 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
Zero Tolerance + Intake Center = EXTREME Nightmare Below is a letter that Richard sent to his local District Attorney.
It describes his nightmare in detail. Dear District Attorney, This may be a rather lengthy letter, but I hope you take the time to read it. As a voting taxpayer and a caring parent, I want to bring something to your attention that is beginning to border on the absurd. My son, XXXXX , is a 16 year old sophomore at a local High School. He inherited ADD (Attention Deficit Disorder) from me, Tourette's Syndrome and OCD (Obsessive Compulsive Disorder) from his mother and takes medication for all of the above. His doctor would not hesitate to tell you that he has accomplished more in school relative to what he has to overcome than the vast majority of the students in the school. A couple of months ago, he was involved in an incident in which he pushed another boy, the boy pushed him back and my son hit the other boy with his hand on the other boy's face (once). There were some other circumstances that led up to it but they aren't important. My son admitted being responsible for it. He didn't blame the other boy for my son's actions. He regretted it and we drove over to the other boy's house that evening where my son made a sincere apology to the boy as well as making a separate apology to the boy's parents for hitting their son. To my knowledge, the other boy was not cut and there were no broken bones. Although there may have been a bruise later on, my guess is the biggest damage was a bruised ego. My wife and I never make excuses for our children. We always back the schools and the teachers, even when we disagree with them. We tell our children that they have to learn to deal with people who might be wrong long after they leave school. I'm confident you know what I am talking about. My wife and I were called to the school immediately after the incident and we were informed that our son was being suspended from school for 3 days. We expected that and didn't disagree with it. We were not happy with what our son did and, although we wished he were not being suspended, we could not fault the school. The next thing we were told was that the school has a "zero tolerance policy" and that our son, under the eyes of our state law, had officially committed a crime called "battery". Although they never used the words "charged" or "arrested", they read him his Miranda rights and told him that they would have to transport him to the Juvenile Assessment Center where we could pick him up later. In addition, we were informed that it is the local Police Department policy that anyone being transported in this fashion has to be handcuffed for the duration of the ride. We thought all this was a little overly dramatic and theatrical but we said nothing and went along with it. As I said, we back the schools even when we disagree with them. I have to tell you, however, that I was beginning to worry that the fine line between doling out punishment to teach my son a lesson and beating what little self-esteem he has left out of him was beginning to be crossed. I was beginning to realize that the "process" was not concerned with our son, his welfare, and his future. It is concerned with carrying out its "cookie cutter" system of punishment, regardless of the individual and regardless of the crime. When I went to high school (and possibly you too), the above incident would have also warranted suspension as well as a visit by the parents. I don't think I am going out on a limb to suggest that most people would feel that the punishment at that time for that crime was appropriate. It gets worse. At the Juvenile Assessment Center, I was interviewed by a nice young lady who asked a lot of appropriate questions about my son, our family members, and talked about the juvenile legal system. She told us that "IF" the county chose to prosecute this case, we would receive a letter from the prosecutor's office within the next two weeks. She added, however, that in light of the fact that this was his first "incident" and that this incident was rather minor compared to others, it was unlikely that we would receive a letter. I was wondering to myself what cases could possibly come through the JAC that could possibly be more minor than this one. Drugs weren't involved. Weapons weren't involved. Impromptu weapons (i.e. a bat or chair) weren't involved. I couldn't help thinking that if we got a letter for this, were there any incidences that your office DIDN'T prosecute. I'm not saying my son didn't do wrong. I'm not saying my son shouldn't be punished. I am saying that if our county prosecutor's office chose to prosecute this relatively minor incident, which was considered "over" by the victim as well, how many other similar cases are being prosecuted? And who is paying for this? I have no doubt that, given the choice between paying fewer taxes or prosecuting all the cases like this, I would choose fewer taxes. She told us that if we got a letter from the prosecutor's office, we could choose to contest it by going to a trial (he hit him once and apologized) or by choosing "diversion". I didn't give it a whole lot of thought because I truly felt that, after that conversation, it was highly unlikely that a prosecutor's office didn't have more important cases to deal with. I honestly feel that if the prosecutor's office is chasing every incident like this, they just don't have enough to do. As a taxpayer, that is disconcerting. As a loving parent, it has become a nightmare. Guess what? We got a letter. From your office, although I'm confident you had nothing to do with it. We still don't say anything to my son about how ridiculous this is. We still want him to think that he caused this and is paying for his actions, but inside it is starting to eat me up. It gets worse. We chose to not spend several thousand dollars on an attorney to take this case to court. Instead, we chose "diversion". We met with the diversion officer on Monday, the 22nd of March. This officer does not know my son, had never met my son, and didn't know the details of why he was in diversion. She pulled out what seems to be a standard list of things that a person has to accomplish while on diversion. We continued to go along with this. Fifteen hours of community service at a non-profit organization? No problem. Probably not a bad idea even if he was not in diversion. Do your homework and get your grades up? No problem. Quite frankly, this is an area I have been working on for years. If diversion could get him to do it, I would recommend diversion for everyone. Urine sample for a drug screen? What for? There was no evidence of drug use. Our son has no history of drug use. I have worked in drug and alcohol rehab and am fairly aware of signs of drug use or abuse. At the time of the incident at the school, no one mentioned suspecting drug use nor did anyone check him for any external signs of drug use (pupils, reflexes, etc.) While contemplating the issue of probable cause, I realize that this is their cookie cutter program and everyone is treated pretty much the same regardless of why they are there. It gets worse. We continued to go along with the process but were becoming aware that the process was developing a life of its own and no one in the chain of the process really cared how it affected my son. I took my son to the drug testing site the next day at 4 p.m. At 5:30 p.m. the site closed and my son had not yet produced a urine specimen because he cannot begin to urinate with a man standing there watching him. Quite frankly, I'm not crazy about that either. When I questioned the workers there, they insisted that the specimen had to come from an "observed" sample and that there was no alternative. I proposed they search him, have him strip completely naked and leave him alone in the bathroom with the cup. They said they couldn't do that because some drug users have actually come up with a way of having a "fake penis" from which they could produce a clean specimen they had obtained from someone else. Mr. District Attorney, my son does not have a "fake penis" nor is he in the habit of carrying one around. I'm not insensitive to the unbelievable methods they have encountered by habitual drug users trying to get around being tested positive. However, not only does my son have to be humiliated by going to a place where there are a lot of questionable people going in and out, be embarrassed because he can't urinate in a cup while being observed, but he has to listen to a degrading explanation of how he might be packing a fake penis. He hit a boy once and apologized. Now it was explained to me that if my son violated his diversion, he would have to be turned over to the court and the judge could sentence to him to "whatever"….detention in the Juvenile Detention Center, probation, etc., etc. And technically, being unable to produce a urine specimen is a violation of his diversion. I was beginning to wonder if this process, which had developed a life of its own was now dividing and multiplying faster than I could deal with it. I left a message Wednesday for the diversion officer (she only works Mondays and Thursdays) to call me and I briefly described the problem in the message. When she called me, she insisted that they had to have the drug screen. When I asked her why, she said they wouldn't be doing their job if they didn't make everyone take a drug screen. When I pointed out that drugs had never been an issue with him, that they were not suspected of being involved in his incident, and to my knowledge, there was no probable cause to warrant him having to take a drug screen, she insisted that they still had to have it….that we "chose diversion" and that was part of the program. If I had known what sort of mindless humiliation that is spawned by diversion, I would have chosen to spend several thousand dollars on high priced attorneys with all sorts of connections and have the charges dropped. And my son would have learned the horrible lesson that he can do whatever he wants and his father will buy his way out. Not the lesson I want my son to learn. But better than hanging around dependent drug users while someone insinuates that you could be artificially equipped, sexually. It got a little better. After a long discussion and a conversation with her supervisor, the diversion officer agreed to forego the drug screen with the stipulation that, should they ever feel the need for one, they still had the right to demand it. No problem. If I EVER felt there was any hint my son was using illegal drugs, I would insist on a drug screen. He's only 16. It could still happen. I'm not stupid. I am not writing you to change my son's diversion program. He will finish it. As absurd and ridiculous as it has become, he will finish it. He even has a good attitude about it. He joked a couple of weeks ago, "Hey Dad, guess what Eugene Robinson and I have in common? We're both on diversion." Isn't that great? My son now realizes that what he did is on the same level as soliciting prostitution. It's too bad that as responsible and caring parents, we can not trust the system to deliver appropriate consequences. It's unfortunate to learn that I can't let my son pay for his mistakes in the future….that I will have to step in for him and hire the best legal minds I can afford just to protect him from a system that doesn't know where its ON and OFF switch is. I'm writing to ask you a couple of things. If for some reason, a ridiculous technicality causes my son's diversion to be violated and he is turned back over to the court, do I need to hire an attorney or is my son just screwed? Is the District Attorney's office in the habit of prosecuting cases such as this? Do they just prosecute everything or did my son just get arbitrarily picked in a lottery? It would seem to be a monumental waste of taxpayer's money. I would appreciate a response regarding my son in particular and the prosecution practices in general. Best Regards, Richard |
|
|
|
© Copyright 2003 All Rights Reserved. |
