Active Entries
- 1: Surge Pricing for Grocery Stores is a Disaster Only Psychopath MBAs Could Love
- 2: Antarctica Day 7: Swimming In the Antaractic Seas
- 3: Restarted my yoga classes, and I discovered I'm a total wreck
- 4: Antarctica: Getting To the Boat and the Disaster That Awaited
- 5: The Enshittification of All That Lives
- 6: How the green energy discourse resembles queer theory
- 7: Tori's Sake & Grill (restaurant, review)
- 8: I'm Not Always Sure I Trust My ADHD Diagonosis
- 9: You can't call it "Moral Injury" when your "morals" are monstrous
- 10: Ebay vs Newmark: You're all just cogs. Accept it. There is no joy in it, but you have no choice.
Style Credit
- Base style: ColorSide by
- Theme: NNWM 2010 Fresh by
Expand Cut Tags
No cut tags
no subject
Date: 2007-07-23 03:52 pm (UTC)Or perhaps on the jury, though it shouldn't be a jury-trial, since they're under aged, and not remotely close enough to be tried as adults, and thus get the 10-year sentance and be placed on the sex-offender list.
I'm curious to know if the parents were present while being questioned, since that's typically how statues work in most places. Of course the DARE officer could say he was just present while the Vice Principal questioned the boys.
Either way, if I were the judge who had this case brought before me, I'd likely dismiss it without prejudice and fine both the officer and Vice Principal for wasting the court's time. (This presumes the boys don't have a long-standing record of being troublemakers, and that this wasn't a repeat offense.)