Child Charged With Disorderly Conduct for Misbehavior at School

[twobit]

If you would like to see copies of the charge, and details of this situation, please email me at cj75013@gmail.com. I promise there is not something else. The child is an A/B student taking honors classes. This occured after school in an empty hall. My child said "oh s**t 3 times as her bus left the school. The teacher was heard by the witness say "that kid is so done" and only the teacher and the one student heard the comment. The SRO officer wrote the ticket based on the teachers statement. The principal of the school told me this should have never been written up and will testify to that. Now it is out of the schools hands and the officer's boss said "regardless of if the witness drops the statement, this is prosecuted by the "society of the victim". I am concerned she will not be allowed to represent herself in court (though the court said she could). It is a jury trial this week. we will likely go to the media with this. Thoughts? I have contacted some senators that are trying to pass a bill to prevent this stupidity. if there are any pro bono lawyers that agree and want to help a 14 year old, please contact me.

[itisup2us]

But yep that is just ridiculous to charge a young person with such an offense..

[jk]

nobody said it was anything other than what you said it was. anteater was saying that this is an extreme reaction to a minor problem and those involved with continuing this should be subject to scrutiny. I suggested another possibility which is often the case when people post but did not make any statement that it was necessarily either.

I am concerned she will not be allowed to represent herself in court (though the court said she could).

that is one statement I do doubt. A minor is considered to be under an incapacity due to their age. That usually precludes a minor from representing themselves. It would also not be a good idea for your daughter to represent herself, even if allowed. This is a criminal issue and should be given all due respect for the seriousness of the charges. She really doesn't want a criminal record, especially starting at this age.

whoops!! 14? No, she is not going to represent herself in a criminal court. No way, no how. It just isn't going to be allowed or happen.

- - - Updated - - -

TEX CR. CODE ANN. § 38.17 : TWO WITNESSES REQUIRED

In all cases where, by law, two witnesses, or one with corroborating circumstances, are required to authorize a conviction,
if the requirement be not fulfilled, the court shall instruct the jury to render a verdict of acquittal, and they are bound by the instruction.

Mums the word.....

I did not investigate if that was even applicable but if it is, there are two witnesses; the coach and the friend

[twobit]

Can the argument be made that there was no breach of peace? The other teen will testify there was no breach of peace. I promise the court administrator said she could represent herself. If this was a real case I would get a lawyer. I had no idea it would cost me 2K. I would have done what most parents do, plead no contest and send her to an anger mgt class. The problem I have is that teaches my kid that someone can accuse you of something ridiculous and it is better to walk away than stand up for your rights. Can the parent represent? Surely they will not force me to get a lawyer to prove she is innocent. Again, just saying that word should not be a crime. It has to be causing a breach of peace and she did not knowingly or with intention do this. She was saying it to herself. The justice system makes it so much easier to admit to no contest and pay a minor fine, than fight for your rights.

[Disagreeable]

Not to make light of this foolishness, however, I can here the questioning now. So Mr Teacher, have you ever used this term before? So you have!!! You do of course realize your prior usage renders moot your claim of being offended. Moving on Mr Teacher, did the defendant use the word as a noun, a verb or in a slang manner?

[jk]

If this was a real case I would get a lawyer.

so this is all contrived? a farce?



If I am misunderstanding that statement, then understand;

this is a real case with a real criminal charge with consequences attached to it.

[twobit]

Ok, well I knew I would get that response. Should not have said that. Yes it is a real case. However, what would you do if you were not a lawyer? Would you let your child plead no contest? Would you say not guilty? Do you personally believe a crime happened? If not, would you pay 2K to prove a point or take your chance with a jury that has common sense (at least I believe they will have common sense)? Would you go to the media?

[Disagreeable]

If it was my child, I would advise them to plead not guilty and tell her story to every news agency in town. I would also hire her a lawyer.

[jk]

I'm not a lawyer . Takee not of my signature line at the bottom of every one of my posts. I would not let my child plead no contest unless it was part of a deferred adjudication and it was the best case scenario given all of the facts. If such a disposition was not offered, I, personally, would prefer my child fight this with everything I could bring forth. I do not believe the action meets the requirements of the charges but even if it did, I believe the actions of the state to be of such excess that it is a perversion of the system to even consider prosecuting a 14 year old child for the actions described. If what she did was criminal, then they need to start manning up the courts because what she said is said by so many people every single day the courts would not be able to process all the cases that would result from such charges.



Based on what you have said, no I do not believe a crime has taken place. As I stated previously, it requires the utterance to be both vulgar, obscene, profane, or indecent and that it by speaking it, it tended to incite an immediate breach of peace.





My first argument of the term not being vulgar, obscene, profane, or indecent is difficult to make if the state uses societal norms rather than the perception of whomever heard the utterance. Based on societal norms, as a court typically views them, it is a vulgar term although I, personally, argue against that because it is a common term in wide use by a large percentage of the populace and as such, while it is distasteful, no longer meets the definition required to meet the charge. Outside of that, the other argument that the term did not meet the description would be that the only people that heard it were the coach and the friend. Since the coach uses the term, either he continually breaks the law or he does not see the term as meeting the requirements of the law.

the second argument and most likely a defense put forth by her legal representative would be that the utterance does not meet the second part of the requirements of the law because there was no immediate breach of the peace due to the statement. If there was no commotion caused by the utterance, it just does not meet the requirements of the statute charged.

Along that same line, if the state should want to argue it is not that it caused a breach of the peace but in circumstances in general it would incite an immediate breach of the peace, well, my defense would be to walk everybody out onto the street and say sh** a couple times making sure people heard me. If there was no commotion due to the statement, it does not meet even their claim.

Given society today, not only do I believe I could say it without causing a disturbance of any kind, I could print it on a shirt and wear it down the street causing no reaction other than looks of disgust.


as to what the friend would testify to;

they need to understand they must testify to the facts as they know them. They would be asked a question and expected to make a response to that question. It isn't a matter of testifying to whether there was a breach of peace or not but simply to answer the questions asked.

[itisup2us]

If not, would you pay 2K to prove a point or take your chance with a jury that has common sense (at least I believe they will have common sense)? Would you go to the media?

I know exactly what you mean, either way they win, while $2k or so might not sound like a lot to some, it's more than I have to spend paying a lawyer and more than likely get the charges dropped or attempt to represent yourself and try to overcome the presumption of guilt that arises without a lawyer.