud so to speak? Would they be like the 13 year old's mother and file a complaint against the judge thus enabling her daughter and in a indirect way continuing to encourage her daughters abusive bullying behaviour, or applaud the judge?
One thing for sure is that children seem to have more rights than their parents these days. Eg.. A 60 odd y/o grandmother was arrested for slapping her teenage grand-daugher. The grand-daughter who she was caring for in her home, was cursing and swearing at her grandmother, using the foulest of language which she (grandmother) would not tolerate including in her home. The grand daughter called the cops on her grandmother and had her arrested for assault...... Can't recall what happened after, whether the grandmother allowed the granddaughter to continue living with her or where the granddaughter ended up as she had no where else to go/live.
The only folks that seem to be able to temper or change some of these children's behaviour is the legal system..... unfortunately, as the pendulum have swung in the favour of the children these days, thus some parents are now unable or unwilling to mete out even the simplest corrective punishment for fear of being arrested, and which leave parents with the only recourse i.e. to call the police on their own children to have them removed from their home when things get out of hand. Sad but true.... just saying...
So what can be done to solve these issues -bullying, belonging or joining gangs etc- plaguing our country even more so these days, before more kids end up dead or in juvie/detention or prison?
Just asking.......
@Peter-the-Piper
Unfortunately, copyright law makes little sense. Most people wouldn't know it, but even the very act of a browser caching a website to load faster (cookies) is, under copyright law, a violation of it. The main problem with copyright law is that it made sense, 50 years ago. Because of technology copyright law needs to change, and though it has been, it hasn't by any means kept up with technology.
That said, it is NOT illegal to burn a cd from either a legally owned digitally copy or from an original disc, so long as it is for 100% personal use. But the idea of what constitutes personal use is where everything gets shady. It would take forever to write all the info, but that's the long and short of it. Downloading music can be done legally. Making copies can be done legally. In fact recording movies/shows on vhs or dvd straight from the tv can be done legally... If you know what you're doing and are willing to pay the royalty fees and whatnot.
@Rubytuesday57
Indeed, there is a difference in violating a child and disciplining a child. However, oftentimes, disciplining a child can and does involve violating a child. Not necessarily the child's trust (which is something no parent should ever violate), but the child's rights and priviledges. But I think you're assuming too much about the mother betraying her daughter's trust. Heck if it had been my child and she had done that, I would've made her surrender as much allowance as necessary to pay for fixing the toddler's hair to look at least presentable and then I would've shaved my daughter bald myself. Children must be taught right from wrong, and what the judge offered was giving the mother a chance to give her child a proper punishment that could actually teach the child what it feels like to have that done to her so as to establish boundaries. This is just my opinion, but most likely this judge is a father, and he himself felt that this incident should've been taken care of outside the court system, but knew he still had his job to do. So he did his best to bring about a sort of middle ground. I won't judge the judge on whether what he did was right or wrong, but at the very least, if this is true, I can understand his intentions.
We have stiffer penalties now than most of the western world and our crime rate is not lower because of it.
She is a 13 year old girl Mark, she is not Hitler.
You're going to need to define what you mean by equal and level here in order for this discussion to continue. I wasn't implying, I was blatantly stating. Also I really don't think you understood what I meant given your response but go ahead.
First off, their hair is not cut upon first entering because that would make one believe it is done at the local jail, it is not. It is only done to felons upon reaching prison. An inmate can refuse to have their hair cut. They just get sent to the hole for a time. The whole reason they do it is for sanitary reasons. They don't want prisoners bringing lice or fleas in, because with some of them that is in issue.
That is part of the point of the article I posted. There are so many laws besides just copyright laws that are either antiquated or very vague that people are committing crimes everyday and have absolutely no idea they are doing anything wrong. All it takes is they are in the wrong place at the wrong time and they will be charged with a felony. Even if the charges are dropped, that doesn't happen overnight. The person was still arrested. Still had to go through all of that humiliation and the legal fees alone are more than enough punishment for most crimes. You want a lawyer to show up one time to fight a traffic violation. $250 minimum. And before people get all goofy about who has a lawyer show up for a traffic violation. A truck driver or other people that depend on a clean driving record for their jobs.
Correct - she did NO permanent damage. And that's my point: She used an ego-crushing experience to teach an object lesson.. just as this mother should be doing to teach her own child - that actions sometimes have harsh consequences.
The daughter sounds like a sociopathic C*** and the mother probably taught her everything she knows.
What a stupid woman. She and her brat feel so entitled that they would actually submit those tapes to the radio station looking for sympathy when they are actually more incriminating to the daughter. What did she think would happen exactly? We would all feel sorry for the way the judge treated her daughter while discussing her threats of rape and mutilation?????
"Oh nevermind that my daughter threatened people. But just listen to the way that mean judge talked to her about it in court!"
Submit her to the "My Kid is a Monster, and I Made Them That Way" club along with the parents of those little ba$tards who bullied the bus monitor. They all have stuff in common to talk about, I'm sure!
If there was no permanent damage done then why did the 3 year old's mother bring this issue to court? Answer: The mother felt her 3 year old was physically assaulted. You don't have a mother physically assault their child to teach them a lesson!!!!!!!
You are probably right on the mother and the daughter, however the issue of her threatening another is a separate incident and legally speaking cannot be considered here as to her innocent or guilt or to her sentencing. Nor should it. She should be tried and sentenced on each individually.
Sillybilly.....#1.127...... Unfortunately the article did not indicate whether the threatening calls had anything to do with the case of the assault on the 3 y/o, i.e. whether the recipient of the calls was perhaps a witness to the assault by the 13 y/o and her friend or whether the person was just another victim of the 13 y/o miscreant.
On the other hand those threatening calls towards another youngster could be viewed in the context of pattern of behaviour...couldn't it?
Restored a lot of comments. Not these.
Try to help yourself next time, drainbramage, that's a derail. You're suspended for a day for violating #4 of the Code of Honor.
tayatayat, you're suspended for a week for violating #1 of the Code of Honor - second suspension in a week. Read the rules.
CBurroughs, you're suspended for a day for violating #1 of the Code of Honor.
How stupid. All this judge did was teach the kids that it is OK to take revenge.
If it was in the same incident yes. If they are separate incidents no. As an example. If someone killed someone else 20 years ago went to prison was released and then committed the same or similar crime again when released the previous incident could not be introduced as evidence. If someone however was a serial child molester like Jerry Sandusky the incidents are in a way connected and can be introduced. However when on the jury a judge will tell you that you that you can't use the separate incidents to determine innocence or guilt in other incidents. Hence he was convicted on like 45 of 48 counts or whatever. It would just be ridiculous both time and cost wise to try the guy 48 separate times so they do it at once.
A good lawyer will sight that introducing evidence of that nature will create a prejudice and in many cases it can and does. Hence things getting overturned on appeal for evidentiary issues. A pattern of behavior can be used in some cases for sentencing, like if someone is a repeat offender but that means they commit the same or similar crime repeatedly. Theft and Murder as example are not the same or similar, however Assault with a Deadly Weapon and Murder are similar and so the latter could be introduced as a pattern of behavior at sentencing to get a longer sentence.
I know that might be a little confusing but the law is confusing. Hope it helps though.
Solomon probably would have come up with something a little more wise....
Solomon probably would have had the tubes of both mom and daughter...TIED!
Sandusky's victims should get to whack off his penis. Errr... really, I meant to say CUT off.
i don't think solomon...would have split hairs...
this is a juvenile court judge. his lode star is supposed to be the best interests of the child. Thirteen year old girls make nasty calls to one another and do lots of stupid things. This 13 year old was not the one who cut the 4 year olds hair. That 13 year old was allowed to go to a salon with her mother to have her hair cut. This mother was complaining about the strip search as well as the public square hair cutting. What kind of a petty satrap still believes that 2 wrongs make a right? BTW, the judge is a law school classmate of mine. My 5 year old sister once shaved my 4 year old sister bald. I guess that at 62 now she should surrender herself to her local hoosegow for a full body search and have all her cavities inspected for weapons and contraband.
'An eye for an eye soon leaves the whole world blind.' Ghandi.
cheer's...here's mud in your eye...Goofy...
Wow! What a terrific judge. Why aren't there more like this? Let the punishment fit the crime. He has the wisdom of a Solomon.
YES! Totally agree, we need to go back to the "eye for an eye", which in a lot of cases would be more appropriate then the typical slap on the wrist.
I agree Pandora. A punishment like this may make the girl realize what she did was not in the least bid fun or justified.
The Judge was totally OUT OF LINE, this is an example of our broken system. We have a legislature that pain staking passes laws and punishment that then are not followed and yet we expect our children to be an exception to the rule and follow the rules. What we get is children doing what ever they see fit, just like the adults. Then we blame the parents for being like everyone else, and shield ourselves from having anything to do with it. This article is about a Judge making up punishment, not about the girls or what they have done and how they are raised. I for one do not want this to be a role of Judges.
The jails are full of punks who think it gives them street cred to get thrown in there. They smart off to the officers and guards and have no respect for authority and do not consider doing a small amount of time to be punishment at all. The system clearly isn't working. We need more like this. And YES, the victim SHOULD get a say in the punishment of their abuser. that might soon take hold, and be a deterrent in and of itself.
I whole heartedly agree that the victims need to have alot more input into the punishment of the offenders. In my state we have sanction courts were a group speaks with the juvenile, discuss in length what they did and why, talks with them about what they plan to do in the future and how they can stay OUT of trouble for good. Then a sentence is passed which includes things like community service, restitution, mediating with their victim towards a resolution if the victim agrees to etc.. I think there is a NEED for a lot of leeway for some creative solutions to juvenile crimes. Our current systems are NOT working. Creative ideas like this judge had could have the potential to stop bad behavior before it becomes habitual and serious enough to be a danger to the others in the community. Way too many peole believe that children need to be coddled, wrapped in bubble wrap and have their bad behavior condoned. these types of idiots are seriously a HUGE part of the problems not the solutions!!!!!!!!!
Valerie Bruno is after the Judge and filed a formal complaint on the judge. Price is a small, cute little town in the mountains of Utah. The kind of place you could feel safe with your kids. Kaytlen Lopan and another girl went to McDonalds and befriended the 3 year old. Then the two teenagers asked the staff at McDonalds for scissors, which the staff refused to hand over. The two girls left McDonalds and went to the dollar store and returned to McDonalds with scissors. This “hair cut” by these two teenagers is totally and absolutely premeditated. Kaytlen is a bully and has harassed another.
The Judge DID NOT force Valerie Bruno to cut her daughters hair. The Judge simply stated that if Valerie Bruno did cut her daughters hair he would make Kaytlen’s sentence shorter. It was Valerie Bruno’s choice to cut Kaytlen hair.
Valerie Bruno hired a lawyer, Valerie Bruno contacted KSL a local news station. This is a small town where I am sure everyone knows everyone and like a lot of small groups, I am sure it has moments of being a tad clicky. I think Valerie Bruno is after her 15 minutes of fame and that she believed that if she took this issue out side of Price that the rest of the world would certain side with her.
Had my daughter touched and cut a 3 year olds hair I would of swiftly and immediately administered punishment and consequences; one being I would of shaved my kids head and Mindy Moss would have been acuity aware of all punishments. Had Valerie Bruno properly handled and parented Kaytlen this entire situation would have not had to go to the police and court. Valerie Bruno is a very poor parent and she has enabled her daughter so much and continues to do so; what is this kid going to do when she is 16???? We have a pretty sick society, if parents enable their kids so publicly!!!!!!! www.sltrib.com/sltrib/news/54359322-78/hair-moss-cut-girls.html.csp
Exactly. From when he was still in grade school I told my son that if he did something accidentally that I would stand up for him, but if I found out that the school was holding him accountable for decisions he made, whether it be not doing homework or misbehaving in some way, I was not going to be one of those parents that protects him from the consequences of those actions, and he'd likely have a punishment at home as well.
Probably something like another 16-year-old that made the news a while back. That one's parents put her on a prepay phone because she kept costing them in overages. She stole their credit card to buy more minutes. When they found out about that and refused to keep funding her phone, she went on a rampage to demand more cell phone time that ended up with them barricaded in the bathroom calling the police and her outside the door threatening them with a pair of kitchen knives.
wantnot
The Judge was totally OUT OF LINE, this is an example of our broken system. We have a legislature that pain staking passes laws and punishment that then are not followed and yet we expect our children to be an exception to the rule and follow the rules.
That is where the system is broke. We have politicians who want to tie up every little act with a law that carries it's own special penalty. But 9 out of 10 time the penalty has nothing to do with the crime nor dose that penalty teach the perpetrator anything but how to get away with it in the future. Everything isn't as plain as people want it to be and laws do actually get in the way of justice at times. Great call by the Judge
yeah punish the child harder than a dwi offender, the original sentence was way over bounds and the cruel and unual offering went over bounds. Criminals standing in court for misdemeanors like petty theft, first time dwi, etc get less. This judge needs to be fired.
and then you guys wonder why we live in such a disfuctional society, find a kid peeing on another, punish the offending child by having him peed on in a public, recorded forum.
This judge should be sued, disbarred, and removed from office immediatly.
Richard Small I for one would be VERY happy IF you moved your liberal commie butt out of America...you are ALWAYS for the criminals ALWAYS for people who do not want to work..its sickening....why dont you hop the first boat to Europe....the land where they give child rapists new idenities to protect THEM from the public...then and only then will you be happy
no missy, I have a right to my opinion which to many of you wish to dismiss, To you the constitution is a paper waiting to be burned. And lady missy u don't know me, I might have more money than you dream of wanting while you accuse and place me in a catagorie that suits yours desire.
A guy once stood by and watched as they cme and took the catholics, he did nothing, his response was I am not catholic. They came came and took the jews, again he responded I am not a jew and did nothing. They came for all, but his response was he was not them until they came for him. He cried for help and there was noone ther to help for they had all been taken down.
Missy do not attack my person which you none of, for my opinion. Defend your position on resonable grounds that do not amount to bullying. You call me unemployed, bet I make more money than you.
Respect my opinion as I respect yours without personally attacking the opinion you disagree with. Personal attacks ona person online or physical is bullying, prove your words before you use the bully defence of insult and degrade the person I disagree with. Only then might our nation of great diversity come together to form agreements and a better nation.
Oh and Missy, I am a veteran that fought in two wars to defend your right to insult me.
Ok Richard, you know so much, you have contributed so much to this society, your opinion means more than everybody elses's. Oh wise one do tell us peons how to solve all the various crimes from deliberately planning, purchasing scisssors and lopping off a toddles hair, to theft, rape, assault, and on and on up to murder including terrorizing and murdering students in schools, that happens to be committed by juveniles every single day of every year for god only knows how long!!!! Pretty crappy way I just spoke (typed) to you isn't it?? Sound familiar???? Condesecending??? You don't have all the answers, nobody does and mores the pity cause a lot of kids these days are NOT the little innocents you might think they are!!! Things hav echanged alot since the days you grew up in IF you indeed have served in 2 wars. You might want to do some research!!!!
WOW! I can't believe some of the sh-t on here. To those of you who think the punishment was out of line, you are truly out of touch with the human capacity to inflict harm on another. This girl knew EXACTLY what she was doing and did so with premeditation. That magnifies the offense exponentially. It means there was malice aforethought and she assaulted this defenseless 3 yr. old girl with evil intent. The judge should have had her committed for a lengthy mental evaluation, and then given her 6 mos. in the girls detention. The ponytail cutting option was just one way of trying to teach a lesson. You guys compare it to DUI and theft. Hah! what a crock of sh-t. A DUI is a lapse of judgement which could potentially end in disaster, but didn't, all brought on by an addiction that nobody grows up planning to have, all because of a substance that the government pimps out to the public. Theft is a non violent crime that is indicative of weak character. This offense WAS A DELIBERATE ACT of evil with the obvious intent to do harm.
Let some piece of rotten garbage commit rape or assault on someone I love and hell yeah I'd like to see the eye for an eye right there in the courtroom. I'd even gladly be the one to step up and shove a chunk of split firewood up their a**, or take a baseball bat to their head. As a matter of fact, I might be inclined to beat them to death right in public.
This child deserves EVERY bit of what she got as well as more, and the mother needs to be evaluated as well. God only knows what she is capable of if she thought this was perfectly OK. I know I would not be comfortable with her living in my neighborhood. This offense is a serious indication of a great capacity to do evil and it needs to be crushed.
I wish more judges would hand out punishments like this one - "What's good for the goose ..." As a high school teacher, so many of these kids don't understand the ramifications of their actions, and this would be a great way of going about it. I bet this kid will never pull s**t like this again because THIS got the lesson across!
I in NO way think the girls should have cut the little girls hair but honestly... "What's good for the goose" and 'hold the mom responsible'... what if that was your 13 yr old? would you feel the same? What if they had done something really bad... would you wish that same punishment on the 13 yr old? or the mom? The world has gone crazy.... when I was growing up, if that was done, there would be no courts involved... The 13 yr old would have gotten a old fashioned butt whipping (and that was the lesson) kids respected their parents, and the 3 yr old (when she grows up) wouldn't remember that her mom was a pansy and had to spend tax payers money on a court hearing when the courts should be dealing with the child molesters, drug dealers etc... No a mom with way too much time on her hands... Who lets a 3 yr old into the bathroom unattended anyway?????
Shouldn't we be teaching our children that we seek justice, not revenge, especially in our legal system? Isn't that why we tell kids to tell an adult when they're being bullied rather that to beat up the bully? Why we tell them to walk away from a fight?
The child wasn't in the bathroom..Where did you hear that? wow, talk about running your mouth with no facts. She was in the play place, where there are many hiding places the little brats could have done this. What they did was assault plain and simple. The 3 year old was there with her grandfather, who was sitting at a table watching the play area. The 13 year old and 11 year old were unsupervised. Get your facts straight. Valarie Bruno has made a mockery of her child and herself on an international level. That is victimizing her own daughter more than the judge just letting her make the decision on the punishment.
Unfortunately, she will do this again. Not because of anything the judge did, but because she just got her mother's blessing to do whatever she wants. The mother should have been disciplining her daughter (even on top of what the judge did) instead of complaining about cutting the hair. I'm not usually one to blame the parents right away. I think in this day, peers have almost if not more influence. But this mother clearly handled it badly.
The 3 yo got a chance to see that people are punished for the wrongs they do if the problem is bought to the attention of an authority that has the power to empathise within the law. This is a juvinile court so there is a lot of leeway in meeting out punishment. Personally, I think that confinement in juvie hall till the first day of school in the fall (with her parents billed for her food and keep) and then community service on Friday and Saturday from 4PM till 7PM, along with the hair chop in court would do more to keep the 13 yo out of trouble for at least 1 year.
Claudine, this was JUVENILE COURT. So no I don't think there were any rapist or child molesters in there unless they were juvenile ones. Secondly, what this girl and her friend did to this 3 yr old was assault. Do you understand that? They had no right to do what they did to this child and the fact that the 13 yr old has some other serious charges in front of her is really disturbing. I read this story this morning on the original site. There is more to this than what has been reported here. This young lady has some really serious issues and the sooner they deal with it the better.
You can collapse Styro's comment, but "Should of" still makes no grammatical sense. People who use it show they have no real grasp of the basic conventions of the English language.
So Vince, have you nothng better to do than be an accomplice to perfect writng nazi's??? Come on now!!! Is this story about the general public's spelling, punctuation, grammer...the basic conventions of the English language etc... OR...is it about the incident described in the article itself??? Gee, guess what Vince it happens to be the latter!!!! Please get a life!!!!! Or maybe just stick to the topic????
I'd have asked the judge if he had clippers to make the haircut really short. I prefer the odds that the kid would actually learn from that before they end up dealing with worse in the boot camps for teens or prison as an adult.
As I mentioned above, "eye for an eye/what's good for the goose" doesn't apply to all situations, and this girl's threatening someone else with rape and mutilation tells me she was already headed for worse and I see immediate action like the judge's as giving her a chance to adjust her attitude before she acts on such threats and has far worse consequences for herself and others.
yup, this 13 year old is surely going to have respect for the wisdom of the law. She didn't get it here, but she's learned that it can impose brutality on her in the public square. time will tell what she learned.
what this imposed was an early teaching to our youth of contempt against the judicial system for its unfair sentencing. Not to mention this one was cruel and unusual, a sentence the courts are forbidden to declare in offence to the exact woding of the bill of rights in the constitution.
When you punish a kid worse than you do an adult violator of the law you creating an enviroment for our youth to contempt law and its order as justice is applied unequal. this 11 year old was sentenced to 30 days while a first time dwi gets a suspended 30 days? yep you guys make our youth wonder wtf?
Richard (although I know my time is clearly wasted on you) but do you not think that the 11 and 13 y/o girls asking the mcdonalds staff for scissors and being told no, then going to the dollar store next door, buying scissors and coming back to the mcds play area to cut the little girls hair was cruel and unusal ? The little girls hair was down to the middle of her back. What part of any of that is NOT cruel and unusal ?? Please tell me...I am waiting...still waiting....why the heck are you ALWAYS for the criminals rights over the victims???
Oh Missy go to the courtroom and watch the dwi defender walk free with no time, go watch the other sentences handed out to adults, while you applauld a judicial sentence handed upon a child. Cruel and Unusual punishment is how I define it. While I respect your opininion and will regress from insulting you, you owe me an apology for insulting me by calling me terms I am not in previous threads. I respect your opinion, you should respect other folks opinions, Lets see you called me a veteran of two wars a commie, who elses opinion you suppressing with your insults and personal attacks? Its called bullying!
Richard you sure go on and on about DWI cases in courts. Your right, they don't get as much punishment as sometimes might fit the action. I know. My grandmother was killed by a drunk driver, hit and run, died instantly, when I was 13. Perpatrator of this crime was 15 and his 2 buddies riding along in the truck stolen from the drivers older bro were 15 and 16. They really didn't get any consequences and that was in 1973. I sure wish this judge and been sitting in the courtroom those punks sat in. Maybe they would have suffered some REAL consequences!!!!!!!!! My family NEVER got even an apology from any of those sweet, precious, innocent little boys for murdering my grandmother!!! WE HAVE TO STOMP ON KIDS WHEN THEY ARE YOUNG!!! THEY HAVE TO KNOW THERE ARE CONSEQUENCES FOR THEIR ACTIONS!!! HAS IT OCCURED TO YOU RICHARD THAT YOU DRIVE RIGHT FROM WRONG IN TO PEOPLE WHEN YOUNG THEY JUST MIGHT NOT BE ADULT OFFENDERS????????????
I agree let the mother of the 3 year old cut the 13 year old brats hair! This is the beginning of bullying and the 13 year old's mother is defending her. I would suggest she wear her ass out - and quit making excuses.
Next time in court it might be for something far, far worse...animal mutilation. arson or sexual abuse of an younger child. Warning signs are too often ignored. This mother of the 13 year old doesn't get it. Not at all.
Shave her head would be a better punishment.
just shaved the top and let the sides...like a bad mullet...call it a skullet...
Jezzzzzzz i'm glad it was hair she cut off. wonder what he would have ordered if she had cut her arm?
What the saying " An eye for an eye will leave the whole world blind "
Shut your liberal, enabling ass up. It is people like you, who tolerate the idiocy of the world, that allows it to continue.
WELL SAID, Ripklawe!!!
aaaand Ripklawe just dissed a quote by Gandhi. Therefore Ripklawe should have his lips sewn shut till he learns that everyone has a right to speak.
You were close Charles. "Intelligent" people have the right to speak. Stupid people don't. Are you an enabler as well? We keep letting the inmates run the asylum and pretty soon, there are no decent people, just babbling morons. Also, could you point out the quote by Gandhi? I am not familiar with it and would love to see how I "dissed" the quote.
People like ripklawe probably proclaim themselves to be Christians while ignoring that Jesus spoke against an "eye for an eye." What exactly is this punishment of getting her hair cut teaching the girl? That if someone does something to you, you can do it right back to them? Making the girl do community service in a cancer ward where people are losing their hair not by choice or any other type of community service would be the better punishment. Detention is also fine. But, ordering to get her hair cut? Hair grows back, so hardly a punishment and it is not teaching her anything other than you can make a deal to get a lighter sentence which is what happened here since 150 hours of community service were taken off.
Nope, I am agnostic at best but that is not the issue at hand here and really has no place in this discussion. The issue is this:
There are too many people having children who are not prepared to make the hard choices when it comes to raising that child. Quit being a friend to your children and start being parents.
Erin, I am assuming you have a child since you have posted in this discussion. If you don't, please leave because you have no credentials to speak on the topic. However, if you do, I bet you put that child in "time out". All time out's do is teach a child how to be an inmate in prison.
Rainier - Well another idiot heard from. You like axiom, are a good example of what isn't needed in this world today. Sometimes you should just shut your mouth and keep your 2 cents worth to yourself.
You could go that way about it, but I could also say the full sentence probably wouldn't have affected the girl either. The report says she was already in trouble for threatening to rape and mutilate someone. It is very likely that someone who is making such threats will not be affected by the original sentence. However, having her hair cut in the court, with everyone watching, would be a more humiliating experience for her. Humiliation tends to teach better lessons then simply sitting in a juvenile detention center.
Now, I will agree that in a number of situations that an "eye for an eye" will indeed "leave the world blind." However, in situations like this, I think punishments like these can be very effective in teaching a child that their actions have consequences. She cut a 3-year old girl's hair because she thought it was probably funny, so she has to pay the price and have her hair cut in a court room. A a juvenile judge, Johansen's job is to make sure he stops behaviors this 13-year old is showing before they become worse.
Nor is it the place for your stereotypical name calling. If people don't think like you do, they are liberal enablers, as well as being part of the "you people" group, correct?
I guess it makes it easier to condemn others when you don't have to look at them as individuals. Just lump them into a little group for you to hate, correct?
Your Internet search engine down for repairs? Don't call me an enabler now for your own laziness to do a search yourself. This is just the link at the top of the search. There are 16,300,000 more if you do not like the link I provided.
Clearly you do know anything about him, or his philosophy, or you would not have replied like you did.
http://www.quotationspage.com/quotes/Mahatma_Gandhi/
You should stop right there. That's all you have done here. One assumption and insult after another.
Should we all get back to you to show you our credentials to be able to post in the places we choose to?
What's that? People that don't share your same view points? People that know cutting the hair will have far less impact than serving the full 276 hours?
Seriously, what example are you talking about? I know the answer, but am seeing if you will own up to your "if I don't agree with it, you're an idiot" mentality.
Well NYMike,
It seems "Rip" has fizzled out...............sort of like a bad fart.
Ripklawe said:
Thereby destroying his own point at the same time he's trying to make it because, by saying that, he's just proven his own stupidity.
Unfortunately Ripklaw, even stupid people like you can say whatever they want.
the mother should have her hair cut also , think she just does not get it ...your daughter is a problem child...
i
the ole say'n... i like best....here's mud in your eye...
Mollycoddling criminals doesn't STOP offenders from committing crimes. Most of the time it seems to condone it and cause reoffending.
Axiom, you were quoting Ghandi. Heard of "spare the rod spoil the child"??
Ripklawe, don't do this. You're suspended for a week for violating #1 of the Code of Honor.
...
Charles Ranier-2718823, drbach, Hoodie-2290570, you're eachsuspended for a day for violating #1 of the Code of Honor.
...
If you feel the urge to censor someone else on Newsvine, try clicking 'ignore' on their account - or logging off.
i like the hair cut with lawnmower idea
go for it...
He should have also made her go to a rape counseling center where she could be talked to by victims of rape and rape counseling staff.
Ludicrous. I'd rather she have gotten the full sentencing. Now what? She gets some hair cut off in the courtroom and goes to a salon later to get it made pretty. Big whoop. She's obviously a disturbed kid and the judge should have been more concerned with requiring psychological treatment than with showboating for reporters. We, the taxpayers, are just going to be dealing with her issues later otherwise.
Ah, but you discount the benefit this has for the 3 year old. The judge gave her justice.
No, David Taylor, the judge gave her revenge.
All of these posters gleefully cheering the judge on need to learn the difference.
She's still going to serve community service. Do you really think the first 126 hours will not teach her but the next 150 will? To be honest I think if it were just the hair, her sentence was way too severe. But along with the threats, I think the judge should have given her exactly what he did, but added psych counseling.
Actually, yeah, I do LA99999. She clearly lacks structure in her life, and a longer period of community service would help to provide that. The more ingrained it becomes, the better.
Septik..
It's plain to see that you haven't had children and you probably had a tough childhood. It isn't about revenge for the 3 yo; It's about that child realizing she doesn't have to be afraid of people because there is somebody available to watch out for her, even though her mother left her unattended in a public place.
Jrz,
The community-service-only approach could just as likely teach her to just be more selective in choosing her victims and intimidate the ones she does choose into remaining silent. It does nothing to give her any actual sense of what she did or how it affects her victim.
The judge gave an option to her and her mother and they chose the haircut. They could have just as easily let the regular sentence stand if they saw the haircut option as unreasonable.
The only difference between Revenge and Justice is the is one is doled out by an individual and the other is doled out by the courts.
There were NO reporters about until AFTER the sentencing when the prissy sissy of a mom called them looking for her 15 minutes of fame!!!!!!!!
She'd like to claim that she was "intimidated" by the judge and thought she "had" to do what he suggested. I think she hears the sound "cha CHING"!!!!!" Hope no court is stupid enough to let this twit cash in on this!!!!!!
I know that if I had cut someone's hair when I was 13 and the judge gave my mom this option, she would have said "no, let him do the community service." Then when we got home she would have cut my hair herself, badly and taken away all my hats.
So, the mother is complaining because she regrets her decision? It was the better decision, as this will teach the teen a far more important lesson and may change her future behavior. Apparently, mom doesn't get it. If she had, the teen probably wouldn't have been in this situation in the first place.
timhood
but there are no appearances on TV and promises of cash if the mother sticks to her agreement with the judge...small wonder the 13 year old has displayed serious bullying issues...now mom is trying to bully the judge...hope no one lets her get a penny for her "flip flopping", bad parenting decisions
The fact that the judge has discretionary powers isn't "cruel and unusual". The fact that he offered to reduce the community service for the cost of a haircut is neither "cruel and unusual", criminal nor cause for dismissal. And if mom had followed the other mother's cue, her daughter would have had her hair cut in a salon. Instead she humiliated both her and her daughter in and out of court. She brought this on herself. This may be the first time she didn't like her daughter's sentencing. But it won't be the last. Not by a long shot. Her lawyer should remain on retainer. This woman and her child will make sure she's a client for his entire career.
Well said 1POV!!! Nicely done!!!!
The tramps are getting younger and younger
At 13 years old, cutting her hair will impact her much more than the community service. I say the judge done good.
I smell a "cruel and unusual punishment" lawsuit coming right up. I hope it goes where it belongs; the mother didn't have to accept the offer.
"Cruel and unusual punishment"...here comes that pesky old Constitution again, which expressly forbids it.
Highly unlikely. Thirteen year old girls change their fashion like the changing of the day. Short hair, long hair, short hair with extensions, long hair pinned up etc...
If she likes her new hairstyle, then what? Over half her sentence removed for nothing. This offer should have never been made. She should have been made to do all 276 hours.
For a teen to be talking about rape and mutilations, losing a pony tail should have never even been considered as an option, or any type of priority. On top of the 276 hours, she should have been mandated to have a mental evaluation done.
Instead, she loses a little hair, which she will get over in a few days, and only has to serve 126 hours of her 276 hour sentence.
Guess it was a half off justice day in that court room.
Exactly, NYMike, she sounds severely emotionally disturbed. And really, she's unlikely to care about her haircut for very long - short hair is no big deal. The judge was entirely illogical.
So, you smell a suit for cruel and unusual punishment ... Send the thirteen year old with her mother to an Islamic country and ask the authouities there to allow them to observe a stoning of some poor, uneducated and likely undeserving property (person) of the court ... The thirteen year old and Mom would rush home to accept their "just dues" in a heart beat ... Don't you think ? ...
I didn't say I thought it was a good idea. I just think mom's lawyer shopping as we type.
aeduko I agree 101%
The hair-cut in court will be remembered by that girl for the rest of her life. As it should.
I suspect that the Rape and mutilation case has different plaintiffs and is scheduled for another date so this judge was just dealing with the assault on a 3 yr old. This 13 yr old obviously has some serious mental issues and desperately needs therapy as does the mother and rest of their family. Teens are more susceptible to public embarrassment than most usual adult type punishments. The kid who has been in juvie is now "tough and worldly" and something of a celebrity. Same with community service, just more fodder to belittle those they were supposed to be helping or guards watching over them cleaning parks or along the highway. This should never have had to go to court, in fact it shouldn't have happened in the first place. The teen's mother should have been a real parent and authority figure. She should have yanked her up short right at the time this happened!
I am not a fan of foster care but if the teen's mother can't wise up and realize that she has a budding serial killer type developing in her daughter perhaps the girl would be better in a foster home that specializes in this type of troubled youth.
The same could be said about her not shaping up after the community service.
At least there's a chance that any regrets she has looking in the mirror over the next few months will make this a lesson that sticks more than another 150 hours of griping about community service.
Mom can be mad but you cannot sue a judge for their decision. I had seen a man serve 30 days chained to a doghouse because he mistreated and abused his dog(He was turned in by his wife). The punishment fit the crime. All you can do is appeal.
Not really. I raised two girls and hair styles were one thing that changed all the time with them.
The suck factor will be greater serving the nearly 300 hours. Also, most sentences like this do make teens think twice. While her friends are having a good time, she will be cleaning up parks.
What do you think a teen will like less? Shorter hair for a couple of months or losing an entire summer to trash duty?
why was a 3 year old alone at McDonald's?????
She wasn't alone. She was there with her grandfather who was seated watching the play area. I have played in that same area when I was a kid. There are many hiding spots where parents cannot see what is going on inside. Get your facts straight. It was the 11 year old and 13 year old that was alone.
On the one hand we have a totally deficient parent that doesn't believe her child did anything wrong. On the other hand we have a child that has been taught that it is ok to be abusive to others.
I say, the Judge should have ordered sterilization for both the mom and kid and break the chain of stupidity.
LOL, I love it! You go, John!
rotflmao. i endorse this!
Hahahahahaahahahhahahahaha.............GREAT note, John! The mother of the 13 year old is a dumb ass with no clue!!
Excellent idea!!! Unfortunately, under current laws it probably would be cruel and unusual punsihment. Perhaps some laws should be implemented in that type of direction though!!!(sarc..sort of! lol)
I think that is a really excellent idea. Wants to go to a beauty shop, bah-humbug. The little 3 year old didn't get a beauty shop hair cut. Should have cut that Mama's hair off, too, for not supporting a just punishment!
why was a 3 year old alone at McDonald's????
That is an assumption. If the 3 year old was in the play tunnels, the mom could not have got in there to stop it in time. The mother must have called the police because it was all she could do....
The child was there with her grandfather. He was seated watching the play area. He didn't notice till after the fact. The child's 8 year old brother helped to identify the 13 and 11 year old, along with security cameras.
Bethie keep setting them straight on who was there with the 3 yr old and how the 11 and 13 yr old were able to do what they did.
Siri, why were an 11 and 13 year old alone and un-supervised at McDonald's, apparently with a pair of scissors?
Siri, you're an embarrasment to reading comprehension.
mom keep your mouth shut she got what she needed a lesson
The judge should have ordered the older girls to donate their hair to Locks of Love, which benefits kids who've lost their own hair due to chemotherapy. That would have been worth a world of community service.
Excellent Idea, Warren - though I doubt there was much love in those locks.
If this girl was making threatening phone calls it sounds like she has mental problems which will just be made worse by cutting her hair. I think she should be in intense therapy for a while and her case reviewed. If her behavior continues then more steps need to be taken later before she really hurts someone.
Locks of Love actually sells most of the donated hair they receive.
I have a friend who regularly donates her hair. It's no big deal to her that it may be sold, as the cost of making wigs must be covered somehow; the cut hair simply isn't glued on to the bald girls' heads. Either way, it's helping other children. Donating hair is easier for her than donating money, due to her family's finances.
Logical is correct. Locks of Love has nothing to do with creating wigs for cancer patients. They make wigs for children who suffer from alopecia. Oprah got that mistake started on her television show and it's never been corrected in the minds of America.
You heard it here, folks. I've suffered through many steaming Florida summers to donate to Locks of Love but never again. Pantene or The American Cancer Society will get my next hair donation. I don't go through all this trouble to have my hair sold to pay salaries to run a non-profit.
There are many other companies that will use your hair donation rather than sell it.
wow, the woman who took this to court must be an over privileged fool. Your kid got picked on, deal with it. have some compassion for the tortured kid who did it, instead of putting her in the awful legal system. the "victim's" mother's deed was much worse than that of the bullying kid. shame.
@LauraMM - Oh really??? Just look at the perp and her mother! The perp's mother is a much a bully as the perp. She's now looking for some form of retribution for her daughter's punishment from the court, a punishment IN WHICH SHE ACTUALLY AGREED TO PARTCIPATE. On top of that, the perp's assault, battery and physical harm to a 3-year-old child is NOT trivial. This kind of abuse of a 3-year-old can lead to life-long trauma over the assault and battery. Given the perp's other behaviors that include threats of sexual assault and bodily harm to others, it borders on not being enough.