When to call the law on your scouts????

[Scoutfish]

And although I may be ignoring my right to use the 5th Amendment here...I have mooned my share of many people.

 

Way back when.....of course.

(This message has been edited by scoutfish)

[desertrat77]

I concur with Beavah, 100 percent.

 

Adults are supposed to demonstrate prudence, maturity, and the ability to analyze complex situations. And then make rational decisions that considers all facets of the siutation.

 

Scouts imprint from the decisions leaders make. The scouts will never learn sound decision making skills if the adults in their life a) are too intellectually lazy to grasp the difference between a crime and mistake, b) are too chicken to sort things out and defer instead to "CYA" rote formulae in every situation and c) have no sense of mercy.

 

There are times when the cops need to be called. More often than not, they don't need to be called. Many other courses of action that are appropriate to handle the situation so that all parties--the wrongdoer, the wronged, parents, authorities, the press, whatever--are satisfied that justice was served. Ah, but this takes time, experience, and yes, courage, to execute properly. Not everything can be reduced to a guide card or a powerpoint presentation.

[Twocubdad]

732 -- only two of the six? Wus.

 

I wouldn't call the cops for any of these. I do believe there are situations where calling the cops is warranted, but this ain't it.

[Eagle732]

Well I didn't say which two!

Of course #5 is out since there weren't cell phones in those days!

[nldscout]

One of the things you need to keep in mind is what the law says in the state where you are. Some states make leaders Mandatory reporters of things that affect the "Health & Welfare" of a young person. The problem is defining what constitues conduct affecting the health and welfare of another.

 

In NY under certain circumstances you could be charged with Obstructing Governmental Administration or Endangering the welfare of a child. Both are crimes under NY law

[Oak Tree]

I wouldn't call the cops in any of these six cases.

 

Sure, I can imagine situations where I'd call the cops. But if these cases are relatively isolated incidents and not part of some pattern of behavior that has persisted despite serious warnings, these can all be dealt with in a troop setting. That's not to say that there are no consequences for any of these actions - there would certainly be some, depending on the details (what do you really know, versus what did you hear about? etc).

[Eagle732]

"It's really just a form of cowardice in my book - an inability for an adult to stand up for what's right on his own without hiding behind some other authority. The only uniformed official yeh should need is the fellow that is wearing olive and tan."

 

I don't agree with this at all. I don't know what kind of book you've been reading but it's not the same book I read!

 

I think leaders all make the best judgement calls they can. If the decision is that the authorities are call that in no way should be considered an act of cowardice. It may in fact be the proper and legal decision for a leader to make. Are you ready to take responsibility for inaction?

 

The situation I described earlier about the boy at summer camp who threatened another scout with sexual assault and the local sheriff came and took him away in cuffs was a proper decision, not a decision made by a coward. The head ranger made the call, is he a coward? Suppose no one called and the boy was later assaulted, would you want to be responsible for not addressing it?

 

Our little arsonist moved on to another unit, they had no idea of his prior activities. He got caught playing with a lighter in a tent while the other scout was sleeping. Fortunately the scout woke up and reported him. I hate to think what could have happened. But if the arsonist would have been reported to the authorities the first time than he could have received help which might prevent a lifetime of trouble.

 

Just my opinion formed by 35 years of service in public safety.

[Beavah]

Yah, Eagle732, I think yeh missed the lines leadin' into that quote of mine: If we can't deal with all of the stuff that falls in the realm of ordinary teen "bad" behavior without callin' for backup from local LEOs...(long list of examples)

 

Nobody is sayin' don't call law enforcement if a kid is dealing methamphetamine, raped another boy in the shower, or used an accelerant to burn the dining hall down. As I mentioned at the start, if yeh know the consequence of the act has to be permanent removal from your troop and from scouting, and in order to protect other people the lad needs to potentially be behind bars or at least in court-ordered intervention of some sort, then I reckon we're all fine with it.

 

But that's where the threshold should be, eh? Not kids takin' a poke at each other, not kids gettin' in an ordinary fight, not bein' a bonehead playin' with matches. All of the range of things that falls in the realm of ordinary teen "bad" behavior should be stuff that we should be able to handle, workin' with parents and others in the program. And if we can't, then we shouldn't be workin' with teens, where we will inevitably be faced with such situations and expected to handle 'em.

 

To be clear, though, by that I do mean "handle 'em". The choice is not between calling the cops and doing nothing, as you and others seem to be suggesting. The choice is a range of things from immediate removal and expulsion from the program on down. The difference is that we and the parents know the boy and will have a lot more long-term contact.

 

Our little arsonist moved on to another unit, they had no idea of his prior activities.

 

Well why in Sam Hill didn't you TELL THEM??? Yeh let a boy you expelled for what you considered dangerous behavior go to another unit, and it never occurred to you that they might need to know that? Yeh never told the council office that yeh had concerns and this might be a case where a boy should be removed from Scouting? You actually think that the law enforcement authorities are somehow goin' to help another scout unit with a problem kid when you couldn't be bothered?

 

The likely outcome of a juvenile case that involves unwitnessed, unsuccessful "arson" of the sort you describe is that the justice system is NOT goin' to handle it. Most county prosecutors aren't goin' to bother with it, and even if they poke at it any competent defense counsel will dispose of it in short order. Yeh have no way of establishin' that it wasn't genuinely an accident, and then the question turns back to why you as the supervisory adult allowed a youth to possess matches/lighter unsupervised on his own in the evening, when such accidents might occur.

 

The notion that the justice system is somehow goin' to do our job for us as parents and scouters is just nonsense. Kids are important, though, as is our responsibility to 'em. So if we are unwillin' or unable to do the job of a competent, prudent, responsible youth leader then we need to get out of the uniform and go find somethin' else to spend our volunteer time on.

 

Beavah

 

 

[Engineer61]

Perhaps some need to learn more about the childporn laws in your respective states.

 

For example:

 

Under Arizona law, Child Pornography is technically described as the crime of Sexual Exploitation of a Minor. Illegal images can be possessed in any number of ways, including print media, videotape, film, compact disc, and pictures downloaded from websites on the internet. Regardless of how the image is transmitted or stored, it is considered to be illegal under Arizona law and subject to some of the harshest penalties in the entire country.

 

If the child depicted is less than 15 years old and you are convicted of this extremely serious offense, the law requires that the judge sentence you to a minimum of ten (10) years in the Arizona State Prison for each image.

 

[Beavah]

OK, Engineer61. The federal law is minimum of 5 years, Arizona is a minimum of 10.

 

But here's my question.

 

Your son's best friend is over at your house, and yeh hear the two of 'em giggling in an odd way so you look in. On your son's friend's iPhone is a photo of his 14-year-old girlfriend (same grade in school) who has "exposed herself" waist up and sent it to him.

 

Technically, under the law, your son's friend is in possession of child pornography and subject to the penalties you describe. Dependin' on how aggressive various legal folks want to be, your son is also eligible for related charges, and of course the girl in question is quite possibly a "trafficker in child pornography" subject to potentially harsher penalties. Then there's the question of who owns the phones and cameras that enabled this, and how culpable they are.

 

What's your move?

 

Do yeh call the AZ State Police and the FBI Internet Crimes against Children task force?

 

Or do yeh call the boy's and the girl's parents and let 'em know what's goin' on and how potentially serious that could be and let 'em deal with it? And then have a talk with your son.

 

B

 

[Eagle732]

Ah, that reminds me of the story of the lad who stuck his cell phone under the stall door and took a picture of a scout on the can. The victims parents were notified and I think it almost resulted in the PD being called. Another reason to ban cell phones on camping trips (at least ones with cameras).

 

"Well why in Sam Hill didn't you TELL THEM???" (In bold and caps)

Beav are you yelling at me?

This happened on my son's first troop outing. I wasn't there, he and I had left because we had a prior commitment early the next morning. I heard about it a week after it happened. The arsonist left the troop and joined another one a month or more before I knew he had left and apparently after the lighter in the tent had occurred. I was not a troop leader at the time, I was just a parent. I had decided that I would not let my son go on trips without me after I saw how this incident was (or wasn't) handled. I lost all trust in the troop's leadership.

 

Our COR found out about it and raised heck! A month later we had a new CC and SM.

And now you know the story of how I became SM.

 

I doubt anyone here is calling the cops of minor incidents. I think we're all well enough informed that we can make solid decisions. Sometimes calling the law is what gets a boy the help he needs, I know here we have a program for young fire starters that has high success.(This message has been edited by Eagle732)

[Beavah]

Ah, OK Eagle732. That sounds more like you, mate.

 

I think yeh have to be very careful about assumin' that court ordered diversionary programs are goin' to be successful. The courts are not psychologists, counselors, or educators. While there are some local diversion programs that have some success, overall they're very hit or miss, and especially in the current economic climate have increasingly been defunded. None of 'em has the rate of success that a moderately caring family selecting appropriate other resources has. So if the goal is really to help the boy, law enforcement and the justice system is not the proper choice.

 

As to whether folks think they should call the police over more minor stuff, I think that was the reason for the original question in this thread, eh? Because a number of folks did express that they'd do exactly that, for various reasons. I was quite surprised. And we're waitin' for E61 to tell us whether he's goin' to drop a dime on his son's friend in da hopes that the AZ law will send the 14 year old boy to prison for 10 years

 

Beavah

[packsaddle]

I can't speak for Engineer61 but in that scenario I can say with great certainty that his son's 'friend' is absolutely no friend at all and if I was the father I would deal with it rather severely. And yes, in my area I do know, also with great certainty, that PTI works really well and that I'm ready to invoke it. I seriously doubt that it would escalate to the extreme that you portray. Moreover, I would be dismayed if an attorney advised me to ignore the law.

[Twocubdad]

Question, Beav.

 

Currently, how many 14 year olds are serving active federal prison time on child porn charges? Just a ballpark figure is good. Same for 14 year old girls convicted of trafficking for sexting photos of themselves.

 

Isn't this the sort of legal boogeyman stuff you're usually railing against?

[Beavah]

if I was the father I would deal with it rather severely

 

As well yeh should, as a caring father. Caring fathers are very different than law enforcement officers.

 

And yes, in my area I do know, also with great certainty, that PTI works really well and that I'm ready to invoke it.

 

Yah, hmmmm....

 

If I may ask, how exactly do yeh know that? You've read good peer-reviewed research on the program, doin' an appropriate comparison to friend and family intervention?

 

If I may ask, how exactly are yeh goin' to "invoke it?". Last time I checked, the fellow who called the cops doesn't get a say in the actions taken by the justice system.

 

Since a scouter is likely to be in jurisdictions other than her home town / county when she calls the cops, how is she supposed to know whether the local system in that area works "really well."?

 

Since the offense in this case is both a federal and a state felony, how do yeh know which group is goin' to take lead? Do yeh know that the federal system also has a PTI that works "really well?" Granted, the feds would usually defer in a case like this, but this particular area has been a focus for a while.

 

And are you really sure yeh want to send your son's best friend off into the court system just because his girlfriend sent him an inappropriate photo out of the blue? I can't wait to see what yeh do when yeh chaperone a dance.

 

I'm not sure what escalate to the extreme means. What E61 and I described are statutory minimum sentences, eh? Yep, it might be that a prosecutor has a brain and lets this go, or pleads it down to somethin' appropriate. But do yeh really know that those people are all responsible sorts? Most are OK, I'll grant, but at some level they stand for election and are therefore politicians as much as they are prosecutors, and politics usually causes a dramatic drop in IQ.

 

Moreover, I would be dismayed if an attorney advised me to ignore the law.

 

Has some attorney somewhere advised you to ignore the law? I rather doubt it, since any competent attorney would know that you're not an officer of the law and therefore are not expected to enforce it. He'd also know that even officers of the law are accorded discretion and expected to exercise it. No, I'd expect that any competent attorney would tell yeh that your legal and moral obligation is to act as a reasonably prudent adult, parent, or volunteer youth leader, and focus on the kid's needs rather than on worryin' about the law.

 

Seems like I read that somewhere recently.

 

B