http://abcnews.go.com/blogs/headlines/2012/11/ohio-man-sentenced-to-one-month-for-teasing-disabled-girl/
QuoteOhio Man Sentenced to One Month After Teasing Disabled Girl
An Ohio man faces one month of jail time for teasing and taunting a 1o-year-old girl with cerebral palsy after a video of the incident went viral.
On Nov. 27, Judge John A. Poulos of the Canton Municipal Court sentenced 43-year-old William Bailey to 29 days in jail.
The taunting occurred on Sept. 26, when Tricia Knight and her mother-in-law were waiting for her children's bus to return from school. Knight's three children, including 10-year-old Hope, attend Walker Elementary with Bailey's 9-year-old son, Joseph.
What happened next was caught on an iPod camera by Knight's mother-in-law, Marie Prince.
William Bailey "was dragging his leg and patting his arm across his chest to pick his son Joseph up," said Knight. "I asked him to please stop doing this. 'My daughter can see you.' He then told his son to walk like the R-word."
The next day Knight posted the video on her Facebook page while Prince uploaded the video they called "Bus Stop Ignorance" to YouTube. Within days, the video went viral.
The Knight family has lived next door to the Baileys for the past two years, and the incident at the bus stop, according to Knight, is the culmination of rising tensions and intimidation against her kids.
In the days that followed the taunting at the bus stop, the Knight family filed a complaint with Canton City prosecutors.
Jennifer Fitzsimmons, the chief assistant city prosecutor for this case, says in the three years she's been in this role, she's never seen anything like this.
"I think when we look at cases, there's case law out there regarding people commenting and gesturing against race and religion. But when there's nothing out there regarding disabilities, it took me a little bit longer to come to a decision."
After Fitzsimmons reviewed the Knight family's complaint, a police report based on a phone call from the Knight family, and the video captured by Prince, she decided to press charges.
"It was settled without Hope having to relive what she saw and how it impacted her," said Fitzsimmons. "I think the trial could have been just as traumatic as the event itself."
Bailey, who works as a truck driver, was charged twice. He was originally charged for aggravated menacing, a misdemeanor of the first degree. In this charge, the victim was Knight, an incident she says took place the same day as the bus stop scene.
Bailey, she said, "was swinging a tow chain on his porch, saying he was going to choke me until I stopped twitching. I sent my kids with my mother-in-law to leave with them. My husband called the sheriff."
In Ohio, a menacing charge is a misdemeanor fourth degree, which carries a maximum of 30 days in jail.
The second original charge, for the bus stop incident, was disorderly conduct, a misdemeanor of the fourth degree. A disorderly conduct is a minor misdemeanor and carries no jail time.
Although Bailey's sentencing technically reflects the charges brought by his actions toward Knight, Hope's mother, Fitzsimmons explains how the plea deal enabled the sentence to cover his actions toward Hope.
"Because the menacing misdemeanor charge was directed toward Hope's mother, and they're all interrelated, the judge took into account all the actions of Mr. Bailey and the entire Holcomb family," said Fitzsimmons.
Bailey "entered a plea of 'no contest' to a menacing charge and to disorderly conduct," said Fitzsimmons. His sentence will go into effect on Jan. 2.
Judge Poulos required Bailey to pay $400 in court costs as well as other fees. He was given a credit for one day which is why his sentence is 29 days and not the maximum 30.
Following the Nov. 27 hearing, Bailey's attorney, John R. Giua, released a statement and apology on Bailey's behalf, according to the The Repository, an online newspaper for Stark County, Ohio.
"I don't think this sentence will change things because it hasn't so far," said Knight.
Knight says living next door to the Baileys affects their everyday lives.
Just last summer, said Knight, 9-year-old Joseph Bailey came over to play with Knight's children and brought over a pocket knife, threatening to "cut [Hope] up," followed by name calling. That harassment continued into the school year.
Since the bus stop incident, Knight has spoken with the bus driver and the school's principal. Knight now drives Hope to school every day while her other two children ride another bus to school.
Hope was born 29 weeks premature after Knight was involved in a head-on auto collision. When she was born, Hope weighed only two pounds, 12 ounces, which caused several medical problems resulting in two brain surgeries. Knight says her daughter fought for her life the first two years.
As for whether this case presents a new precedent in Ohio is another debate.
"I don't know if it sets a precedent so much maybe as it begins a conversation between people," said Fitzsimmons. "I think conversation starts progress, and I think if it can bring something else to light, it would be good."
R-word? Republican? :hmm:
Close, it's a synonym.
In the minds of...
That is fucking ridiculous. The public menacing charge I can understand, but honestly, the disorderly conduct charge is, well, fucking retarded.
It sounds a bit more serious than just teasing that disabled girl. Threatening the choke somebody with a chain is the deal here.
Quote from: Valmy on November 29, 2012, 08:37:03 AM
It sounds a bit more serious than just teasing that disabled girl. Threatening the choke somebody with a chain is the deal here.
Doesn't make for a fun headline or frothing though. :(
Quote from: Scipio on November 29, 2012, 08:36:56 AM
That is fucking ridiculous. The public menacing charge I can understand, but honestly, the disorderly conduct charge is, well, fucking retarded.
Being the police officer's catch-all that it is, I'd have thought that 90% of the time disorderly conduct charges are fucking retarded.
Quote from: Scipio on November 29, 2012, 08:36:56 AM
That is fucking ridiculous. The public menacing charge I can understand, but honestly, the disorderly conduct charge is, well, fucking retarded.
Oh, now the prosecutor is doing it too! Leave the retards alone.
Quote from: Scipio on November 29, 2012, 08:36:56 AM
That is fucking ridiculous. The public menacing charge I can understand, but honestly, the disorderly conduct charge is, well, fucking retarded.
I think you read the title of thread rather than the actual article. The charge was based on a threat to the mother. As part of the Plea deal the Judge could take into consideration all the surrounding events including his actions toward the daughter.
fyi here is the threat that was made:
QuoteBailey, she said, "was swinging a tow chain on his porch, saying he was going to choke me until I stopped twitching
Anybody seen Ed today?
Quote from: katmai on November 29, 2012, 05:31:12 PM
Anybody seen Ed today?
Couldn't possibly be Ed. The guy sounds far too active for him.
Quote from: merithyn on November 29, 2012, 05:36:07 PM
Quote from: katmai on November 29, 2012, 05:31:12 PM
Anybody seen Ed today?
Couldn't possibly be Ed. The guy sounds far too active for him.
Okay sugar tits, you are locked into the targeting computer.
Quote from: Ed Anger on November 29, 2012, 05:36:48 PM
Okay sugar tits, you are locked into the targeting computer.
Bring it, candy dick. :D
Quote from: Ed Anger on November 29, 2012, 05:36:08 PM
Quote from: katmai on November 29, 2012, 05:31:12 PM
Anybody seen Ed today?
Do I live in goddamn Canton?
i don't pay attention to where you live. Ohio is Ohio is Ohio to me.
You Americans and your poor geography.
Quote from: Ed Anger on November 29, 2012, 05:42:02 PM
You Americans and your poor geography.
According to some around here i'm Canadian <_<
Quote from: Ed Anger on November 29, 2012, 05:43:09 PMHow insulting. :mad:
Don't worry, if you work hard enough eventually people might think you're Canadian too :)
Quote from: katmai on November 29, 2012, 05:40:46 PM
Quote from: Ed Anger on November 29, 2012, 05:36:08 PM
Quote from: katmai on November 29, 2012, 05:31:12 PM
Anybody seen Ed today?
Do I live in goddamn Canton?
i don't pay attention to where you live. Ohio is Ohio is Ohio to me.
Ohio should be nothing to you. :contract:
Quote from: Malthus on November 29, 2012, 05:56:30 PMOh, we Canadians have thick skins. :D
Oh! You thought he meant to suggest it was an insult to Canadians that Katmai might be one?
And here comes the Canadian jerkoff parade. Beeb and CC ain't far behind. Bailing out of this thread.
(https://sites.google.com/site/adifferentvista/BailingOut.jpg)
I just want to know why Ed is now known as a candy dick
edit: I dont actually want to know. I just find it amusing that he is.
Quote from: Tonitrus on November 29, 2012, 11:30:26 AM
Quote from: Scipio on November 29, 2012, 08:36:56 AM
That is fucking ridiculous. The public menacing charge I can understand, but honestly, the disorderly conduct charge is, well, fucking retarded.
Being the police officer's catch-all that it is, I'd have thought that 90% of the time disorderly conduct charges are fucking retarded.
Now, now. That'll be enough of that.
Quote from: merithyn on November 29, 2012, 05:36:07 PM
Quote from: katmai on November 29, 2012, 05:31:12 PM
Anybody seen Ed today?
Couldn't possibly be Ed. The guy sounds far too active for him.
No shit. Besides, Ed wouldn't have to pretend to be dragging his leg. OH SNAP :FACE:
Quote from: Ed Anger on November 29, 2012, 06:00:25 PM
And here comes the Canadian jerkoff parade. Beeb and CC ain't far behind.
:lol: Righteous indignation + aboot = vomit
Quote from: katmai on November 29, 2012, 05:42:37 PM
Quote from: Ed Anger on November 29, 2012, 05:42:02 PM
You Americans and your poor geography.
According to some around here i'm Canadian <_<
I have a name you know :P
Quote from: CountDeMoney on November 29, 2012, 07:39:29 PM
Quote from: Tonitrus on November 29, 2012, 11:30:26 AM
Quote from: Scipio on November 29, 2012, 08:36:56 AM
That is fucking ridiculous. The public menacing charge I can understand, but honestly, the disorderly conduct charge is, well, fucking retarded.
Being the police officer's catch-all that it is, I'd have thought that 90% of the time disorderly conduct charges are fucking retarded.
Now, now. That'll be enough of that.
This...
http://seattletimes.com/html/localnews/2019777053_rosie28m.html
...has me in a "fuck the police" mood recently...
QuoteLawsuit says police didn't need to shoot, kill Rosie
A Des Moines couple have filed a federal lawsuit against the city's Police Department after officers shot their dog two years ago.
By Mike Carter
Seattle Times staff reporter
To Deirdre and Charles Wright, their 4-year-old Newfoundland named Rosie was a member of the family — a big, hairy, doe-eyed friend and companion who "aided in their enjoyment of life, well-being, personal development and daily activities."
To the trio of Des Moines police officers who confronted the barking bear-of-a-dog in the driveway of the Wrights' home two years ago, she was something else entirely.
"He doesn't want me to get very close," one of the officers is heard saying on an audio recording from a patrol cruiser's dashboard camera, the deep bark of the dog in the background.
The officers had responded to a report of a loose dog in the Des Moines neighborhood, phoned in by a neighbor who was concerned that the animal might get hurt. The Wrights were out of town. When police arrived, there was Rosie, all 115 pounds of her, woofing away.
Over the next hour, police used a Taser on Rosie twice, chased her for blocks and ultimately shot the dog — four times — with an assault rifle in a stranger's back yard.
Outrage over Rosie's killing has carried on almost unabated since that Nov. 7, 2010, afternoon. There have been memorials and a vigil for the dog and her owners, attended not just by hundreds of sympathetic pet owners, but by the Des Moines mayor and police chief as well. Thousands have signed an online petition demanding the officers be punished.
The Wrights believe the officers were intent on shooting the dog almost from the outset. They filed a federal lawsuit Nov. 17 against Des Moines police, claiming their civil rights were violated when officers shot Rosie. Attorney Shannon Ragonesi of the law firm of Keating Bucklin & McCormack, which is representing the city, would not speak to the specifics of the lawsuit. However, she said the Police Department conducted a "thorough internal review" and concluded the officers' actions were justified.
Two other reviews of animal-control policies — one by an outside agency and the other by an ad hoc committee appointed by the City Council — reached similar findings, save for a finding that the city needed guidelines for the use of Tasers on animals, Ragonesi said.
"Sweetness of temperament"
It was a Sunday, and there was no animal-control officer on duty, when police responded to Rosie's neighborhood in the 26200 block of 16th Avenue South, according to police reports and the lawsuit. Officers concluded the dog lived at the address where she was spotted — she'd apparently knocked down a fence to get out of the enclosed backyard.
According to the American Kennel Club's (AKC) website, Newfoundlands are large working dogs often used in cold-water rescue because of their thick coats. The AKC says the breed's "sweet disposition makes him a good fit for families." Though the dogs appear docile, they are active and require daily exercise. "Sweetness of temperament is the hallmark of the Newfoundland; this is the most important single characteristic of the breed," the AKC says.
The conversation among the officers responding to the call was captured on dashboard-camera audio obtained by the Wrights' attorney through the state Public Disclosure Act.
At one point, an officer produced a catchpole with a loop on one end, used to snare small animals from a safe distance. But because of Rosie's size, they questioned whether it would work — even if they could figure out how to operate it.
And then there was this dilemma, posed by one of the officers: "Once we get him, what are we gonna do with him?"
An officer suggested using a Taser on her. Another thought he might be able to "choke her out."
The audio recording indicates the officers were talking about shooting her within 10 minutes of arriving at the scene.
The only effort to identify her, according to the lawsuit, was that one of the officers photographed her and sent the snapshot to the city's animal-control officer, who was off-duty and did not respond to the scene.
Animal-rights lawyer Adam Karp from Bellingham, who is representing the Wrights, alleges in the lawsuit that officers made no effort to contact the Wrights, who were out of town overnight, but who could have been reached through their alarm company or through pet-licensing information.
The number of an emergency contact — a niece whom the Wrights had asked to check on the dog while they were gone — was also available from the alarm company, the lawsuit alleges.
Rosie's city pet license application also contained their contact information but was never checked, Karp said.
Dog "just sitting there"
According to witnesses quoted in the lawsuit, the dog was "just sitting there" when one of the officers used a Taser on her in the driveway of the Wrights' home, sending her running from the yard. The officers followed in their cars.
"He doesn't want to play," one officer is heard commenting. About a minute later, another officer says, "I'll shoot him. Let's just go shoot him," according to the lawsuit and dash-camera audio.
Meantime, another officer got close enough to Rosie to use a Taser on her a second time, firing through the car's open passenger window. The dog scampered away, eventually finding her way into Lora Perry's back yard, about four blocks away.
Perry, in an interview, said Rosie had apparently slipped into Perry's fenced yard while she was parking her car and had been there for about 15 minutes, "just sniffing around," when an officer arrived at the gate and asked if she'd seen a stray dog.
"I told him, 'Yes,' that she was here. He got on his radio and a few minutes later another officer arrived" carrying a rifle. Perry said the officers entered her yard, walking past a "No Trespassing" sign.
"One of them told me to get in the house, or something like that," Perry said. "It was clear they were there to shoot her. She wasn't doing anything. She was just sitting there."
Perry said she had two children in the house when the officer opened fire on the dog.
"They were frightened," she said. "And I was just livid. They didn't ask me anything. The dog could have stayed in my backyard."
The officers let her own dog out when they opened the gate to kill Rosie, Perry said.
After the first shot — which an autopsy later concluded shattered the dog's leg — one of the officers is heard shouting "Nice!" The officer with the rifle fired three more times, according to the lawsuit and dash-camera video.
The Wrights returned home later that day unaware of what had happened to their dog. They frantically called friends and the police, looking for Rosie.
According to the lawsuit, the Des Moines police only acknowledged they killed her after Mr. Wright found a Taser dart on his lawn the next day and took it to the police station, seeking an explanation.
In the lawsuit, Karp alleges the officers not only failed to capture Rosie but acted inhumanely when they killed her. The American Veterinary Medical Association recommends a gunshot to an animal's brain when an animal needs to be put down with a firearm. An autopsy performed by a veterinarian showed that none of the four bullets hit Rosie in the head.
Ragonesi, the city's attorney, said Karp has adopted an "uncommon use" of the section of the civil-rights section of the U.S. Code, usually applied in cases in which people address illegal seizures in the form of police misconduct like excessive use of force or wrongful arrest.
But Karp said the Fourth Amendment guarantees that citizens shall be secure in their "persons and effects."
"Rosie was an effect, and a special one that cannot be replaced," he said.
There is legal precedent for civil-rights cases involving killing pets.
The 9th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals held in a 1994 case that police violated the rights of a Northern California family when officers shot the family dog. The family eventually received nearly $100,000.
A 1998 case out of San Jose, Calif., found that police violated the rights of members of the local chapter of the Hells Angels when they shot and killed three dogs while serving a search warrant during a murder investigation. Near
So what's the unnecessary shooting a big stuffed animal got to do with bitching about disorderly conduct?
Besides are dead animals newsworthy?
Quote from: garbon on November 29, 2012, 08:57:48 PM
Besides are dead animals newsworthy?
That octopus that predicted soccer winners certainly was.
I'm sure cops would've shot his ass, too.
It was in Germany wasn't it? The cops would have had sex with it.
Can cops in Germany afford a 25k fine?
Quote from: Ed Anger on November 29, 2012, 06:00:25 PM
And here comes the Canadian jerkoff parade. Beeb and CC ain't far behind. Bailing out of this thread.
(https://sites.google.com/site/adifferentvista/BailingOut.jpg)
That happened in my birth town. :)