13-Year-Old Middle School Student Suspended for ‘Pranking’ - Page 4

runningdude · #46 Feb 21, '12, 12:50 pm

Reflecting on this a tiny bit (I work in a school, so thinking about these issues is both an academic and practical exercise

), its possible we are not getting the whole story.

We are reading this story from the perspective of the kid's defense attorney, who's job is to portray the kid in the most favorable light possible (in this case, as a victim). Since school disciplinary records are for the most part confidential, we don't know if this is a first time incident, or if there have been any previous incidents that would make transferring the student to the alternative program a logical escalation of consequences. It certainly wouldn't be the defense attorney's role to publicize the aggravating factors.

Basically, we truly don't know if this was a "one-time" prank, or if its the prank that broke the school-marm's back. A thought to keep in mind before condemning the school's response.

sedonaman · #47 Feb 21, '12, 1:42 pm

Quote:

Originally Posted by runningdude

...Basically, we truly don't know if this was a "one-time" prank, or if its the prank that broke the school-marm's back. A thought to keep in mind before condemning the school's response.

You know what? Murderers, robbers, rapists, serial killers, kidnapers, gang-bangers, and other hardened felons get a better break than that. Juries are not allowed to consider their past convictions.

**pnewton** · #48 Feb 22, '12, 4:28 am

Quote:

Originally Posted by sedonaman

You know what? Murderers, robbers, rapists, serial killers, kidnapers, gang-bangers, and other hardened felons get a better break than that. Juries are not allowed to consider their past convictions.

In Texas, they are. What makes you think that juries can not consider past convictions?

runningdude · #49 Feb 22, '12, 4:39 am

Quote:

Originally Posted by sedonaman

You know what? Murderers, robbers, rapists, serial killers, kidnapers, gang-bangers, and other hardened felons get a better break than that. Juries are not allowed to consider their past convictions.

??? Of course juries are allowed to consider past convictions in most cases.

sedonaman · #50 Feb 22, '12, 9:54 am

Quote:

Originally Posted by pnewton

In Texas, they are. What makes you think that juries can not consider past convictions?

A past conviction is not evidence of guilt of a current charge.

**pnewton** · #51 Feb 22, '12, 2:11 pm

Quote:

Originally Posted by sedonaman

A past conviction is not evidence of guilt of a current charge.

No one said it was. What I said is that past convictions can be brought up in a trial. LIkewise, disciplinary history at a school can help determine the best course of punishment on a subsequent infraction.

sedonaman · #52 Feb 22, '12, 2:29 pm

Quote:

Originally Posted by pnewton

No one said it was. What I said is that past convictions can be brought up in a trial. LIkewise, disciplinary history at a school can help determine the best course of punishment on a subsequent infraction.

You asked,

Quote:

Originally Posted by pnewton

... What makes you think that juries can not consider past convictions?

The fact that a past conviction not proving guilt in a current prosecution is what made me think it, although I also think most juries of one's peers probably think it does.

**pnewton** · #53 Feb 23, '12, 5:18 am

Quote:

Originally Posted by sedonaman

You asked,

The fact that a past conviction not proving guilt in a current prosecution is what made me think it, although I also think most juries of one's peers probably think it does.

I see. Well the past convictions can be brought up. While it does not prove anything, it is evidence of the character of the person and can greatly affect sentencing. Likewise the defense can bring forth character witnesses, that provide no direct evidence of the crime.

This line started because we do not know the whole history of this student, yet are saying (some here are saying) that it was too harsh. The boy's history is germaine to the response.

sedonaman · #54 Feb 23, '12, 6:22 am

Quote:

Originally Posted by pnewton

I see. Well the past convictions can be brought up. While it does not prove anything, it is evidence of the character of the person and can greatly affect sentencing. Likewise the defense can bring forth character witnesses, that provide no direct evidence of the crime.

I agree that it could affect punishment, but my point was it does not necessarily indicate guilt

Quote:

This line started because we do not know the whole history of this student, yet are saying (some here are saying) that it was too harsh. ...

The reason I come down hard on the school is because, at work, I have observed that "zero tolerance" policies always end up the same way: persecuting everyone. In fact, they should be called “intend to persecute” policies. They are inevitably applied to absurd situations that make administrations look like they don’t know what they are doing, which they probably don’t. [I am reminded of the “no red or green lights” policy in schools at Christmas time, but blue lights were OK. Guess what the color of Advent is.] Making the school administration look like the fools they are is perhaps the real reason the student was punished.