Randy Cassingham's Blog

Posted by Sue from Michigan on August 16, 2010:

I don't see this as a ZT issue. Just transporting a person in a trunk is dangerous. That would be cause for a ticket, right there. Pulling a prank that has the police thinking you are committing a violent felony is even more dangerous. What if one of the kids made an unexpected movement that caused one of the officers to discharge his weapon? Cops are human. They make mistakes. That would ruin the kid's life and the officer's, over a prank. The charge seems justified to me.

Posted by Mike from Dallas on August 16, 2010:

One day there will be a Supreme Court ruling on the crime of "Disorderly Conduct", one I suspect will be that it's too vague to be constitutionally valid. Until then, it's a catch-all for every "crime" that offends any particular cop's sensitivities. Notice that there was no other "crime" to be charged with.

We've pulled similar stunts as these kids, and we were in our 30's/40's. In summary, it involved a bunch of us working out of town, staying at a hotel, and getting totally blind stinking drunk. And one of our co-workers passed out. So we duct-taped him in the nude to a rolling chair, rolled him out to the elevator, and then hit every button.

As for Scared Straight, that's a pretty fairy tale. Them that learn are able to do so from the arrest experience; no need for overnight stays. As a parent, I can tell you that I will never let one of my kids spend the night in jail as long as I'm able to make their bail. And yes, I've been in jail a number of times, as a teen and as an adult.

As for the What-If's, those are endless. As a gun owner, the law holds ME to an accountability that nearly renders my 2nd Amendment right worthless. I draw and shoot only when my choice is to be tried by 12 or carried by 6. I expect no less accountability from the police. Accidental discharge in the hands of a professional is intolerable.

As for those kids, it was a dumb stunt. Get over it. Not the first, won't be the last, and no amount of laws or charges will change it.

Posted by Stefani, Iowa City IA on August 16, 2010:

I really don't see this as a zero tolerance issue. Their actions caused police response as if a crime was being committed. In my opinion, it's rather along the same lines as filing a false police report because it pulls the police officers off legitimate work for something that isn't actually a crime. And these boys are old enough to be able to think through the potential consequences of their actions. I think being charged with disorderly conduct is an appropriate response, though I would hope that the judge works out a compromise that will help them learn from the experience.

Posted by Scott in Chicago on August 16, 2010:

This isn't ZT - it's a real live misdemeanor crime. They ought to be prosecuted as juveniles (which record will not follow them into adulthood), and put on probation.

If this really is nothing, that will become obvious during that period of supervision, and when it ends, it's over; if this is indicative of something worse - psychiatrically or criminologically - that will show as well, and we can deal with it.

Posted by Dale from Arizona on August 17, 2010:

Pranks can be dangerous.

I recall many years ago a story about a couple of guys in a restaurant were suddenly confronted by two more guys that just entered. They started a fight that ended up outside and shots were being fired. Coincidentally two police officers unwittingly drove up during the shooting and quickly subdued everyone involved. As it turned out, all four knew each other and were firing blanks and the whole thing was staged to catch the reaction of the public for their psychology class.

It leaves one with strong mixed emotions, no one was hurt but….HOW STUPID CAN YOU BE??

---

They were indeed lucky that the officers didn't open fire -- or that there were undercover cops dining at the time, who would perhaps shoot the aggressors to contain the situation. Or armed civilians, or.... -rc

Posted by Robert in Oklahoma City on August 17, 2010:

I'm in agreement with those who say this is not Zero Tolerance. If I were to see something like that happening, I would have called the police. This is an example of a joke that's not funny. It's one thing to scare someone silly, but to scare someone into calling the police? That's pretty dumb.

Posted by Cory, Topeka, Kansas on August 17, 2010:

This isn't ZT. The kids played a prank, they got caught, the cops did the right thing.

Look, I can't tell you how many times I caught somebody doing something wrong and then copped out by saying "I was just joking". My dad, a cop in Denver, even tells the story about how a BK was held up while he sat in the lobby. When the crook realized that the cop had just caught him, he said "I was just joking around".

Look, the kids played a dangerous prank that LOOKED like a crime. The cops have no choice other than to treat the apparent crime as one. While it is possible that no crime was committed - you can't just take people at their word.

If it looks like a crime, and smells like a crime, treat it as a crime until you have better than a voice from a trunk saying that it isn't.

Posted by Peter, Texas on August 17, 2010:

No, I don't believe this to be zero tolerance at all. While still a prank, police officers were still called out meaning they could not be sent to a *REAL* crime if it were in progress.

It should be considered filing a false police report.

---

But the kids didn't "file" a police report, or even call this in; a witness did. So the witness should be arrested for "filing" a false police report? -rc

Posted by Harmon, Houston, TX on August 17, 2010:

OK, kids do stupid stuff. I've done some myself.

On the other hand, I was a teacher for several years in Flint, MI. One day while teaching a 6th grade class, a parole officer in plain clothes came into class looking for somebody. Half the kids in class tried to hide behind their books. When I was a kid, I didn't know what a parole officer was. Half of the kids in class not only knew who he was, but had a professional relationship with him - half of the kids in my class were active criminals, and I, as their teacher, wasn't allowed to know about it. I suddenly realized why my stuff was always getting stolen and broken in class.

I asked the police liaison officer what the percentage of kids in the whole school with active police records was, he guessed at least a third. And as their teacher, I wasn't allowed to know who, or for what. Following the police reports, even without names, it was obvious that the crimes ran the whole gamut, from theft, especially car theft, to drug dealing, gang violence, and manslaughter. One judge during a campaign, made the statement that too many dropouts were on the streets committing crimes, and he was determined to get them back in the schools. My point is, that they would still be committing crimes, but just doing it in school.

It also became obvious that there were groups of car theft criminals that essentially ran schools much like Fagan's, that used children to steal cars, because if the kids were caught, they wouldn't get punished very badly, their records would be sealed, and no one would be allowed to know.

This system we have for dealing with juvenile crime has greased the skids to make it easier for children to begin a life of crime. And made life for teachers incredibly more difficult.

Try this yourself: Try to find out what percentage of students in your local middle and high school have active police records. Even if the names are sealed, the answer will probably shock you.

Posted by Ernest, NSW, Australia on August 17, 2010:

A prank is something that causes no real trouble and does NOT disturb many people. A fake kidnapping is NOT a prank. It's just as bad as a one I heard of back in the 1990s, some guys thought to stir a person up by staging a faked armed kidnap of them from their mate's work on his birthday. They enter with ski masks and realistic toy guns. The end result was three 'fake' kidnappers in intensive care for some time. They looked real, they acted real, and the armed security guard visiting his wife defended the people and shot them.

The same could have happened here if an off duty police officer was on hand and decided to intervene using his firearm, as he would have been entitled to do in most jurisdictions, using his firearm to stop a felony. How would the kids feel then? I think they should get a few hundred hours community service as a minimum, to give them time to reflect on their stupidity. Mother nature has a simple answer for stupidity, they're the first to die.