$40,000 in damage and the owner gets charged?

[The Walk of the Penguin Mich]

Are you serious?

4 kids vandalize a home a man's renovating.  They do $40K in damage (I saw the results on the news this morning, they had a field day in this house with hammers).  Man gets wife to call 911 while he investigates noise and he catches 4 boys in the act.  He locks them in a closet until the cops get there.

www.therepublic.com/view/story/776ac4adb53d4c3e9dea823a50ee1426/US-Vandalism-Suspects-Closet

[chiver78]

sounds like there's more to the story here...

[Peace Of Mind]

Why wasn't trespassing added to the charges? 

I'm just glad this wasn't in Florida.  We are the Capital of idiots here - I swear!   No, I'm not the Governor so stop looking at me like that!    

[Deleted]

He should have shot them. Dead boys don't squeal.

[thyme4change]

The boys have also been charged.  

If this were my son (who is 8), I wouldn't press charges.  Sorry - even if the guy did threaten him with a hammer, I would want my son to come away with the message that if you are doing something illegal - bad things happen.  You might run into some vigilante justice guy who locks you in a closet.

What a fiasco.  Sheesh.

[The Captain]

"I understand they were in the wrong, but there are other ways to handle it," he said. "He (Daniels) knew who the kids were. It's not like they were strangers. And send the kids home and call the cops then. You don't sit there and torment them and tell them you're going to bash their skulls in with a hammer."

So the guy knew who the kids were, threatened them with physical voilence, and unlawfully restrained them...

BTW the kids were also charged.  Sounds like both sides were in the wrong.

[muttleynfelix]

He (Daniels) knew who the kids were. It's not like they were strangers. And send the kids home and call the cops then. You don't sit there and torment them and tell them you're going to bash their skulls in with a hammer."

You send the kids home and THEN call the cops  WTF?  He should be putting the fear of God into them.  They should be traumatized by it! 

[constanz22]

Well, cuz it's NY, the nanny state.  (I work in social services in NY state)  They kids weren't charged because of their ages.  It will be handled in family court.

[The Walk of the Penguin Mich]

Does anyone think that if he did as the dad requested.....let the boys go home and THEN get the cops, that the kids would actually have been charged?  

Those kids would have lied that they weren't there, so there would be no proof.

I wonder who is going to pay for the damages?  $40K is waaaay over what you can get in small claims court.

[Miss Tequila]

Jun 17, 2013 12:24:38 GMT -5 thyme4change said:

The boys have also been charged.  

If this were my son (who is 8), I wouldn't press charges.  Sorry - even if the guy did threaten him with a hammer, I would want my son to come away with the message that if you are doing something illegal - bad things happen.  You might run into some vigilante justice guy who locks you in a closet.

What a fiasco.  Sheesh.

I would hope this would teach my kid a lesson...be an asshole and bad things can happen.  Much better than if the kids stumbled across the wrong home owner who actually smashed their heads in with the hammer.

[thyme4change]

Jun 17, 2013 12:32:33 GMT -5 The Walk of the Penguin Mich said:

Does anyone think that if he did as the dad requested.....let the boys go home and THEN get the cops, that the kids would actually have been charged?  

Those kids would have lied that they weren't there, so there would be no proof.

I wonder who is going to pay for the damages?  $40K is waaaay over what you can get in small claims court.

That's what I am thinking.  He let's them go, and it is he-said, they-said.  

I just wouldn't want my kids to get the message that they can get out of an illegal act, because someone else did something stupid.  

The article does say they have been charged.  Of course it will be handled in family court, because they will be charged as juveniles.

The boys have been charged with burglary and criminal mischief. Their cases are being handled in Wayne County Family Court.[/img]

They are going to get a slap on the wrist, probation, etc.  It isn't like they will be sent to juvy or anything, and they shouldn't.  Most of the time, that will make things worse.  

[midjd]

Jun 17, 2013 12:27:03 GMT -5 The Captain said:

"I understand they were in the wrong, but there are other ways to handle it," he said. "He (Daniels) knew who the kids were. It's not like they were strangers. And send the kids home and call the cops then. You don't sit there and torment them and tell them you're going to bash their skulls in with a hammer."

So the guy knew who the kids were, threatened them with physical voilence, and unlawfully restrained them...

BTW the kids were also charged.  Sounds like both sides were in the wrong.

I completely agree.

Two wrongs don't make a right. Just because the children broke the law doesn't mean the homeowner also has the right to break the law.

This is how you end up with situations in which a homeowner poisons his neighbor's dog because the dog poops in his yard, or someone keying your car because you cut them off in traffic. Vigilante justice might seem satisfying, but it rarely ends well.

[midjd]

I wonder who is going to pay for the damages? $40K is waaaay over what you can get in small claims court.

The homeowner can sue them in civil court. Depending on the state laws, the kids (well, their parents) can also be responsible for the homeowner's attorney fees.

[muttleynfelix]

Jun 17, 2013 12:43:08 GMT -5 midjd said:

Jun 17, 2013 12:27:03 GMT -5 The Captain said:

"I understand they were in the wrong, but there are other ways to handle it," he said. "He (Daniels) knew who the kids were. It's not like they were strangers. And send the kids home and call the cops then. You don't sit there and torment them and tell them you're going to bash their skulls in with a hammer."

So the guy knew who the kids were, threatened them with physical voilence, and unlawfully restrained them...

BTW the kids were also charged.  Sounds like both sides were in the wrong.

I completely agree.

Two wrongs don't make a right. Just because the children broke the law doesn't mean the homeowner also has the right to break the law.

This is how you end up with situations in which a homeowner poisons his neighbor's dog because the dog poops in his yard, or someone keying your car because you cut them off in traffic. Vigilante justice might seem satisfying, but it rarely ends well.

So detaining a couple of children while the cops arrived is vigilante justice? 

It isn't like he tied them up for a couple of days and then called the cops. 

[thyme4change]

The good news is that the guy who locked them in the closet was a neighbor, not the homeowner, so we are going to have some really messy 3-way court battles.  The kids will be charged criminally.  The neighbor will be charged with child endangerment.  The homeowner will sue with kids' parents.  The kids' parents will sue the neighbor.  The neighbor will sue the homeowner.  Ack.  

A bunch of lawyers are super-happy right now.

[midjd]

You're right, he didn't tie them up... he locked them in a closet.

Regardless, it's against the law. The vandalism and his mental state might be mitigating factors so that he'll get a suspended sentence, but criminal confinement statutes are usually pretty clear. You cannot confine someone (tie them up, lock them up, grab them and throw them in a car, etc.) against their will.  Police are the only group empowered to do that.  He was correct in calling the police, but he should have let them do their jobs.

ETA - didn't see Thyme's post. I mistakenly assumed that the person who did the confining was the homeowner.

[The Walk of the Penguin Mich]

His father in law is the homeowner. 

[tskeeter]

I guess someone is going to have to explain to me how simply putting the kids in a closet amounts to endangering them.  Assuming that the kids weren't left unattended for an extended period of time, it would seem that they were in less danger in a closet than they were while they were committing the vandalism.  Afterall, they could have been hit by falling debris, with a hammer that was being swung by one of their buddies, cut themselves on glass from windows they apparently broke, or injured themselves on/with construction tools and equipment that may have been in the home.

Unlawful restraint?  I guess I don't understand how this situation was any different than a storekeeper holding a shoplifter until the police arrive.  The man involved found the kids vandalizing the house.  I think he had a reasonable cause to hold them for the arrival of the police.  If this situation amounted to unlawful restraint, does that mean I don't need to hang around while the poice officer writes me a ticket?  Just how, exactly, does one distinguish between lawful restraint and unlawful restraint?  Is it the situation that led to the restraint?  Is it the method of restraint?  Is it who is intiating the restraint?  Is it who is being restrained?  Or some combination of these factors?   

Threatening the kids?  Not too smart.  But I wonder what I would be if I found weeks of work destroyed by this bunch of pint sized criminals.

[swamp]

Jun 17, 2013 12:32:33 GMT -5 The Walk of the Penguin Mich said:

Does anyone think that if he did as the dad requested.....let the boys go home and THEN get the cops, that the kids would actually have been charged?  

Those kids would have lied that they weren't there, so there would be no proof.

I wonder who is going to pay for the damages?  $40K is waaaay over what you can get in small claims court.

Actually, people get charged on witness statements all the time.

You've got a guy who says he saw the guys doing the damage.  You have a homeowner that says the place was fine before that.  You've got pictures of the damage.  You'll probably have statements from the kids saying they did it.

It's enough to convict.

[The Walk of the Penguin Mich]

But I wonder what I would be if I found weeks of work destroyed by this bunch of pint sized criminals.

Who are likely going to get their hand slapped and sent home to mommy and daddy.  The kids were apparently pissed off because they wanted to play in the house that was being renovated, and they were told to go away by the wife.  So the destruction is retaliation for being told that they could not play in the empty house.

[The Walk of the Penguin Mich]

You'll probably have statements from the kids saying they did it.

You really think 4 8-10 year old boys are going to admit they did it?  They're going to lie through their teeth.

[swamp]

Jun 17, 2013 13:18:50 GMT -5 The Walk of the Penguin Mich said:

You'll probably have statements from the kids saying they did it.

You really think 4 8-10 year old boys are going to admit they did it?  They're going to lie through their teeth.

They start out lying and then they admit it.  I don't know why they do, but they do.   I don't think I"ve ever had a Family Court Juvenile Delinquency case where the kid didn't give some kind of admissions. 

[8 Bit WWBG]

Mayor Bloomberg should outlaw hammers over 8 ounces...

OK seriously, this used to be the kind of thing where the parents of the vandals would thank the neighbor for catching the kids and then give their own kids a whooping.

...:::"Police are the only group empowered to do that.  He was correct in calling the police, but he should have let them do their jobs.":::...

So if the kids had left, and it became a "his word against theirs" situation, would he have any prayer of getting recompense?  After all, do you think any of those kids' parents would side against their little angels?

...:::"But I wonder what I would be if I found weeks of work destroyed by this bunch of pint sized criminals.":::...

Does this factor in during mental state?  I hope the neighbor gets off scot-free.

...:::"ETA - didn't see Thyme's post. I mistakenly assumed that the person who did the confining was the homeowner.":::...

Is it worse if the one doing the detaining is also the property owner?  If I caught someone breaking in, and I was able to subdue him/her and restrain him/her until the cops showed up, could I actually be charged?

Because if we've hit the point where burglars have more rights than victims, screw this TSP/Roth crap and a 30 year wait.

[8 Bit WWBG]

Also, does anyone involved in this incident work for Dollar General or BMW?

[thyme4change]

Jun 17, 2013 13:25:05 GMT -5 swamp said:

Jun 17, 2013 13:18:50 GMT -5 The Walk of the Penguin Mich said:

You'll probably have statements from the kids saying they did it.

You really think 4 8-10 year old boys are going to admit they did it?  They're going to lie through their teeth.

They start out lying and then they admit it.  I don't know why they do, but they do.   I don't think I"ve ever had a Family Court Juvenile Delinquency case where the kid didn't give some kind of admissions. 

I believe that.  I can see how they can't keep up the lies.  My only concern is that now that the parents have turned the criminals into the victims, how do these kids feel about their actions.  

I bet the kids are lying about the extent of the "threatening with a hammer."  

I missed that the neighbor is the son-in-law.  

[Shooby]

Well, technically, he could have killed them all since they didn't belong on that property and be totally justified right? 

[swamp]

Jun 17, 2013 13:49:48 GMT -5 Shooby said:

Well, technically, he could have killed them all since they didn't belong on that property and be totally justified right? 

Um, no. 

[Shooby]

Jun 17, 2013 13:51:01 GMT -5 swamp said:

Jun 17, 2013 13:49:48 GMT -5 Shooby said:

Well, technically, he could have killed them all since they didn't belong on that property and be totally justified right? 

Um, no. 

Why not?  If he felt threatened and they were on his property or property that he has a right to occupy, then if someone looks at your cross eyed you can take them out.

[Miss Tequila]

Jun 17, 2013 13:28:00 GMT -5 8 Bit WWBG said:

Mayor Bloomberg should outlaw hammers over 8 ounces...

OK seriously, this used to be the kind of thing where the parents of the vandals would thank the neighbor for catching the kids and then give their own kids a whooping.

...:::"Police are the only group empowered to do that.  He was correct in calling the police, but he should have let them do their jobs.":::...

So if the kids had left, and it became a "his word against theirs" situation, would he have any prayer of getting recompense?  After all, do you think any of those kids' parents would side against their little angels?

...:::"But I wonder what I would be if I found weeks of work destroyed by this bunch of pint sized criminals.":::...

Does this factor in during mental state?  I hope the neighbor gets off scot-free.

...:::"ETA - didn't see Thyme's post. I mistakenly assumed that the person who did the confining was the homeowner.":::...

Is it worse if the one doing the detaining is also the property owner?  If I caught someone breaking in, and I was able to subdue him/her and restrain him/her until the cops showed up, could I actually be charged?

Because if we've hit the point where burglars have more rights than victims, screw this TSP/Roth crap and a 30 year wait.

I can't remember my dad ever spanking me...but my ass would have been red for a week if he found out that I did something like this. I would have been safer locked in the closet

[swamp]

Jun 17, 2013 13:54:13 GMT -5 Shooby said:

Jun 17, 2013 13:51:01 GMT -5 swamp said:

Um, no. 

Why not?  If he felt threatened and they were on his property or property that he has a right to occupy, then if someone looks at your cross eyed you can take them out.

Now you're changing the facts.  YOu can't kill someone for trespassing.    If they threaten you, that's different, but it better be a reasonable fear of death or serious physical injury.   Looking cross eyed at someone isn't enough.