Update on the teacher beating a student story...

[ACooper]

I just heard the story on our news (radio)

This school was a charter *alternative* school if that means anything to anyone. And the teacher did in fact call and apologize to the family.

That isn't anything we didn't know, but here is something NEW:

The child was in fact injured. He suffered a black eye, and miscellaneous bruises. Not staged for show or scare tactics apparently. This woman most definitely needs criminal charges instead of just the loss of her employment. You tell me, who is allowed to give a minor a black eye and bruises and NOT be arrested? Or even a fellow adult for that matter.

 

[Vintage Boxers]

hmmm syill a vague story, though i admit i didnt follow it..

true---loose job and charges....

 

[Buckshot]

I would love to know what happened leading up to it.

 

[Pam111]

It doesn't matter to me what happened leading up to it at all. It was not self defense, so it was an adult assaulting a child. It is in no way legal

 

[Buckshot]

It doesn't matter to me what happened leading up to it at all. It was not self defense, so it was an adult assaulting a child. It is in no way legal

Really? There is nothing a child could do that would justify an assault from an adult?

 

[PixieSticksandTricks]

Really? There is nothing a child could do that would justify an assault from an adult?

Its a child in a "alternative" school so those teachers should be equipped to handle those kids without that kind of violence.

If you think causing a student (with issues) injuries like that is okay......than I just don't know.

Like I said in the other thread. If the video was of the woman doing these things to the dog. No one would question what led up to it.

 

[Pam111]

Really? There is nothing a child could do that would justify an assault from an adult?

Nope
There are reasons this is a crime...
I don't think it's justifiable for an adult to assault another adult if it's not self defense either

 

[Buckshot]

Its a child in a "alternative" school so those teachers should be equipped to handle those kids without that kind of violence.

If you think causing a student (with issues) injuries like that is okay......than I just don't know.

Like I said in the other thread. If the video was of the woman doing these things to the dog. No one would question what led up to it.

If I saw a video of a woman beating a dog I would want to know what led up to it. If the dog attacked her child or something I could certainly be forgiving of a lack of restraint. If the child in this situation was doing something that would push the normal person to violence that would play a big part in how I think she should be treated. All I am saying is that I can't judge until I know the facts.

 

[sillysally]

Really? There is nothing a child could do that would justify an assault from an adult?

Absolutely not. If the teacher can't handle difficult kids they shouldn't be teaching middle school age kids period much less alternative school kids. My mom taught middle school for 25 years and was often given the more challenging students because she did well with them, and somehow managed to make it though without beating the snot out of any of them.

 

[Buckshot]

Nope
There are reasons this is a crime...
I don't think it's justifiable for an adult to assault another adult if it's not self defense either

It could have been the defense of someone other than herself. If a child was beating up on your kid would you get physical with the attacker? If your child was being attacked by a mean kid and it was interupted by an adult that caused bruising on the attacker would you want to se this person charged? I know there is a whole lot of what ifs, but since we dont know what led up to it can we really judge?

 

[ACooper]

I would love to know what happened leading up to it.

Really? There is nothing a child could do that would justify an assault from an adult?

Again, we went over this in the other thread.

If a child full on attacked me, yes, I think I would defend myself with enough force to fend them off and gain control of the situation. Same with a dog or any other living creature.

What was shown on that video was not the case. *IF* that child came at her prior to the camera rolling (which we don't know but isn't *supposedly* what happened) that was long over and that teacher was full on attacking HIM while he cowered, not defending herself or another student by any stretch of ANYONE'S imagination by that point.

So in this case, NO, there is NOTHING we need to know about what led up to that attack. The teacher was wrong, she didn't use any proper procedure to have the student taken out of that classroom and she should have criminal assault charges on her. End of story.

You can bring all your own "what ifs" all day long Buck, in this case you are wrong and speculating...........what we see is a child already cowering, a child who ended up with a black eye and bruises from an ADULT in charge. That is criminal and no scenario you can concoct is going to change that fact.

 

[Buckshot]

Absolutely not. If the teacher can't handle difficult kids they shouldn't be teaching middle school age kids period much less alternative school kids. My mom taught middle school for 25 years and was often given the more challenging students because she did well with them, and somehow managed to make it though without beating the snot out of any of them.

That is interesting. Would you have been opposed to Klebold and Harris being beaten by an adult during the crime they commited?

 

[Pam111]

It could have been the defense of someone other than herself. If a child was beating up on your kid would you get physical with the attacker? If your child was being attacked by a mean kid and it was interupted by an adult that caused bruising on the attacker would you want to se this person charged? I know there is a whole lot of what ifs, but since we dont know what led up to it can we really judge?

Yes, that is true that I forgot about that type of situation. Defense of another could call for violence. But, this video is not that--no matter how hard you try to twist it. That kid was cowering. She could have gotten the other kids out, closed the door, IF there was ever a situation where she felt the need to defend another kid. The kid was not attacking back. I fail to see how continued assault could possibly be called for. She wasn't restraining him--she was hitting him.

 

[Sweet72947]

The problem is, Buckshot, that even if a child was doing something that warrented the use of violence, if an adult assaults a minor, they could be in BIG TROUBLE with that child's parents, the law, etc. If it were me, hitting someone under 18 would be a last, last, last, last, last, LAST resort to the problem because I don't want to be dragged through court by an angry parent forever and have my reputation dragged through the mud.

For me to hit somebody under 18, it would have to be a pretty serious situation, such as a 16 year old attacking my sister or something (a lot of 16 year olds are taller than me, so I think I would be safe from too much legal retribution in that instance.)

 

[sillysally]

That is interesting. Would you have been opposed to Klebold and Harris being beaten by an adult during the crime they commited?

Really dude?

This was a CHILD that was NOT attacking--he was cowering, unarmed and attempting to cover his face--hell, he's not even trying to defend himself. There is absolutely no similarity to this situation and Columbine, at all, not even a little bit.

 

[Buckshot]

Again, we went over this in the other thread.

If a child full on attacked me, yes, I think I would defend myself with enough force to fend them off and gain control of the situation. Same with a dog or any other living creature.

What was shown on that video was not the case. *IF* that child came at her prior to the camera rolling (which we don't know but isn't *supposedly* what happened) that was long over and that teacher was full on attacking HIM while he cowered, not defending herself or another student by any stretch of ANYONE'S imagination by that point.

So in this case, NO, there is NOTHING we need to know about what led up to that attack. The teacher was wrong, she didn't use any proper procedure to have the student taken out of that classroom and she should have criminal assault charges on her. End of story.

You can bring all your own "what ifs" all day long Buck, in this case you are wrong and speculating...........what we see is a child already cowering, a child who ended up with a black eye and bruises from an ADULT in charge. That is criminal and no scenario you can concoct is going to change that fact.

I hope if you ever face a jury it is made up of people just like you. People who dont care about what might have drove you to the point of commiting a crime. People who are satisfied with just the bare fact that you did something wrong and dont care to hear anything else about it.

She continued after he was taking a defensive posture. To the letter of the law she is wrong. Just as soldiers who do crazy stuff in war that violate the written law I can't say that I am one to judge. When you put sane people in insane environments they do insane things. This story didn't start when the camera did. Although I would have to admit she did hit a child that was submitting, I cant say that it wasn't justified.

 

[Saeleofu]

In my opinion, no, there is nothing a child can do to justify an assault from an adult, unless of course the child is assaulting the adult.

 

[Buckshot]

Really dude?

This was a CHILD that was NOT attacking--he was cowering, unarmed and attempting to cover his face--hell, he's not even trying to defend himself. There is absolutely no similarity to this situation and Columbine, at all, not even a little bit.

You said that violence was never ok. Still agree with that? Or is there times that it is ok?

 

[sillysally]

I hope if you ever face a jury it is made up of people just like you. People who dont care about what might have drove you to the point of commiting a crime. People who are satisfied with just the bare fact that you did something wrong and dont care to hear anything else about it.

She continued after he was taking a defensive posture. To the letter of the law she is wrong. Just as soldiers who do crazy stuff in war that violate the written law I can't say that I am one to judge. When you put sane people in insane environments they do insane things. This story didn't start when the camera did. Although I would have to admit she did hit a child that was submitting, I cant say that it wasn't justified.

So what do YOU think justifies being the crap out of an unarmed, cowering kid that is obviously smaller than you?

 

[ACooper]

I hope if you ever face a jury it is made up of people just like you.

Good, because I hope that too

If you can find justification in her continued beating of that CHILD once the child had completely surrendered, well then you are a better advocate FOR her than she is for herself. Congratulations, I think you might have earned social worker status, or criminal attorney at the very least

After all, SHE admitted she was wrong and apologized, SHE was there, SHE knows the complete and total story. She "plead guilty" so to speak and it wasn't to keep her job, she already lost that, and it isn't going to stop the mother from filing charges if she wants either......