School Vandelized

[Babyblue]

MyFox Tampa Bay | Vandals damage school

This really bugs me due to I live in this small town of Wauchula. It is ridiculous that two 15 year old "so called gang members" or "actual gang members"... No actual comments been made yet. Just pisses me off that a few years ago this town was peaceful until the gangs started popping up in this rural area. I guess no town or community is immune to gangs. I see graffiti on bridges, walls, electric substations, just about anywhere. The gang related crime rates went up.

I hope these boys get the book thrown at them by the judge. I feel more arrest on gang members need to be made. This also means that gang members spraying graffiti, or simply being a known member of a violent gang should be a felony.

IT IS NOT JUST A PHASE it is VIOLENCE towards our community.

 

[authentic]

I wish I could do the permanent graffiti on those gangsters house, cars, clothes, and their valuable things. They are just destroying the beautiful, and natural world for fun.
I saw group of gang kids did the graffiti on the ambulance, churches, etc. Why would they do that? Ambulance is to save the people's life, and they are destroying them. Gangsters are full of pea-brains.

 

[Babyblue]

Exactly. They are destroying the education of children. Hilltop School in Hardee county is an Elementary and Jr High combined. I can imagine how the children feel since their school and place of education has been violated...meaning they have been violated. These teen should be charged on an account of each child that attends to that school.

 

[Berry]

These teen should be charged on an account of each child that attends to that school.

Now that is an interesting idea. Charging people on how many they hurt rather than simply on the crime committed. Each victim counted as a separate crime.

 

[RedFox]

I wonder if those kids even go to that school. If they do, make them sit by the broken window and be cold unless they pay for them to be fixed. It's also stupid to empty out the fire extinguishers. What if those are needed for fighting small fires before they get out of control? If they go to that school, they could've caused themselves to get burned up.

Why spray tags? It's not like everybody knows that it's your symbol. Spreading your your identity in this anonymous manner isn't as rewarding as doing something with your name on it, like writing a book. I'm sure those people would go nuts if their homes and any cars they get are tagged.

They haven't developed the ability to put themselves into others' shoes and should be sent to counselors to help them with that before they become immature adults.

 

[Babyblue]

Now that is an interesting idea. Charging people on how many they hurt rather than simply on the crime committed. Each victim counted as a separate crime.

Maybe it will hinder some criminals from committing a crime as such, to charge them in that manner. It may seem harsh to some people, but if that happens then they will look at it... as if it is "worth it"

 

[Berry]

Some people consider any form of punishment cruel, no matter how henious the crime.

I personally believe our response to crime should be effective and the victim should be considered vital to the equation. (Our current justice system tends to punish those who need help and help those who need punishment and the victim is considered to be nothing more than another piece of evidence).

 

[Babyblue]

Some people consider any form of punishment cruel, no matter how henious the crime.

I personally believe our response to crime should be effective and the victim should be considered vital to the equation. (Our current justice system tends to punish those who need help and help those who need punishment and the victim is considered to be nothing more than another piece of evidence).

Agreed.... criminals get rewarded for attorneys that can be appointed to them if they can not afford one... What about the victims. Would a free attorney be appointed to them?

It is just how they want to protect the criminals rights...What about the rights of the victims...

 

[jillio]

Some people consider any form of punishment cruel, no matter how henious the crime.

I personally believe our response to crime should be effective and the victim should be considered vital to the equation. (Our current justice system tends to punish those who need help and help those who need punishment and the victim is considered to be nothing more than another piece of evidence).

Too true!

 

[jillio]

Agreed.... criminals get rewarded for attorneys that can be appointed to them if they can not afford one... What about the victims. Would a free attorney be appointed to them?

It is just how they want to protect the criminals rights...What about the rights of the victims...

Under our criminal justice system, the victims are given free legal representation via the district attorney's office. The DA is responsible for the prosecution of crimes. I don't think anyone could consider a public defender as a "reward". A person is much more likely to be incarcerated with representaion from a public defender than representation from a privately retained attorney. Alsao, under our system, a person is considered innocent until proven guilty. For that to occur, they must go through the justice system. To refuse legal representation to someone simply being accused of a crime, would be, under our system, to refuse due process to someone who has yet to be proven guilty.

 

[Babyblue]

Under our criminal justice system, the victims are given free legal representation via the district attorney's office. The DA is responsible for the prosecution of crimes. I don't think anyone could consider a public defender as a "reward". A person is much more likely to be incarcerated with representaion from a public defender than representation from a privately retained attorney. Alsao, under our system, a person is considered innocent until proven guilty. For that to occur, they must go through the justice system. To refuse legal representation to someone simply being accused of a crime, would be, under our system, to refuse due process to someone who has yet to be proven guilty.

That you... That is why I put that under a question mark

What about the victims. Would a free attorney be appointed to them?

I was not really sure of that one.

I do believe in due process...innocent til proven guilty.

But these kids were caught on tape. are they innocent? Guilty as the eye can see. Yet they will have due process. of course it is the right thing to do.

What about the children. Their rights were taken away. They have to go to school everyday knowing that the school was trashed.

 

[jillio]

That you... That is why I put that under a question mark


I was not really sure of that one.

I do believe in due process...innocent til proven guilty.

But these kids were caught on tape. are they innocent? Guilty as the eye can see. Yet they will have due process. of course it is the right thing to do.

What about the children. Their rights were taken away. They have to go to school everyday knowing that the school was trashed.

I agree with you. The children who attended that school are victims. I hope that the school sets up some sort of a program that will allow these kids to talk about and process their feelings about this so they can deal with the fear and the doubt and the anger that this is bound to have created for them. Likewise, after the case goes to trial, it would be a good idea for these kids to be given the opportunity to talk about their feelings regarding the punishment these boys will receive. This could be an ideal opportunity to not only help them through the feelings this has created, but to use it as a learning experience and proactive way to address good decision making and the consequences of bad decision making.

Unfortunately, our legal system does not provide for that sort of thing, and it is left to the school counselor to design and initiate the program. We can hope that this school has a progressive counselor that not only focuses on the negative, but uses the negative as a way to teach some valuable, positive lessons to the student body. I see that as the best possible outcome.

 

[Berry]

Agreed.... criminals get rewarded for attorneys that can be appointed to them if they can not afford one... What about the victims. Would a free attorney be appointed to them?

It is just how they want to protect the criminals rights...What about the rights of the victims...

Under our criminal justice system, the victims are given free legal representation via the district attorney's office. The DA is responsible for the prosecution of crimes. I don't think anyone could consider a public defender as a "reward". A person is much more likely to be incarcerated with representaion from a public defender than representation from a privately retained attorney. Alsao, under our system, a person is considered innocent until proven guilty. For that to occur, they must go through the justice system. To refuse legal representation to someone simply being accused of a crime, would be, under our system, to refuse due process to someone who has yet to be proven guilty.

Viewed this way, yes. But let us pause and view Babyblue's comment from a slightly different angle, and this may be what Babyblue meant:

The victim(s) should have rights they do not have, even if they can afford the highest paid attorney in the land. (Did you know at one time in the US you could hire an expensive attorney to help the prosecutor win their case?) When I was a child you could go to the DA's office and ask for advice if you were poor. (Now you cannot on the grounds the DA may have to prosecute the matter and may be giving advice that is detrimental to its own case.)

Those victims that cannot afford an attorney should have access to free legal advice to assist them with whatever rights they do have. For instance many victims do not understand civil law or even what the term "civil law" means, and are not aware they can pursue damages in court, let alone how to collect the award once given.

 

[jillio]

Viewed this way, yes. But let us pause and view Babyblue's comment from a slightly different angle, and this may be what Babyblue meant:

The victim(s) should have rights they do not have, even if they can afford the highest paid attorney in the land. (Did you know at one time in the US you could hire an expensive attorney to help the prosecutor win their case?) When I was a child you could go to the DA's office and ask for advice if you were poor. (Now you cannot on the grounds the DA may have to prosecute the matter and may be giving advice that is detrimental to its own case.)

Those victims that cannot afford an attorney should have access to free legal advice to assist them with whatever rights they do have. For instance many victims do not understand civil law or even what the term "civil law" means, and are not aware they can pursue damages in court, let alone how to collect the award once given.

What about victim advocates? Isn't it their responsibility to keep victims informed of their rights? I agree with you that the system does not function very well in regard to actual results. However, the system does have procedures on place that are, theoretically designed to assist victims. I was simply explaining the intent of system. Actual function and results is a whole 'nother subject. Theoretically, legal aid is there as well, to provide victims with legal represenation and advise when an attorney cannot be retained due to financial reasons. Do these systems function optimally? No, of course not. But then, neither does the system function optimally from the perspective of the accused. I think you will see in the later part of my post, I stated that the legal system did not provide for assistance for the kids that can be considered the truevictims in this particular case, and that it was unfortunate that such services would be left to the discretion of the school counselor. You would better be able to comment on this than I, but I don't think that civil action is even a possibility in this particular case. Correct me if I am wrong.