And now for the rest of the story- A Muslim boy and his clock

[Sapper Woody]

Texas Family Code Section 52.025

A child may not be left unattended in a juvenile processing office and is entitled to be accompanied by the child’s parent, guardian, or other custodian or by the child’s attorney.

A person taking a child into custody shall promptly give notice of the person’s action and a statement of the reason for taking the child into custody, to the child’s parent, guardian, or custodian.

He was denied this after requesting it and the police chief had no answer for that particular question when asked by the press.

It sure is great that the Irving police can just disregard the law willy nilly. Even scarier that they did this all of this after it was found out to be exactly what the kid said it was.

I'm sure everyone here would be totally fine with having their child unlawfully interrogated without your consent or presence. Goodness gracious people.

Again, I'm not saying that what happened was exactly correct, but I think people are going overboard in trying to make it appear more incorrect than it was. As has been pointed out, no charges were filed, and he technically wasn't under arrest. When he was denied a chance to call his father, the way I read it, was during his arrest. The father arrived on the scene of the arrest, and so the department didn't need to contact him anymore. It was already done.

I am not sure of the circumstances of the first paragraph, as I am still looking for a good, unbiased source. Seems they all have a slant to them.

 

[Use of Time]

Again, I'm not saying that what happened was exactly correct, but I think people are going overboard in trying to make it appear more incorrect than it was. As has been pointed out, no charges were filed, and he technically wasn't under arrest. When he was denied a chance to call his father, the way I read it, was during his arrest. The father arrived on the scene of the arrest, and so the department didn't need to contact him anymore. It was already done.

I am not sure of the circumstances of the first paragraph, as I am still looking for a good, unbiased source. Seems they all have a slant to them.

No, I'm with you.

To summarize.

Teacher alerting police is fine and police investigating on site is fine. Police handcuffing him and taking him to a juvenile detention center and questioning him before his parents or attorney are made available is not good. This thing could have been handled by the police showing up, confirming it wasn't a bomb, advising the child of the judgment to bring this device to school and leaving the school. The child was suspended three days which is a bit much. The fact that the child was in fact taken to a juvenile detention facility and interrogated while allegedly having his request to contact his parents denied is alarming especially when the police have acknowledged that it was quickly confirmed on site that it wasn't a bomb and the child never misrepresented his intent for bringing the device to school. Add in the fact that neither the police or school administration took any steps to evacuate and secure the building and I'm doubly concerned.

Also having a hard time finding a legitimate source that states if he was detained or arrested. Usually a detainment is on site and there is some hazy legal language that identifies a reasonable amount of time (usually 20 minutes). The fact that he was cuffed and transported to a detention facility lends me to believe he was either arrested or the police stopped one step short of making an arrest. There we have the need to have the Miranda rights read and all that which I'm doubting was done. That's where I have a problem with the interrogation. In a detainment he doesn't have to answer anything as his 5th amendment rights are Constitutionally protected. Whether or not the child knows this is in question hence the law for having parents contacted as far as juveniles are concerned.

 

[Sapper Woody]

No, I'm with you.

To summarize.

Teacher alerting police is fine and police investigating on site is fine.
Police handcuffing him and taking him to a juvenile detention center and questioning him before his parents or attorney are made available is not good. This thing could have been handled by the police showing up, confirming it wasn't a bomb, advising the child of the judgment to bring this device to school and leaving the school. The child was suspended three days which is a bit much. The fact that the child was in fact taken to a juvenile detention facility and interrogating while allegedly having his request to contact his parents denied is alarming especially when the police have acknowledged that it was quickly confirmed that it wasn't a bomb and the child never misrepresented his intent for bringing the device to school. Add in the fact that neither the police or school administration took any steps to evacuate and secure the building and I'm doubly concerned.

I can understand that, and I agree. I think the question which needs to be answered is was this all done in an oversight, or was it done on purpose for some reason? I, personally, would tend to lean towards they went overboard in trying to teach him a lesson, and that much of what was done was not with malicious intent.

I do agree with you on how it should have been handled.

 

[Use of Time]

I can understand that, and I agree. I think the question which needs to be answered is was this all done in an oversight, or was it done on purpose for some reason? I, personally, would tend to lean towards they went overboard in trying to teach him a lesson, and that much of what was done was not with malicious intent.

I do agree with you on how it should have been handled.

Agreed on all accounts. I'm just coming at this from the perspective of a parent. If I found that my child was paraded in front of his peers in handcuffs and interrogated without my consent after the situation was quickly clarified on scene, I know I would be livid.

 

[righteousdude2]

Regarding a parent being present during the investigation of children, my experience with the state of California DSS was legally permitted to talk with children during the initial, or onset of an investigation.

State laws allowed that mandated reporters and on sight investigators be permitted to interview the children without parents being present. I think the law allowed this because sometimes the issues could be life threatening, or threatening to the welfare of that child or other children, and having to wait for a parent to be contacted and arrive prior to the initial questioning could HINDER and even impair the information necessary to develop ans assess the situation and take corrective actions for everyone involved.

In short. It is not necessary to gain permission to talk to children in a state licensed facility during the scope and course of an investigation concerning the safety and welfare of said juvenile(s). I think this is extended to teaching staff.

 

[poncho]

https://www.youtube.com/watch?t=1&v=6Dgd9m_t5Jo

 

[Use of Time]

Regarding a parent being present during the investigation of children, my experience with the state of California DSS was legally permitted to talk with children during the initial, or onset of an investigation.

State laws allowed that mandated reporters and on sight investigators be permitted to interview the children without parents being present. I think the law allowed this because sometimes the issues could be life threatening, or threatening to the welfare of that child or other children, and having to wait for a parent to be contacted and arrive prior to the initial questioning could HINDER and even impair the information necessary to develop ans assess the situation and take corrective actions for everyone involved.

In short. It is not necessary to gain permission to talk to children in a state licensed facility during the scope and course of an investigation concerning the safety and welfare of said juvenile(s). I think this is extended to teaching staff.

This is Texas. Teachers and the press can ask questions yes, but this child was handcuffed, transported and interrogated at a juvenile detention facility while having his request to contact his family denied. We already know the situation wasn't life threatening so that doesn't hold water. Even the police have acknowledged that it didn't take long to determine that. You don't get to throw out the law because it might hinder an investigation. I've already posted the law in this very thread that is pretty clear on the procedures.

 

[poncho]

This is Texas. Teachers and the press can ask questions yes, but this child was handcuffed, transported and interrogated at a juvenile detention facility while having his request to contact his family denied. We already know the situation wasn't life threatening so that doesn't hold water. Even the police have acknowledged that it didn't take long to determine that. You don't get to throw out the law because it might hinder an investigation. I've already posted the law in this very thread that is pretty clear on the procedures.

You do realize that you're speaking to the same mindset that gave us the patriot acts, warrantless searches and seizures, mass warrantless wiretapping by the NSA, indefinite detention without charge or trial and execution by the state without due process, right?

 

[Darrell C]

As an IED expert (not necessarily "bomb" expert; there's a difference), if I saw this, I would immediately assume that it was an ignition/initiation device. Obviously, there are no explosives present, but I wouldn't expect a teacher to know this. In fact, I've had soldiers incorrectly call that type of configuration an IED, when it is just an initiation system.

Upon seeing that, with no prior warning of the child bringing it to school, the school should have been evacuated, the young man in question separated from his peers, and the police called.

I am not condoning the actions of the police force. But the police being called was the right action. However, the action the school took was not enough; it should have been immediately evacuated.

The boy probably should not have been arrested, but he definitely should be let known the gravity of bringing a device such as that into a public area with seemingly no explanation.

Looking at that picture, there is only one component missing to make that an IED; and that's the explosives. The initiation system is there (timer/alarm), the ignition system is there (the current of electricity which would flow to the buzzer for the alarm). It's all there except the explosive. A couple of items which could easily be found in the school's janitorial or medical closet, and with a case that size, you're looking at a device that would be the equivalent of roughly 6-10 pounds of TNT.

I know the rebuttal will be, "But we have all those components in our alarm clocks at home." While this is true, I don't dismantle my alarm clock into usable components and take it into public with me.

I'm not saying the boy was wrong; what I am saying is that what he did wasn't very bright. He brought a suspicious object that not only appeared like a homemade explosive, but had all the components except the actual explosives, into a public place that is currently a hotspot for mass shooting (public school) in a state in which there has been several recent mass shootings. Again, not wrong; just not smart.

As an aside, I tried to find a good, unbiased news source for this. But I couldn't. It's amazing the ignorance though, on both sides. One headline was, "What kind of bomb counts up?" Answer: any of them can. As long as there's an alarm type of component, it can be used. It's just the most frequently used items have a timer that either dings or buzzes when it reaches zero.

Excellent post.

I'm not saying the boy was wrong; what I am saying is that what he did wasn't very bright.

That seems to be the issue, motivation. If it were a clock project, and innocent, there is the question of why someone would make something that was already a clock into another clock, which is ungainly and going backwards in terms of advancement (the goal has been for years to make clocks smaller, unless decorative, which is not.

I agree it wasn't very bright to do what he did, and it makes me wonder if the motivation was not to intentionally spark an incident concerning profiling.

You make a great point that explosives could be found in the school, not to mention that if there were a plot someone could have easily placed the necessary materials in a hidden location.

What we need to do is water-board this brat until he comes clean.

Just kidding.

But, we do need to hear from the boy his motivation. If this kind of thing interested me more, I might even look for it, but, as it stands, it seems like the situation, for the most part, was handled, though debated as to whether it was handled well or not.

It may be he treatment of the kid was a lesson the authorities tried to teach, a "scared straight" kind of thing, which is not unheard of.


God bless.

 

[poncho]

Yep that's why we have authorities. To give us all lessons on how we are to submit to their authority.

 

[Darrell C]

Yep that's why we have authorities. To give us all lessons on how we are to submit to their authority.

It's not a perfect world, Poncho, best to try to avert attention to some of the good things that take place in this fallen world once in a while.

Here's a challenge: find something positive (without sarcasm, lol) that has been accomplished by Police Officers.

Anything.


God bless.

 

[Revmitchell]

Here’s What a Former FBI Agent Told Us

......IJ talked to Jonathan Gilliam, a former FBI agent, about the way the issue was handled.

On Mohamed’s detainment:
“I do believe that he should have been detained and if he did not answer questions properly and openly, arrested.

We cannot play politically correct games when reacting to anything that may be terror related or the potential of injuring or killing people.”
On whether or not the clock resembled a bomb:
“I have made numerous explosive devices in my career. While I was not an Explosive Ordinance Disposal (EOD) operator, I was a SEAL. We didn’t take bombs apart, we built explosive unconventional devices that could be used in unconventional ways.

That device (clock) resembled something that was unconventional and not understood by the teachers or law enforcement. That is typical of crude explosive devices.”
How he would have approached the situation as an FBI agent:
“My response would have been exactly as the authorities in Irving, Texas responded. I challenge anyone that was not in that circumstance to explain a better, more effective response to an unknown, unconventional device.”
Then, we asked Gilliam if he believed it was set up like a “hoax bomb”:
“I can’t speculate on that because I’m not there to interview witnesses and the boy. What seems to be apparent is that he was willing to keep showing people until someone got alarmed. I’m amazed that the first teacher that saw it didn’t make a big deal about it immediately.

Important thing is that people learn from this and remember it’s ok to question something you feel might be a threat.

Clock or explosive, that kid or any other kid that brings something unconventional that resembles even the components of a bomb, should be delt with swift action to clear this area and triage the boy and the device.”

http://www.ijreview.com/2015/09/425...acebook&utm_medium=owned&utm_campaign=culture

 

[poncho]

It's not a perfect world, Poncho, best to try to avert attention to some of the good things that take place in this fallen world once in a while.

No it's not a perfect world. Looking the other way when your country needs you to defend it most isn't making it any better.

Here's a challenge: find something positive (without sarcasm, lol) that has been accomplished by Police Officers.

Anything.

Why? Do you suppose that's going to reverse how far this country has slid into tyranny?

Here's a counter challenge for you: Take off the blinders, ditch the emotional attachments you've formed to the state and any political party and start defending the US Constitution and your own country and countrymen from the tyrants great and small that are busy transforming into a debt ridden slave plantation.

A word from Sam Adams . . .

“If you love wealth greater than liberty, the tranquility of servitude greater than the animating contest for freedom, go home from us in peace. We seek not your counsel, nor your arms. Crouch down and lick the hand that feeds you; May your chains set lightly upon you, and may posterity forget that you were our countrymen.”

 

[Use of Time]

http://www.ijreview.com/2015/09/425...acebook&utm_medium=owned&utm_campaign=culture

Then why didn't they evacuate the school or follow any other bomb related procedures? You can't arrest somebody for exercising their fifth amendment rights. I can't believe you don't know that. If he wanted to, the child could have been completely silent and refused to answer anything and the police would have to accept that. The Constitution isn't to be discarded at will.

 

[poncho]

Sure it is. It's easy. The neocons proved it. Just scare the population with a bunch of bogeymen you've been funding and arming for decades and using as proxy fighters in other countries and tell the people those bogeymen will get them if we have to follow the constitution.

The government of these United States actually claims the authority to execute American citizens with no due process at all (see the NDAA) and the people don't even think twice about it. The people didn't even blink when Obama executed an American citizen with a missile from a drone without due process. 50 years ago that would have been considered murder and everyone would be screaming for his impeachment and arrest, today? People are more concerned over what Donald Trump said about Oprah.

Constitution? We don't need no steenking constitution we'd rather feel safe from outside threats than worry about threats to our liberty. And besides we all know that the only time we have to worry about the government abusing it's power or violating our rights is when democrats are in control of the government.

 

[Sapper Woody]

I wish we had a transcript of what exactly was asked of the boy. We do know, when asked what the device was, he responded with, "It's a clock". What we don't know is what were the follow up questions, such as, "Why did you bring it to school?"

Knowing this information might shed some light on why the actions that were taken were taken. I'm not condemning the boy (although, again, I don't think what he did was very bright), but I'm not going to jump on the condemn-the-police bandwagon until I have more information.

With the information I currently have, I can't say whether detaining him was the right or wrong answer. A question I do have, however, is why wasn't the school evacuated. This definitely looks suspect.

In the case of this story, it seems we (as a board and as a country) have immediately split into two factions: one who condemn the police, and one who applauds them. I'm trying not to become a part of either group until I can make an informed decision.

Poncho, I would think that you would be doing the same thing, as much as you speak out against the false dichotomy. Here is a time when that idea could absolutely be applied. It's possible that both parties were wrong. It's also possible that neither party was wrong.

 

[Revmitchell]

I wish we had a transcript of what exactly was asked of the boy. We do know, when asked what the device was, he responded with, "It's a clock". What we don't know is what were the follow up questions, such as, "Why did you bring it to school?"

Knowing this information might shed some light on why the actions that were taken were taken. I'm not condemning the boy (although, again, I don't think what he did was very bright), but I'm not going to jump on the condemn-the-police bandwagon until I have more information.

With the information I currently have, I can't say whether detaining him was the right or wrong answer. A question I do have, however, is why wasn't the school evacuated. This definitely looks suspect.

In the case of this story, it seems we (as a board and as a country) have immediately split into two factions: one who condemn the police, and one who applauds them. I'm trying not to become a part of either group until I can make an informed decision.

Poncho, I would think that you would be doing the same thing, as much as you speak out against the false dichotomy. Here is a time when that idea could absolutely be applied. It's possible that both parties were wrong. It's also possible that neither party was wrong.

Looking at what the kid actually brought to school automatically makes him wrong. Add to that his dad is a Muslim activist adds suspicion to this entire ordeal. Cops will detain anyone with the use of cuffs until they clear matters up. Further the school mishandled the entire thing when teachers had earlier ignored what he brought even though they had their own suspicions or knew other might. I have to wonder if there was a fear of being in trouble or made a public spectacle of should it be discovered that they were wrong.

 

[annsni]

I was talking to my kids about this last night and I remembered a situation where we saw a response different than what we thought it should be but it made sense in light of who the person was. My daughter had a young man who was interested in her although my daughter was not interested in return. He still made sure to be around my daughter as much as possible and when she was in our church Christmas musical as one of the main roles, he made sure he made it to every performance. On the last night, he walked into the lobby with his heavy coat (it was December and cold outside) with something hidden under his coat. None of us though anything of it. However, one of our security people was a former Marine who served in Ronald Reagan's Secret Service and so he has a different sensitivity to things. He immediately honed in on this guy and was ready to run over to get him - but the other security man next to him knew the situation and said "It's probably Nicole's stalker with flowers." "Stalker" really keyed this guy up even more and he turned to me to ask me about it. I explained that he was harmless as far as we knew and he hung out with the group of them from work. It was really interesting to see how this guy was now on heightened alert with the stalker and ended up totally tailing him the entire night, staying not more than 10 feet from him until he left the parking lot. I was amazed at the skill of stealth he had!

But the take-away I told the kids is oftentimes we will think a response is overblown but when you realize the experience of the police/authorities, sometimes it makes a lot more sense. I'm not sure of all of the details of this case but I can see why the authorities might be a bit more sensitive to a child bringing in an electronic board like that and possibly being vague about it's description. Might the response have been heightened by the nationality/religious faith of this boy? Absolutely. But again, that can be from past experiences of this police force.

 

[Darrell C]

No it's not a perfect world. Looking the other way when your country needs you to defend it most isn't making it any better.



Why? Do you suppose that's going to reverse how far this country has slid into tyranny?

Here's a counter challenge for you: Take off the blinders, ditch the emotional attachments you've formed to the state and any political party and start defending the US Constitution and your own country and countrymen from the tyrants great and small that are busy transforming into a debt ridden slave plantation.

A word from Sam Adams . . .

“If you love wealth greater than liberty, the tranquility of servitude greater than the animating contest for freedom, go home from us in peace. We seek not your counsel, nor your arms. Crouch down and lick the hand that feeds you; May your chains set lightly upon you, and may posterity forget that you were our countrymen.”

Well, it's funny you should consider me a pawn of the government, seeing I am a small business owner who's only ties with the government are paying taxes and pulling permits.

They do not regulate my life.

So you are saying that the life my wife and I have built is a plantation? lol

The fact is you will not take up my challenge, because you know in your heart that the number of questionable events are far outweighed by the number of events where a criminal is brought to justice, crime deterred, heroes made in acts of self sacrifice.

When a child goes missing...who is it that searches for that child? Who is it that prosecutes the criminal?

Have you ever looked for a missing child? I doubt it. Why? Because there are people in place to handle those things when they arise.

Right?

So what would happen if a community were "bankrupted" and those resources were not available? Could we depend on you?

We could name any number of events where we have Law Enforcement in place, and as I said before, I think we owe it to the people who willingly put their lives on the line for the Public...not to charge them all with corruption.

As far as tyranny? Who did you vote for? The guy I voted against has strong-armed me with buying insurance that is double what I was paying for it, and if I don't...I am taxed. The guy I voted against is a man who is okay with his grandchildren being put to death.

You charge me with a scenario that will, if people do not start waking up, one day be true. The guy I voted against states he supports homosexual rights and at the same time promotes people...who put homosexuals to death.

There is no tyranny for those who respect Law Enforcement. Only for those that despise it.

So let's keep the facts straight.

And that is all the time I have today, my friend, see you at the next appointed time.


God bless.

 

[Revmitchell]

https://www.youtube.com/watch?t=216&v=CEmSwJTqpgY\

The above link is a short video explaining that the so called clock in the briefcase (not a cigar box) was in fact not made by the boy but was simply a store bough product removed from its manufactured casing.