The officer believed he had probable cause to make an arrest. Since the kid was entitled to free milk the officer was clearly mistaken about this, but this mistake does not get resolved by refusing to cooperate.
So the arrest is going to happen, and the kid is pulling away. What should the officer do next?
I find your reaction odd. The officer was “rough” and charged an innocent “with larceny” while the victim “mouthed off.” Yet you find fault with the kid, not the cop. :smack: Do you think police are or should be trained to use physical force against people who mouth off at them?
Moreover, your remarks imply that it is normal for a police officer to behave childishly, so it is the duty of the 13-year old to compensate by acting adult. :rolleyes:
Just like the little girl tazed for riding her bicycle, one could argue — and I guess you are — that police are entitled to any force to subdue an arrestee … or bullets if the kid attempts to flee? But these very young and innocent black kids should never have been arrested in the first place. Is that really so hard to understand?
It’s discouraging to see schools using police authority when it’s not appropriate. Police are trained to take control, be assertive and enforce law. Police arrest rule breakers.
This was a trivial rule infraction. All that was required was a simple question by a teacher. “Did you pay for your milk?” Then the kid could explain he was on the free lunch program. Even if he did take milk, 30 mins of detention/study hall would be sufficient correction.
I’m increasingly stunned and baffled by these stories. When I was growing up we had a cop at the school as part of a community-building hearts-and-minds kind of thing. He would occasionally give us lectures about things like drunk driving and other safety-oriented stuff. I don’t recall him ever actually arresting someone (even though we had some kids who deserved it) and I certainly don’t recall the teachers ever using him to enforce school discipline.
Now I see articles about police attacking students for not obeying their teachers and, of course, this article here. I cannot comprehend at what point responsibility for student discipline became a law enforcement concern. It seems to reflect a larger trend in society in which the justice system is the first, last, and only form of conflict resolution.
Kids need to learn about REALITY - the real world.
In the real world there are consequences for your actions and laws/rules. Best the kid learns now to follow the rules of society, it could save his life later on. Every summer I read about teens killed because they were not following traffic rules (speeding, drinking and driving, etc.).
The officer should have spoken with the youth and apologized for accosting him. If his job was to patrol a lunchroom, he should be aware of the free milk program. That’s just a no-brainer, but unfortunately this particular officer didn’t have much going on upstairs. Probable cause is based on what is in the officer’s knowledge, but instead of acting out of knowledge, he acted out of ignorance, and instead of recognizing that and making amends for his error, he played the “submit or else” card. Then to make matters worse, he doubled down by having the youth charged after learning that the youth was in the free milk program. That officer either needs an attitude adjustment or a career change, and the school needs to clean its house of its staff who went along with it.
Well said. 
That was the point I was struggling to make. I can see the value of placing a cop in a school for community relations and to interact with the students. But routine school discipline isn’t something the cop should enforce.
Reading the article, and some others:
According to the boy he went back to the line to get his milk.
According to the officer he was concealing it.
Assuming he just forgot his milk and was grabbing his free one, ignoring everything else about the case. Can you see how someone that saw a student jumping into line, grabbing a milk and then concealing might look like they’re stealing it. Keeping in mind that not all students get free milk and even if they do, they’re probably only allowed one.
I’m guessing the officer didn’t know that this specific student gets free milk AND didn’t get his when he was in line the first time. He just saw someone grab a milk and not go through the checkout.
And this is giving the kid the benefit of the doubt. All bets are off if he did actually steal it.
Clearly it’s time to do away with the free milk program. I’m sure it seemed like a nice idea at the time but it obviously causes nothing but problems.
That sounds like cause to say something to the student. Not to touch him.
Maybe after it was all sorted out, yes, but not while the kid is actively resisting efforts to detain him.
Arrest is not subject to the discretion of the arrestee. If you think the arrest is bullshit, you sort it out later through legal efforts, not by physically trying to prevent the arrest from happening.
Re: acting out of ignorance, as Joey P points out, milk theft (and the outward appearance thereof) can still be perpetrated by someone who is in the free milk program. Under the circumstances described, the officer’s belief that a theft had occurred may have indeed been reasonable. The fact that he was later shown to be wrong does not, by itself, prove that his belief was unreasonable.
It should be noted that we don’t know what the officer did to begin the confrontation. Sure, he might have grabbed his wrist. He might have also put his hand on the boy’s should and sternly said ‘uh, excuse me’. But no matter what the officer did, it’s going to go sideways when the boy "yanked away from him, I told him to get off of me because he’s not my dad,”.
I don’t want to be the guy that says you need to submit, but a simple ‘is there a problem’ probably would have cleared this up. If he wasn’t stealing it, great. If he was, it would have gotten him the detention/suspension Acey so dearly wants him to have. But when he started resisting and mouthing off the handcuffs came out and now it’s bigger than just breaking a school rule.
If so, I’d say it’s because the cop lacks training or self-control. He isn’t the boy’s parent, and he cannot be sure that the kid has done anything wrong. I don’t see that he has any right to be touching a child in any way that would require a “yank” to get away from.
Or perhaps learn that they are petty authoritarians to be feared and avoided.
Do you think children should be trained to mouth off to police?
High school teachers are not lunchroom monitors.
You do realize this is what police officers do, right? They put their hands on people they suspect have done things wrong (it’s part of accusing and arresting them). I can appreciate that you don’t like it, but your beef is with the system, not this particular case.
No. I dispute that this is universal police practice, even in cases where it is certain that a violation has occurred, such as when you were pulled over for speeding.
Did he get arrested for resisting arrest too? That seems to be the MO for the blue line. Arrest someone for some bullshit charge that will never stick and add on resisting arrest. I guess he should feel lucky that he wasn’t choked out when he pulled away.
Seriously?
Kids need to learn that cops are dangerous people who will beat you, arrest you, or kill you if they become aware of you?
If that’s the lesson you want to teach, then mission accomplished.