No Charges For Child-Whipping Judge Caught On YouTube 948
theodp writes "Federal prosecutors will not charge a Texas judge seen lashing his teenage daughter with a belt on a YouTube video taken seven years ago and posted online last week, closing the door on the possibility of criminal charges in the case. The viral video, uploaded by now 23-year-old Hillary Adams, shows her father, Aransas County Court-at-Law Judge William Adams, whipping her with a belt for downloading music when she was 16 (full video, requires login). 'F*****g computers,' the judge tells his now ex-wife on the video. 'I told you I didn't want one in the god damn house. See all the problems they cause?' Judge Adams issued a statement asserting that his daughter released the tape to retaliate against him for withdrawing his financial support."
Just another corrupt judge (Score:5, Insightful)
and another example of a judge that should be removed from the bench by any means possible -- I don't know if you can recall a judge in texas, or if you have to wait until the next time that clown is up for reelection, or what the process is, but whatever the process, it needs to happen.
Re:Just another corrupt judge (Score:5, Funny)
Comment removed (Score:5, Interesting)
Re:Just another corrupt judge (Score:5, Funny)
As a native Texan, I'm all for corporal punishment as a method of last resort. But not in the manor in which this was delivered.
So the judge can't beat his daughter in his house, but could in someone else's? That seems kind of arbitrary.
Re: (Score:3)
Re:Just another corrupt judge (Score:4, Insightful)
Well considering that she knew she was going to be beaten by her father's demeanor, that she set up the video camera to capture the event for posterity, I have a hunch the Judge sent the "message of last resort" rather frequently.
Comment removed (Score:5, Insightful)
Excuses (Score:5, Insightful)
Judge Adams issued a statement asserting that his daughter released the tape to retaliate against him for withdrawing his financial support.
I'm not quite sure that makes what he did OK...
Re:Excuses (Score:5, Insightful)
Umm... call me crazy, but maybe she was retaliating for him repeatedly beating the crap out of her.
Re:Excuses (Score:5, Interesting)
Nope. She's posted about it elsewhere, but basically, she saved the video in order to blackmail him. Fast forward to a week ago, and he threatens to stop allowing her to borrow his Mercedes. So she posts the video in response.
They're both horrible people: the judge for beating his daughter, and the girl for blackmailing him over it.
If she wanted him punished, she had the chance. She didn't. She wanted money from him.
Re:Excuses (Score:5, Insightful)
If she has become a monster, then it is of his design and his handiwork. It may not excuse her for her attitudes, if indeed these allegations are true, but his responsibility does not end with him, it encompasses ALL that he has done. If he has indeed broken her mind, then he is no less responsible than her for the video being posted.
Re: (Score:3)
I don't know. I mean, how much faith can you have in the justice system after you've been beaten by a judge in your own home?
Re:Excuses (Score:5, Insightful)
Abuse survivor here. I'm in my mid 30s now, male. I've not seen or heard from my parents/step-parents since I was fifteen years old. One of the best things I ever did in life.
Blackmail was not involved here, as far as I can tell. I never read anything about that. She never threatened to release the video; she just did it. I would bet sacks full of money that she never let anyone else know about that video, out of fear of being abused further. It doesn't even make sense that she would try to use it as a control mechanism against him. Even if she did,.... uh... good for her.
Note in the articles how the farther took back a car, thus depriving her of the ability to get around. It was never a gift to her. It was a tool to use as control, and when he wanted to control her further, he yanked the chain. This is a twenty year old we are talking about here, not a child. Even in adulthood, he treats his daughter as something that needs to be controlled.
This guy will lose friends, respect, his job, and his entire career. I'd say that's pretty fair. I don't have any sympathy for him and very little for the mother.
As for the feds, they should not be involved in any way, no duh.
As for charges, unfortunately, she sat on this too long. Fear can really paralyze and control you. Again, no duh.
Re:Excuses (Score:5, Interesting)
And that's what everyone is missing. They think she is a spoiled brat blackmailing him for cutting her off. As you said from all appearances that car was her only transport. Given that's she got palsy she's probably very limited in what kind of transportation she can use. Although it doesn't excuse the fact that she should get her own transportation he's clearly using it as a form of control. He probably gave it to her with the intent to use it to control her, when she failed to do whatever it was he wanted he'd yank the chain and try to force her to obey. I'm willing to bet up to this point he's exerted immense influence over her and her life.
He needs serious help in the form of counseling, and I dare say she does as well because I really don't think this was an adult response to the situation.
Re: (Score:3)
you reap what you sow
Re: (Score:3)
Nope. She's posted about it elsewhere, but basically, she saved the video in order to blackmail him. Fast forward to a week ago, and he threatens to stop allowing her to borrow his Mercedes. So she posts the video in response. They're both horrible people: the judge for beating his daughter, and the girl for blackmailing him over it. If she wanted him punished, she had the chance. She didn't. She wanted money from him.
Devil's advocate... as the victim of physical abuse, why shouldn't she have a say what form her retaliation should take? Specifically, what makes her a horrible person just because she decided his abuse of her should have financial penalty that directly benefits her? Given she likely doesn't fear continued physical abuse and given he's not likely to physically abuse other people, imprisonment wouldn't be worthwhile. A nice steep fine, perhaps? With perhaps her as the beneficiary as the aggrieved party?
Generational Abuser v2.0 (Score:5, Insightful)
Gotta agree with the AC - I've been beat before, and while it looked like this man was putting his heart into it, he looked like an out of shape skinny punk compared to the whippings I got as a child. When a beating was finished in my household, the crying didn't stop for 30 minutes, and you'd be lucky if you weren't limping afterwards. If the video had shown her inconsolable for 20 minutes after the beating, hardly able to move because of the pain, I'd be more inclined to feel some sympathy for her. As it was, she had a dick father, and a dick mother, but as soon as they got out of the room, she was cool as a cucumber, walking around like the beating was nothing to her.
Now be clear, even if you're a wimp with a belt and can't give a 16 year old enough of a smack down to keep them crying for 30 minutes, you shouldn't be beating your kid - it's stupid and unproductive. But this was definitely "gotcha" videography on the part of the kid. The whole family is rotten, and frankly, I'm most appalled by the mother - the fact that she was cool with it as an observer (although I think she got one lick in too) was chilling.
Seems like you're primed and ready to be a child abuser yourself.
Your attitude needs a lot of work. I'd recommend a psychological evaluation, stat. Or just show this post to your woman and let her decide.
Re: (Score:3)
Oh, no doubt, I could've learned the lesson of anger and hatred from my parents, the way Hillary seemed to learn from her parents. It would've been almost too easy. But I made a conscious choice to forgive my parents, and to respond to their anger and hatred with love and compassion. My children don't get beat, they get disciplined with appropriate restrictions and stern lectures - both of which, by the way, have been very effective in teaching proper behavior.
I broke the cycle of anger. Hillary didn't.
Re: (Score:3)
From TFA [seattlepi.com]:
What a fucked-up family.
Nothing to prosecute here - Statute of Limitations (Score:5, Insightful)
He's a bad person, to say the least. However, the state's statute of limitations expired, and the federal prosecutors could find no *federal* laws being broken. (Keep in mind which crimes are state, which are federal) To do otherwise would be to violate the legal system, no matter what you feel.
Re: (Score:3, Informative)
THE FUCKING STATUTE OF LIMITATIONS HAS NOT EXPIRED.
http://www.dallascriminaldefenselawyerblog.com/2008/09/statute-of-limitations-texas-l.html [dallascrim...erblog.com]
Could you at least have the fucking brains to DO THE RESEARCH YOURSELF before opening your mouth like a fucking parrot?
Re:Nothing to prosecute here - Statute of Limitati (Score:4, Insightful)
Cerebal palsy is a disability in Texas that meets the criteria.
Re: (Score:3)
Being a bad parent while being a judge is worse than being a bad parent while being a plumber.
Not All Spankings Are The Same (Score:5, Insightful)
Re: (Score:3, Interesting)
You don't have to spank your kids to keep them in line. I was spanked a lot as a kid. Didn't want to finish my food, didn't want to go to bed, fighting with siblings (I was middle child. What older said was always right and younger was too young to know better, so always my fault), plus other random things. It didn't make me a better person, it made be a better lier and I stopped trusting my parents. I knew that if I went to them with a problem, there was a chance I would get in trouble and a chance I
Re:Not All Spankings Are The Same (Score:5, Insightful)
Completely agree. To repeat something I said elsewhere, I support corporal punishment, but not when it's anything that even remotely resembles what that video shows. I've talked to my parents about some of this over the years as questions about how I'll one day raise my own children have come up, and some of the things that I most remember about my punishments as a child were things that I later learned were entirely deliberate and intentional on their part.
My parents did spank me as a child, but they made a point of never once doing it while angry, never once using it as a first resort, never once doing it before they had clearly explained to me what I had done wrong and making sure I understood (and they always gave me 10-30 minutes to think about it before discussing it with me), never once trivializing it by slapping or swatting me, and never once doing it without telling me that they loved me (and making that clear to me through the tears in their eyes). Aside from the obvious (at least to me) fact that they were acting out of love, the fact that I could always count on them to be reasonable is what made those spankings effective. There were a few times where my parents had me sit in a room in anticipation of being spanked, only to let me leave for one reason or another (e.g. it became evident that I was acting with a different motivation than they had ascribed to me, such as entering an off-limits area, not to misbehave, but rather to pull a wayward sibling out of harm's way).
Any punishments of this sort need to be given out of true love and concern for the wellbeing of the child. Anything else is inexcusable and won't be effective since the child will recognize it for being what it is: unloving, unfair, inconsistent, or unreasonable. I was fortunate to have two loving parents who understood that. Not everyone is that fortunate.
federal law vs. state law (Score:3)
Source - no registration required (Score:5, Informative)
I got beat as a kid. (Score:5, Interesting)
I'm for discipline, and I'm for corporal punishment, but that was a sick individual getting his kicks punishing his child. You lose the moral battle when you curse as much as he did, when you seem to enjoy it as much as he did, when you won't stop even when your child is a weeping wreck in front of you.
What sort of parent looks back on that I thinks they've helped mould their child into a good citizen?
There's a lot of talk about how she only showed this after he took away her toys. Because you expected adult, rational behaviour from her? Yeah, that's how she was raised. Wasn't it?
I don't normally get angry at Random Q. Internetguy, but that wasn't an Internet meme, that thing you just saw, that was the repeated, planned, brutalization of a child by her parent, and it was appalling.
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
I found the most interesting quote from the video wasn't his cursing, but the mom's statement, "Take it like a grown woman." That underscores their life in that house. I'm sure this happened to everyone in the house several times throughout the years.
Re: (Score:3)
Re: (Score:3)
Retribution (Score:3)
"his daughter released the tape to retaliate against him"
Really! I wonder where she learned about such vengeful behavior? Though I'd have to say her releasing the truth about you for any reason is far less questionable than you beating her like that. And I'm not even against restrained use of corporal punishment in some cases - but what you did, to a girl that age, for the crime committed?
Sir, you are a shitty father. If your daughter knows well enough that you're going to beat her in a scandalous way that she sets up a camera to catch you in the act, you have failed utterly as a parent. If she's able to cause a national sensation by showing a few minutes of what she grew up with, you are a lousy human being. It is a travesty that one as you has ever sat on the bench and decided the fates of others.
Re: (Score:3)
Telling and showing off the truth can rarely be attributed as retaliation to any sane observer.
Okay... (Score:3)
I was spanked and beaten as a child.
To be honest, in a lot of cases, I (and my brother) were completely out of control. And when I say completely, I MEAN *COMPLETELY*. The kind of behavior that's not acceptable ANYPLACE. The kind that gets you ejected from restaurants. The kind that has the police coming and talking to your parents. The kind that gets your parents called in to school for multiple parent-teacher conferences.
Yes, I've had a belt taken to me. At most, 2-3 whacks across the ass.
The only time I was ever beaten anyplace NEAR this badly was when my brother and I were caught playing out on the roof of our house. We scared my father so damn badly with that stunt that he smacked us silly.
Needless to say we never did that again.
The are times when a hand or belt across the backside is acceptable.
But the severity of the beating in this case is unlike ANYTHING I had as a child (and let's face it, I drove my parents NUTS, quite literally, my mother was a stone's-throw away from being committed a time or two).
And the whole bit about "You turn over and take it".
Like fucking hell! I'll be damned if I EVER give someone a free hand in beating me for prolonged periods. And I expect no less from ANYONE, adult or child.
If my parents had treated me like that, I'd have killed them. Flat out. No exceptions.
It's no wonder the girl grew up and became a vindictive little bitch.
When you discipline a child, you spank them at the time of the infraction. You link cause to effect. You don't "wait until dad gets home" then stage a beating. Even on a teenager. ESPECIALLY on a teenager. All you're teaching them at that point is that, if you're doing something wrong, it's okay to simply lash out at any time as "payback".
Sound like her behavior in this case?
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
interesting. i think though adult or child the guy deserves a beating for treating his daughter that way. beating his daughter to save the rights of people who make money from music? what an asshole.
Re:Child? (Score:5, Insightful)
No, he's beating his daughter because he's an idiot with anger management and control issues. If it's not okay to beat a stranger for "violating the law", then it's certainly not okay to beat someone you're supposed to love, and who you have a legal responsibility to protect from bad stuff such as illegal physical assaults like this.
BTW: This was not a one-time incident.
Re:Child? (Score:4, Interesting)
Yet another target for "Anonymous" to go at - and he isn't declared innocent either if he isn't charged. You need to bring him to court to determine guilty or not.
I think that by avoiding to charge him they try to avoid having to re-take a lot of cases that he has been involved in.
But the video is good enough to get him convicted by almost any jury unless they are specially picked from extreme Amish or similar societies where they don't use computers or TV.
Re:Child? (Score:5, Insightful)
and he isn't declared innocent either if he isn't charged.
Actually, he is. That's what "innocent until proven guilty" means, and that is the legal status of any person in the US who has not been tried and convicted.
You need to bring him to court to determine guilty or not.
Which is not the same as "innocent". It is "guilty" or "not guilty".
Note: I am not saying that this person is innocent, in a moral sense; he clearly is not. I'm only speaking to the legal structure.
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
I was spanked with a razor belt more times than I care to count when I was growing up. Not radically different than this. You can bet I didn't do whatever caused the whipping again.
Oh, that makes it okay then. Fuck you, asshole.
Re:Child? (Score:4, Insightful)
I believe in spanking, under the right circumstances. What this man did was not spanking, it was beating. It's not cool.
LK
Re: (Score:3)
I was spanked with a razor belt more times than I care to count when I was growing up. Not radically different than this. You can bet I didn't do whatever caused the whipping again.
Were you 16? Then you were either an idiot or a coward.
Spanking worked with me too until I was 8 or so. At 16, if I saw nothing wrong with if (and nobody explained why it was wrong), stopping would just mean I was a coward by giving in to the whims of bullies.
Because that's all he's being by beating her. A bully.
Re:Child? (Score:5, Insightful)
There are a couple questions to ask about the "spankings".
1. Did you actually do something wrong - or were the "spankings" random, unpredictable, and/or unwarranted?
2. Did you get belted all over your body, like the girl in the video?
3. Was there a preset number of swats, or did your parent just whip until his arms got tired?
4. Was there a definite lesson to be imparted?
5. Did you actually LEARN a lesson, or did you just "learn" to avoid Dad, or to hide your actions better?
As for minding our own damned business - that shit can go to far. I seem to remember some women being killed in New York City, screaming, crying, and begging for help - and no passerby would lift a finger, or make a telephone call. I also seem to remember, more recently, a toddler being killed in traffic in China, and no one would come to her aid. Almost every month, we read of some child dying in America due to abuse and neglect. I'm one to "mind my own business" most of the time - but there comes a time when you HAVE to take notice!
Re:Child? (Score:5, Insightful)
I was spanked with a razor belt more times than I care to count when I was growing up...
You are a clear example of why this form of discipline should not be used. You're incapable of thinking for yourself, as evidenced by the logical fallacy you opened with. Or rather fallacies.
1. Let's start with the fact that you don't agree that you were harmed does not mean you were not indeed harmed - you clearly have no sympathy/empathy for others who are similarly abused. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Psychologist's_fallacy [wikipedia.org]
2. If I were to accept that you were not harmed, why would I accept that others with different motivations, beliefs, personalities would not be harmed? A sample size of one is not sufficient. Perhaps you turned out fine but your neighbour would become a serial killer or a broken wreck of a person given this form of discpiline. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Post_hoc_ergo_propter_hoc [wikipedia.org] and http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hasty_generalization [wikipedia.org]
I don't doubt others apply and that is just your opening sentence. I don't have time or inclination to pick apart more. See the complete list here:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_fallacies [wikipedia.org]
May I ask the following question? If it is okay in your mind for a parent to beat his or her children to make sure they do not behave antisocially, why not a boss beating his or her workers, or a teacher, provided that they mean well? What exactly makes it okay to discipline a child one way but not an adult? Surely you don't think they are lesser creatures? So what possible sane argument can you make here? I'm curious.
If you think it's okay for you or others to beat people to get them "in line" with your way of thinking, you have in fact been harmed by your upbringing. Violence often escalates. Children learn by example. Get help - certainly before having children and infecting the next generation. You are using your abuse to justify more abuse.
That's less succinct than "Fuck you, asshole" the other poster presented, but much more thorough. Consider that I'm not being abusive and actually think about what I am saying.
Re:Child? (Score:4, Insightful)
So it wasn't very effective then. Except, of course, for teaching you to consider domestic violence acceptable and instilling a rather disturbing level of authoritarianism, which you demonstrate here by instantly siding with the authority figure, even when he's clearly abusing his power. And so the cycle continues.
Are you implying that an adult man who "lost his temper" and beat up a helpless girl in rage should be pitied, because his victim made the disgusting crime public?
There is evidence of abuse, specifically the video in question which depicts it. This abuse is everyone's business, because violent crime doesn't become any less of a violent crime just because it happens inside four walls and the victims are in a particularly vulnerable position in respect to the criminal. And in this particular case the criminal happens to be a judge; if he can't control his violent impulses with his own family, why would we expect him to do so in in official capacity either?
Re:Child? (Score:4, Insightful)
My parents would beat the shit out of me if I ever stepped out of line and I still didn't turn into a sociopath. There are probably some emotional scars there but I managed to move past all that. I actually have a very good relationship with both of my parents now.
You admit your parents abused you and not only do you condone it, you seem to idolise them. I feel sorry for your kids.
Not everyone's going to handle that kind of abuse the same way. Some will turn into sociopaths, some will commit suicide.
My older sister, on the other hand, came to school with some marks on her body and Social Services came to the house and she didn't live with us anymore after that. The father sounds like an asshole but it isn't child abuse unless it leaves a mark.
Sounds like your sister got the protection and you got screwed. You shouldn't grow up thinking that's normal.
Everyone needs to stop pushing their values on other people and telling them how to raise their kids.
No. You live as part of a society and what you do affects others. You need to stop insisting that anti-social child-raring that raises monsters is okay because some people don't end up monsters. Should I be permitted to raise my child to beat, murder and rob people if that is my belief? No. Your position is untenable.
Re: (Score:3, Interesting)
Re:Child? (Score:5, Insightful)
Even more likely he is beating his daughter because it makes him feel like a big man on a power trip. She knew what she was doing would elicit a severe beating, so if she wanted footage of him abusing her, all she had to do was download some songs from the internet.
Child abuse and domestic abuse aren't about punishment, they are about control. She could probably have changed the desktop background or something equally trivial. He's not punishing her for misdeeds, he's beating her into submission. He even says so in the video.
Re:Child? (Score:4, Insightful)
I'm sure a man who doesn't understand computers or technology (at least, 7 years ago, that might have changed) is absolutely quaking in his boots over threats from an internet group.
What exactly are they going to do, find and release a video of him beating his daughter to get him thrown off the bench?
Re: (Score:3)
Yes, I've known phreaks, but I am not now, nor have ever been one. All of them I knew were friendly easygoing people. It took a lot to set them off, but if you were dumb enough to do that, you'd be better off never using a phone again, and possibly moving to a cave somewhere.
Re:Child? (Score:4, Insightful)
But fact is, 16 year olds are adult already. Most can act and think that way too. At least I could.
Re:Child? (Score:4, Interesting)
Re:Child? (Score:5, Insightful)
That is not a matter of "age" but of education or age based education. ... bored ... bored about what school and life demands from them ... many of them live in their own worlds. Just doing musics, parties and sports and the bare minimum to pass classes in school. The teacher asks: what do you think about "X" and they tell him everything he missed the last 20 years about X ... ... but I can bet that a big deal of the brains you scan (from young people) are just not yet malformed like the main adult brains are.
History is full of 14 year olds becoming King or war lord or any other high abstract thinker with organization tallent or great leader ship.
In our society growing ups are treated like puppies, most of the time hold down so they don't develop. And only martyred with grades in stuff completely unrelated to what is really interesting. How do you learn enough physics in "school" or "high school" to get interested in studying it?
Do you know who Niels Bohr is? Smart young people are the norm, not the exception. Also "adult" young people are the norm. The fact that we don't have/see this right now is a side effect of our society and not a genetic thing of aging or growing up. Most young people I meet are bored
Sorry, I don't know what you want to see in your brain scans
Re:Only till 25? (Score:5, Insightful)
You'll understand why all of your arguments are completely incorrect when you're older.
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
Re: (Score:3)
Re:Child? (Score:5, Interesting)
Re: (Score:3)
Whether I "should" do something or not is up to me to decide.
Nope. A court can too, in many cases.
Re:Child? (Score:4, Insightful)
Re: (Score:3)
law does not define truth.
Re: (Score:3)
law does not define truth.
The law defines legal responsibility. While some people seem to have forgotten the whole balance of rights and responsibility in our society, the ethical issue is that if a person does not have legal rights (such as the right to go where they want or not eat broccoli) that person likewise cannot be held accountable in a legal sense. If the law does not grant you rights, there is no ethical or moral responsibility to obey the law. That is why the whole "try a child as an adult" nonsense is so abhorrent to an
Re: (Score:3)
Re:Child? (Score:4, Insightful)
or refuse schooling, a lawyer etc.
A 16 your old legally is a child, they are protected by the state (and can be taken away from home if they have abusive parents, whether they want to go or not, for example), and in legal agreements they cannot sign for themselves without special circumstances. They cannot serve in the army, they cannot collect an adult minimum wage, they cannot be treated like adults legally without special circumstances (which violate both the definition and purpose of separate child laws in the first place).
16 years cannot marry without parental consent, pregnancy - in some specific cases, court approval or the like (unless they are already emancipated).
A 14 year old is not *automatically* tried for murder as an adult, they can, under special circumstances be given that privilege.
You see these things on the news and it biases your perception of what actually happens. In extreme cases children can be emancipated from their parents at very young ages when the parents have no criminal record etc... But in that sense any piece of law can be overturned in a one off basis, for the 99.99% of everyone else 16 year olds are children, are treated that way by several laws, and treaties, and treating them differently is illegal.
Re: (Score:3)
Of course there was a crime committed: grievous bodily harm.
Re:Child? (Score:4)
...it boils down to fear. With a foundation of fear, you can build up respect, trust and love.
If you honestly believe that, then you are one sick fuck.
Re:The legal system at it's finest. (Score:5, Informative)
Actually no, the statute of limitations applies to regular citizens also.
Re:The legal system at it's finest. (Score:5, Informative)
18 USC 3283 - Sec. 3283. Offenses against children
"No statute of limitations that would otherwise preclude prosecution for an offense involving the sexual or physical abuse, or kidnaping, of a child under the age of 18 years shall preclude such prosecution during the life of the child."
I believe the code is clear in stating that the statute of limitations do NOT apply to child abuse victims.
Re:The legal system at it's finest. (Score:4, Insightful)
We thought the world was flat once.
Sometimes people realise the ideas they have are wrong and they change them, beating children is one of those things that much of the world has decided was wrong.
Re: (Score:3, Informative)
There's a difference between beating and spanking with a belt, or hitting with a belt. I'm glad you can't see, or know the distinction.
Mod up (Score:5, Insightful)
Wish I had mod points. Times change, things get better. What our parents accepted as the way of the world wasn't ok with us. What we think of as part of the landscape is not good enough for our kids. This is progress.
Re: (Score:3)
http://www.psychohistory.com/htm/05_history.html [psychohistory.com]
Re:The legal system at it's finest. (Score:4, Informative)
Funny. A belt is child abuse these days. In my day, that was considered 'punishment' for fucking up.
I'll grant you that there definitely is a bit of debate and disagreement on whether punishment with a belt is considered discipline or abuse. In a way I think it kind of borders on abuse, but at the same time, I was whipped with a belt as a child and I don't really think of myself as having been abused.
However, that's beside the point. We aren't talking about hitting someone with a belt a couple of times. We are talking about a video of him whipping and degrading her for SEVEN MINUTES. After about the first 5 hits in about 20 seconds, she's cryiing and begging him to stop, but he continues on. She's hit with the belt a total of 18 times. At one point (about 4:20 in the video) he appears to hit, punch, or slam her (you can hear a pretty loud thump, and you can tell it's not the belt). He uses phrases like "I didn't get my licks in yet", "I'm going to BEAT you into submission" (emphasis his), and "I'll keep BEATIN you, and BEATIN you". Apparently his wife even claims she was abused, and she eventually left him for that reason.
Here's the video of the whole thing: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=FEaqB4773MA [youtube.com]
Re: (Score:3)
Why exactly should federal charges be brought against him? I don't think beating your kid is a federal crime.
He should be punished (although I'd image the statute of limitations is up on this), but it would be by a local/state court. I'd also say he should lose his position, but I'd imagine they can't do that unless he is convicted.
Re: (Score:3)
Technically he should have recused himself whenever the issue of child abuse or domestic violence came up.
Re: (Score:3)
The judge cannot be punished in Texas. The State Attorney there has already stated that it would have been a crime, had it been known about at the time, but the statute of limitations has run out. I would argue that the Feds were quite reasonable to examine if there was a Federal issue, since Texas has declared the incident to have been a crime but one they could not prosecute. The Feds might also argue that corrupt officials (and there's no question that he is one) should also be investigated to see if the
Re:The legal system at it's finest. (Score:5, Informative)
The State Attorney is a lying sack of shit.
http://www.dallascriminaldefenselawyerblog.com/2008/09/statute-of-limitations-texas-l.html [dallascrim...erblog.com]
TEN YEARS.
2011-2004 = 7
Someone needs to shoot the SA as well.
Re: (Score:3)
The other piece of info everyone seems to be neglecting is that the child has cerebral palsy. This makes her a DISABLED individual, which certainly qualifies her for the ten-year one, not the five-year one everyone else is trying to say SOL applies.
Don't forget by reason of age as well - 16 isn't old enough in Texas unless you've been emancipated. She clearly can't be emancipated, as she is dependent by nature of physical (possibly mental) disability.
Re:The legal system at it's finest. (Score:4, Interesting)
You are very clearly not reading everything.
The child has cerebral palsy. First, it's a felony by reason of age - 16 is not old enough in Texas to reasonably live on your own without support or aid. Secondly, Medical (physical) disease further adds to this. Thirdly, it's a third-degree felony alone if committed when the child assaulted is covered under Family Code 71.005 - Household member.
You don't know jack about Texas law. How about you shut up and listen to an actual Texan?
Re:The legal system at it's finest. (Score:5, Informative)
Come to Canada. It *is* a federal crime and the law has been upheld by the Supreme Court, just like drunk driving, and you will be charged. You'll have to make bail and promise to come back for your trial, and if you don't your sorry ass will be extradited from the US.
And no, we also do it to Canadians as well - and there is no "religious excuse" [lifesitenews.com].
And there is no statute of limitations on child abuse in Canada.
Re:The legal system at it's finest. (Score:5, Funny)
One more example of the lack of reading the article on Slashdot at its finest.
Re: (Score:3)
First, we only have his word for that and I'm not inclined to accept his claims on face value.
Second, what does it matter why she released the tape? The tape was made and depicts child cruelty, child abuse (not the same thing), negligence, uncontrolled violence and addiction to violence. Ok, so he wanted this to be a family secret. (See "People of the Lie" for why this is a really good indicator of even worse depravities.) His excuses ended the moment he started thrashing her with his belt.
This might not be
Re: (Score:3)
Two wrongs don't make a right, but they ARE wholly independent issues as far as the law is concerned. Her reasons, therefore remain immaterial when it comes to examining his actions.
Yes, you're right that knee-jerk changes to law are bad. However, I take as the underlying principle that the sole value of a nation-state for the people within it is that it raises the potential of all within it beyond the point that could be achieved by any other means. Everything comes down to that. Perpetuating a cycle of ab
Re:The legal system at it's finest. (Score:5, Insightful)
If she had released it when she was a 16-year-old living at home, I would imagine he would have beaten the shit out of her.
Re:The legal system at it's finest. (Score:4, Informative)
According to a quote from the district attorney from the Texas county in question:
"I would expect that yeah, charges would have been pursued but for the inability to proceed due to the statute of limitations," Flanigan said Friday. "You know, whether that would have been a felony or a misdemeanor charge I can't say but I think there would've been some action pursued."
Also according to the article:
Angela Dodge, a U.S. attorney's office spokeswoman, said prosecutors determined there was no federal crime depicted on the 2004 video of Aransas County Court-at-Law Judge William Adams.
According to the link you posted (emphasis mine):
Five Years
Theft, burglary, robbery; kidnapping; injury to a child, elderly individual, or disabled individual that is not punishable as a felony of the first degree under Section 22.04, Penal Code; abandoning or endangering a child; or insurance fraud;
I don't agree with beating children, and especially disabled children, but the crime was not severe enough under current laws to be a felony, and the statute of limitations expired.
Re:The legal system at it's finest. (Score:5, Informative)
Your quote is screwed.
"Ten Years- theft of any estate by an executor/administrator. Theft by a public servant of government property, Forgery. Injury to a child, elderly individual, or disabled individual punishable as a felony of the first degree under Section 22.04, Penal Code;"
A child with cerebral palsy that has been terrorized into a state of fear and unable to defend themselves is a felony, according to Penal code 22.01 with the provision of it being a THIRD DEGREE FELONY if conducted against a person described in Section 71.0021(b), 71.003, or 71.005, Family Code (in this case, it's 71.005 that applies - Household member) and also in Section 22.04, which the entirety of the section shall be hereforth linked
http://www.statutes.legis.state.tx.us/docs/pe/htm/pe.22.htm [state.tx.us]
""Disabled individual" means a person older than 14 years of age who by reason of age or physical or mental disease, defect, or injury is substantially unable to protect himself from harm or to provide food, shelter, or medical care for himself."
By reason of age - 16 years old is not old enough to reasonably live on your own, especially with cerebral palsy, which happens to fall under physical disease.
Hi, I can read in-depth and reference multiple law requirements at the same time thanks to tabbed browsing. SOL has very clearly not expired due to these conditions.
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
Sounds like someone is Projecting.
Re: (Score:3)
Beat, yes. Educate, no. There is no evidence that beatings achieve anything beyond a brief catharsis on the part of the one doing the beating and some form of severe mental dysfunction on the part of the one being beaten. It has no redeeming qualities and is often concealed by the perp (as in this case) because he/she knows damn well it's abnormal, psychotic and depraved.
In this case, the victim has been alleged to have become dysfunctional and that this is why the tape was released. I say alleged because t
Re:So... (Score:4, Insightful)
Re: (Score:3, Informative)
She has cerebral palsy.
Re: (Score:3)
It's the pottery barn rule, you broke it you bought it.
As for refusing to take care of herself. That's just plain ignorant, more likely he conditioned her to be dependent upon him. Which is probably a large factor in why it took so long for the tape to be made public. If she really refused to take care of herself, she probably could have gotten most of his money suing him in court for the damages.
Re: (Score:3)
Re:hard to watch (Score:4, Informative)
He didn't completely stop supporting her financially. He reduced her allowance and took away the Mercedes. Most people do not earn enough to drive a Mercedes. Why should he be forced to supplement her income to the level she deems adequate. She should be grateful for every cent she gets. She is essentially blackmailing him. Two wrongs do not make a right.
Re:hard to watch (Score:5, Informative)
Note: She is an adult and recovering from the abuse. However, she was born with ataxic cerebral palsy. I don't know how bad it is, but it may preclude her from many occupations. Apparently she is pretty smart and plays the piano well. Ataxic cerebral palsy usually affects muscular coordination, and the symptoms (poor balance, shakiness, poor coordination) last a lifetime and may get worse in old age.
There is no reason to discuss why she needed her family's support, if she needed her family's support, if it was justified to withdraw the support or anything else because we don't know enough facts, and it's none of our business.
http://www.amazon.com/s/ref=nb_sb_noss?url=search-alias%3Dstripbooks&field-keywords=thinker's+toolbox&x=0&y=0 [amazon.com]
Re: (Score:3)
So we slap seven years of terrorism charges against the judge.
Re:hard to watch (Score:4, Informative)
That's not how it happened (according to him).
He decided to reduce the support because he felt she was not pulling her own weight.
She countered that she had a video of him beating her from 7 years ago. Basically, she was threatening him to keep the support going or risk embarrassment or worse, prosecution or prison.
The law in most countries does not allow blackmail. In fact, if the prosecutors are willing, she might find herself in trouble.
He did something bad, illegal for which he ought to have been punished. But the law does not allow vigilantism. The law is not a tool to be used to beat people into submission with. It is not hers to use as a weapon. She had to decide earlier whether she wanted him punished or not. Heck, this girl continued living with her father after her parents separated.
Re: (Score:3)
Re:He... (Score:5, Insightful)
After having watched the video, it's very hard not to agree with you though. I don't understand how whipping his daughter is teaching her a lesson about downloading. Beating the fuck out of him might help though, seeing as fear and control seem to be the only thing he understands.
Re: (Score:3)
It's justice. Served angry mob style.
Re:MAFIAA: sue him! (Score:4, Insightful)
She was a minor at the time, so it's on his dime.
Re:"Spare the rod, spoil the child." (Score:4, Insightful)
My parents took the belt to my hind end a few times as a kid and I turned out OK.
Uh, no. You grew up to be an advocate of beating children. That you think that represents "turning out OK" shows how far from OK you are.