Kid gets suspended after standing up to bully

[Babbylonian]

Not when you're trying to determine whether the possibility of seriously crippling a bully is justified based on the attack captured on video.

You seem fixated on the idea that there was some sort of intent to "seriously [cripple]" the kid. Tell me, just how many times does getting thrown 3 feet to the ground result in the throwee being "seriously crippled?" Do you think the thrower had reason to expect that outcome? From what I saw in the video, it didn't look he threw him far enough or hard enough to expect the kind of injury you're imagining.

In the incident I described above, my attacker could have ended up in the hospital being treated for serious brain injuries. Should I then have ended up in jail if he had died, despite having acted in self defense?

 

[TragicMonkey]

Nothing that would justify any claims of "self defense" on the day afterwards.

How about an hour before? What's the statute on limitations to "standing up to bullies"?

Maybe. But then he tried to retaliate and that I think is wrong.

Unless it's a "bullying" situation, of course. Then retaliation is permitted, nay expected and celebrated?

I cannot claim self defense for defending myself against something that you did last week.

Really? What about something I threatened to do in the future? What if it was a scheduled fight--"I'll deal with you at recess!" sort of thing? I'm confused by the temporal element in ethics. Does an action's ethical valuation change with time elapsed? Does that apply to all ethical situations, or just physical violence?

Slightly, yes.

"Slightly"? You are able to judge the importance of evidence you don't have? What if a further fifteen seconds of video showed up that got cut off the front of this clip, and that video showed both boys saying "We're going to act out that scene from 'Jackass'"? I'd say that would radically change all judgments made on this matter!

Since I am not in a jury I'll happily take that risk. Where's the problem?

Miscarriage of justice, of course. I thought this was a skeptic's board? Yet people are judging without evidence, merely because bullying is an emotional topic.

 

[IDB87]

So your argument would now have him getting the much bigger reward?

I'm also in favor of the bully having charges pressed against him for assault.

 

[IDB87]

You seem fixated on the idea that there was some sort of intent to "seriously [cripple]" the kid.

The intent was seemingly self-defense. That entails injuring the bully. Can it ever be taken too far?

Tell me, just how many times does getting thrown 3 feet to the ground result in the throwee being "seriously crippled?"

Do we have instances of such an invent regularly occurring (like fistfights, for example?) or is a frail body slammed into concrete typically considered a health improvement?

In the incident I described above, my attacker could have ended up in the hospital being treated for serious brain injuries. Should I then have ended up in jail if he had died, despite having acted in self defense?

I never implied the victim should be charged with anything.

Your situation is also slightly different, in that we know more about it - you had been bullied and beaten up for years, and you finally snapped. For all we know this was the first altercation between the two.

 

[Rasmus]

How about an hour before? What's the statute on limitations to "standing up to bullies"?



Unless it's a "bullying" situation, of course. Then retaliation is permitted, nay expected and celebrated?

I have been very clear throughout that I am all in favor of the self-defense aspects but that any sort of retaliation beyond that would be a bad thing.

Really? What about something I threatened to do in the future?

Then there was time to go to a teacher or a parent or the police inbetween.

What if it was a scheduled fight--"I'll deal with you at recess!" sort of thing? I'm confused by the temporal element in ethics. Does an action's ethical valuation change with time elapsed? Does that apply to all ethical situations, or just physical violence?

It applies to self-defense.

"Slightly"? You are able to judge the importance of evidence you don't have? What if a further fifteen seconds of video showed up that got cut off the front of this clip, and that video showed both boys saying "We're going to act out that scene from 'Jackass'"? I'd say that would radically change all judgments made on this matter!

Yes, that happening is ever so likely, too.

It is of course entirely possible that everybody involves was force to act out exactly as they did by a gun holding an alien ray gun whop was behind the kid with the camera phone, too.

Miscarriage of justice, of course. I thought this was a skeptic's board? Yet people are judging without evidence, merely because bullying is an emotional topic.

I am not judging without evidence, I am judging based on all the evidence I have.

This includes a video and several comments made on several webpages. I also notice an utter lack of anything at all hinting at the possibility bit that a lot more might be going on that we don't know about. Did anyone say that the big kid actually was a bully, or can I put that right next to the teapot orbiting Saturn - something that cannot be ruled out, is entirely possible but for which no evidence whatsoever exists? (And yes, I agree it is a lot more likely than the teapot)

 

[Babbylonian]

The intent was seemingly self-defense. That entails injuring the bully. Can it ever be taken too far?

I would submit that a single weapon-less attack in response to an instigating attack could not be "taken too far."

ETA - Assuming the self-defender isn't some sort of trained combatant (a Navy SEAL or member of the SAS could easily go "too far").

Do we have instances of such an invent regularly occurring (like fistfights, for example?) or is a frail body slammed into concrete typically considered a health improvement?

Deliberately misinterpreting what I asked in the construction of a question isn't a response. I'll allow it though, and answer yours: No, violence isn't a good thing.

I never implied the victim should be charged with anything.

Your situation is also slightly different, in that we know more about it - you had been bullied and beaten up for years, and you finally snapped. For all we know this was the first altercation between the two.

Then throw out my description of my history. Under the circumstances of that single event, should I have suffered legal and social consequences if I was punched in the face and in pain and anger accidentally killed my attacker?

 

[TragicMonkey]

For all we know this was the first altercation between the two.

Or it was the 403rd altercation, with the larger kid being the bully in the first 402. Or the two kids hadn't ever fought before this, but the larger kid had just beaten up the smaller kid's friend. Or the larger kid had stolen the smaller kid's prized possession an hour before and taunted him to "do something about it". For all we know is right--we don't know much at all. Just two kids during one stretch of time. The meaning of events in that time might not be the obvious one.

 

[Nihilianth]

Did you ever go up to someone and repeatedly punch them in the face?

Yeah, a body slam is extreme and dangerous. So is punching someone in the face.

When I was in high school people tried to bully me all the time, and I had a terrible time of it. I was larger than everyone except for my best friend and it was very hard because of the HUGE double standard. Twice I was sucker punched right in the face, and if I had even returned a single punch either time, it would have likely been very bad for the attacker. Worse, the official response if I had reported either one would have been to give both of us the exact same punishment. Unofficially the larger guy always got punished worse.

Once in gym class I stole the ball from a basketball player, which upset him a lot. So he spear tackled me. Right in the middle of gym class. Did he get punished? Nope. Everyone asked why I did nothing in return to him. If I had, I would have been the one punished because I was far larger than him even though the teacher was watching the entire thing unfold.

For the record, my response was always to laugh at them because I found it very funny. That kind of stops any fight by the way.

Ya know, when it comes to such situations, I think schools are sending a terribly wrong message.

They are pretty much saying "there is nothing we can really do to end bullying. But if you are caught fighting, even in self-defense, everyone involved gets punished equally."

Pretty much saying that bullying is not any worse than defending one's self. Which is complete BS. Happens at the school I work at all the time. I have two bullies in my classroom. One of them got in a fight on the playground with another little boy from a different class that is really quiet and has no record. And yet, they both got the same punishment. Despite my protests that the bully from my room started it. I saw the whole thing. School told me it didn't matter, because the smaller boy punched back. I would have protested even further, but my job probably would be on the line.

 

[IDB87]

I would submit that a single weapon-less attack in response to an instigating attack could not be "taken too far."

Well that's where we differ, which is fine.

Deliberately misinterpreting what I asked in the construction of a question isn't a response.

It's also bad manners.

I'll answer again.

I don't think it's relevant how often it occurs. The threat is there, and a much larger kid slamming a much smaller kid into concrete is generally not considered a good thing.

Then throw out my description of my history. Under the circumstances of that single event, should I have suffered legal and social consequences if I was punched in the face and in pain and anger accidentally killed my attacker?

I wouldn't throw out your history, as it sets a precedent. I don't think you should suffer legal consequences, no. Social consequences are a little trickier. Knowing your history, and the incident, I would say it's regrettable that the boy was killed, but you couldn't be held responsible.

 

[TragicMonkey]

I am not judging without evidence, I am judging based on all the evidence I have.

And that's the problem here. You don't have enough evidence to judge. Nobody does, not on an internet messageboard. People who know the kids, other kids, witnesses, teachers...they can judge because they have more information. There's a minimum amount of evidence needed before any judgment can reasonably take place, and one film clip isn't enough.

This is a pretty major problem today. Soundbites. Film clips. Stick 'em on the air, and invite the viewer to "make their own judgments!" The viewers aren't qualified. The evidence isn't enough evidence (even if it's not selectively edited and selectively chosen to begin with) to make judgments, but the audience doesn't care. They feel smart because they made up their own minds! "I haven't been manipulated, because I saw the clip!" So not only is a rush to judgment made on incomplete, possibly improper, possibly irrelevant evidence, but everyone feels very certain because hey, it was based on evidence.

 

[Dancing David]

How does a kid, standing around minding his own business, who is violently assaulted by another kid avoid having a suspension at all? Just let the attacker hit him?

Defending yourself gets you suspeneded, but it's okay cos it's not as harsh a sentence as the attacker?

That is why in our school district, if the atacks was unprovoked with no history of antagonism, the 'victim' would likely just be sent home for the day, while the other child would receive a larger suspension, if there was a history of him being involved in former incidents.

 

[Nihilianth]

It wasn't a fair fight from the beginning, as you seem to be pointing out. The bully is obviously smaller than the victim, and it looked as if the big kid shrugged off his punches. What he was doing was taking out frustration on the kid by smashing him to the ground (nothing a slap around wouldn't have fixed) - he wasn't in physical danger or seemingly badly hurt.

Haven't read through the thread. But I think you are quite wrong! Big, small, it shouldn't matter. If someone wants to take up the risk of smacking around someone who is potentially a better fighter, you deserve whatever comes to you. I was bullied. A lot. Up until 9th grade when I finally changed schools from a Catholic school, to the public high school. Incidentally, the public school was far safer. (A few years after I graduated, the Catholic school I attended had a school shooting. Was all over the news.) In any case, I was one of the smallest kids in all of the schools I attended until my senior year. I grew like a foot, and gained close to 100 pounds over a single summer.

In any case, I think it is far safer for the big kid to win big in a fight, than to have to put up with such harassment. Piss the kid for long enough, he may eventually reach for a gun.

(Do note, I do not whatsoever condone violence. But sometimes, you must utilize violence in self-defense. The law recognizes this need. There are many times when a teacher of law enforcement officer is not around or too far away to be of much help.)

 

[GreyArea]

But we don't know the history here. And that is always a major factor in the actual decision, my guess is that in my school district they would have both been suspended equally and the initiator would have been marked for starting the fight. Unless the history indicates other wise.

When I was a kid, the usual size of the bully and victim were the reverse of this.

Though, ofcourse we don't know the entire context of the incident either so...

*Expect the unreleased & unedited footage to show the big kid had been hitting the little kid for 20 minutes beforehand!

What happened the day before the video was shot? And the day before that? And the day before that? Nobody posting here knows those kids, or the relationship between them. Maybe the victim of this particular incident was the tormentor in prior indicidents.

Indeed. What is the real history between these two kids? Without knowing the context, how quickly should we assume that a 7th grader would normally harrass a 10th grader? Can we trust how the adults on Heynes' side characterize his high-school experiences? Parents have lied for their kids before.

Chifley College (Dunheved Campus) only runs from 7th through 10th year. I am not familiar with the school's academic calendar, but I would think that the 7th grader only started there a few weeks ago. Maybe he was just trying to gain early clout by piling onto an established target whom older kids had already been tormenting. But that's just a speculation in the absence of more-complete information. Normally, I would have my doubts about such a scenario being true.

Would have been interesting to see what would've happened if that older kid had come a few seconds earlier.

Is the girl at the end of the video some kind of hall monitor or prefect? She is wearing what looks like an identification badge. She definitely saw the 7th grader punching Heynes, and deflected the younger boy's allies instead of detaining Heynes (as far as we can tell from the video). It would be interesting to hear her testimony.

And when the two boys were suspended, had the school officials seen (or even known about) the video?

Who recorded it?
It looked like this was a set up of some sort.

That may be. Notice how a spectator gets in the way of the camera and is immediately yanked aside. Also, the camera operator and someone else near him cheer on the 7th grader.

But it still doesn't tell us who is the real bully. It could be that the 7th grader's friend was there to record the moment the 7th grader finally stood up to his tormentor, which would make this an "epic fail" as the kids say. On the other hand, if Heynes had long been the victim, this could just be an example of happy slapping. (And in that case, Kein Mitleid for the chavlet perp.)

It appears that the video was posted by a parent or friend of Casey's (I can't access the site right now). Yet the whole circumstance of the video indicates some sort of preplanning on someones part (the bully's or the victem's).
How did the person who posted the video get a hold of it? If it was indeed a friend of Casey's, then was it a freind of Casey's who took the video? If so, then there would appear to have been some sort of premeditated action to this. More info is needed.

Indeed, again. How did Heynes' friend's father get the video from Heynes' adversaries?

Judging from the 7th grader's interaction with the cameraboy at the end, I think they were working together. My guess is that it was then posted anyway, found, and re-uploaded by Heynes' friend's father. But that is pure speculation on my part.

...if the video snippet is as it appears* that was assault so why should a kid have to put up with it just because we decide to call it "bullying"? If it was dealt as it would have been between adults i.e. the police involved they'd both probably be up in court and the court could decide if the big kid's response was reasonable or not. (Given the lack of a kid's ability to understand fully consequences I can't say that the big kid's response was disproportionate.)

I would favor legal prosecution for assault and battery against whichever kid was the real perpetrator. Both would have to be taken in for questioning and the camera seized for evidence.

Did this happen after school? Chifley does not allow their students to have mobile telephones during the day, but their wording is confusing:

We understand the need for mobile phones but they are the total responsibility of the student. Any losses incurred will not be the responsibility of the school. Mobile phones are not to be used at school for any reason. Mobile phones should be handed into the Deputies each day. If still in possession of the student, they must be turned off during class time.

PDF: http://www.dunheved-h.schools.nsw.e...t/2011/3/19eb9eeb2dddce7a012e74521c726de2.pdf

--------------------------------

Meanwhile, this incident has know become an internet meme: http://knowyourmeme.com/memes/zangief-kid

That was quick!

 

[Nihilianth]

It'd take a stone-cold jury to not see the difference in weight between the two kids, and that the victim was perhaps being a bit excessive in body-slamming the bully.

Wrong. The jury would see self-defense. Weight doesn't matter, when you are having fists slam into your face for no apparent reason.

Well you just said it - a time to cool off before flying off. Apparently you think I'm against self-defense? Well I'm not, as I've said. I don't think he needed a potentially crippling body-slam as much as a good slap around, which the bigger kid proved he could do no problem.

Yeah, and all the bully's friends standing around, waiting to jump in? Better to end it, and end it as quickly as possible.

Punched to the side of the head, if not the upper cheek bone - probably hurt the bully more than the victim. If he had been punched in the nose, I may agree with you.

WHERE you are getting punch, hardly matters. Especially if it is in the face. Cheekbone, forehead, nose. Why should it matter?

No guarantees. What's to stop this 'gang' (term used very lightly) from continuing the bullying? They found it funny that their friend got hurt. They're either cowards or loons, possibly both, so like I said there are no guarantees with the friends.

The kid didn't get hurt. The bully himself appeared to be laughing as he was stumbling around, trying to shake it off. I've done the same on many occasions. Bang a body part, and it hurts like hell, but can't keep from laughing and groaning at the same time. Eventually, it goes away after a few minutes, and everything is fine.

By defensing the bully, you are sending the wrong message, that it's ok if you bully someone, so long as they are bigger than you! The bigger person should know better anyway! WRONG!

 

[Nihilianth]

That was a fight?



No one said anything about fine tuning anything. Everyone here seems to be under the impression that what needed to be done was physical violence. The question is where the line drawn between excessive and appropriate? The bigger kid got socked in the side of the head and a few shots to the stomach and sides - does that warrant potentially spilling the bully's brains over the pavement or damaging his spine? You don't have to answer right now, but you do have to ask yourself.

That's a question for the police, and anyone who is trained in the martial arts. Not for an untrained, young adolescent boy who only sees a bully in front of him who is willing to hurt him not only physically, but emotionally as well. And all that bully's friends are standing around letting it happen. Even laughing and recording the whole scene! Making the emotional torment even greater.

 

[Checkmite]

Remember, these aren't high-schoolers or people who -should- know better. These are young, impressionable kids who have a lot to learn about life.

Wow, someone who gets it.

This wasn't an incident where some petty and cruel hardened scoundrel was trying to exert power over someone smaller and weaker; it's a case of some little kid who didn't know any better screwing with another kid in an attempt to gain social acceptance from his peers, and being exposed to a critical life lesson - that little kids are vulnerable to being hurt when they start something with bigger, stronger kids. Whether he learned anything from the experience of course is as much up in the air as who actually started the fight - the video shows neither.

This is a sad, sad situation all around. The "bully" here is simply not old and mature enough or aware enough of the consequences of his actions to be held the kind of accountable for his actions that makes people in this thread happy that he could hardly walk at the end of the video. He's a little fricking kid, for Christ's sake. What he did was wrong and what happened was a consequence of his actions, but that does not make him deserving of injury, and the schadenfreude I'm seeing in this thread is indefensible.

 

[Nihilianth]

I'm just not seeing what the victim did wrong.

Yes he slammed the bully on his face and knocked him senseless but he then stopped. It seems that one of the bully's friends tried to start something then and the big kid walked off and a (seemingly) older student put an end to any pursuit.

Interestingly, as the girl tried to end the pursuit, at the VERY last second, just a hair-split of a second before the video shut off, it looked like the bigger kid who confronted the fat kid after slamming the small bully to the ground, was about to give chance. It looked like he was about ready to run after him. So I don;t think the entire incident was quite finished.

 

[Checkmite]

The kid didn't get hurt. The bully himself appeared to be laughing as he was stumbling around, trying to shake it off. I've done the same on many occasions. Bang a body part, and it hurts like hell, but can't keep from laughing and groaning at the same time. Eventually, it goes away after a few minutes, and everything is fine.

What a crock. He was laughing because his friends were there and he had to save face in front of them.

 

[Rasmus]

The kid didn't get hurt. The bully himself appeared to be laughing as he was stumbling around, trying to shake it off.

His "stumbling around", if anything, is a sign of a severe blow on the head, and not one of "not getting hurt". All Schadenfreude aside, the child was in need of a doctor at that point.

I've done the same on many occasions. Bang a body part, and it hurts like hell, but can't keep from laughing and groaning at the same time. Eventually, it goes away after a few minutes, and everything is fine.

That is not "the same" it is the exact opposite, since you claim the kid didn't hurt whereas you were hurting despite the laughing.

By defensing the bully, you are sending the wrong message, that it's ok if you bully someone, so long as they are bigger than you! The bigger person should know better anyway! WRONG!

As much as I agree with you, you earlier said

Although, I must say, at least he WAS picking on someone bigger than him. Better than someone smaller, that's for sure.

Why is that better? At what size does it become okay to attack someone else?

 

[Nihilianth]

Why is the victim being blamed here?

And THAT is the big question in this thread.....