OregonVet: Lorelle: **grumble, grumble, lotsa negative thoughts about bratty kids with stupid names**

Well, my younger son is named El-O (pronounced El dash Oh) but he is not a brat!

I know it's none of my business, but do you mind if I ask why? It's been pretty well documented that kids with "unique" names do worse in life than kids with normal, boring names. Certainly back when I was an amoral child I'd have participated in the cruel teasing of your son by singing "Old MacDonald Had A Farm" at him over and over.

Yes, I know the name is actually EL instead of EEE-EYE, but so what? First time I saw it written, your kid would have become little eee-eye-eee-eye-oh. Yes, I agree I was an ass. I was bullied myself, and like many bullied children, was always on the lookout for some other kid I could dump some of the burden on. But what I don't get is, why hand live ammo to your son's potential enemies like that?

First world problems.

reported: FTA: At a May 28 hearing, Lopan entered admissions in the assault case, as well as another case stemming from eight months of phone calls she made to another teen in Colorado that included threats of rape and mutilation, according to an audio recording of the hearing provided to the Deseret News by Bruno.

13 and already a sociopathic psycho biatch. I do not see a bright future for this girl.

This.

I order you to shave my pubes.

titwrench: I don't completely disagree with the court's decision but I disagree with the philosophy behind it. If the court decided what the girl did was assault and that it was an egregious act wouldn't the court's punishment also be assault and egregious? My logic puts this in the category of cruel and unusual punishment. In essence that are assaulting a minor if by the court's account that the cutting of the 3 year holds hair was assault.

Cutting the hair wasn't a punishment in and of itself, it was offered in return for a reduced sentence. The mother could have refused to cut the hair but then her daughter would have to do the full 276 hours of community service instead of just 126. Since the mother consented it can hardly be considered cruel and unusual.

Earpj: downstairs: Seriously... 24 comments and I'm the first to point out that punishment was 200+ hours community service? The hair cutting part was just a deal the judge offered to remove the community service punishment.

The judge didn't and couldn't force such an action.

30 days in detention plus the community service.
Not gonna read it again, but didn't it say that the hair cut would remove 150 hours, or reduce it to 150 hours?

/Were it my Mom, I woulda been bald before going to court.

Reduce By. So the 30 days sticks and at least like 70+ hours too. It is a heavy punishment really.

FloydA: [i105.photobucket.com image 270x319]

What Lopan might look like.

SATISFIED!!!

I think those two girls and their parents should be waxed from the top of their heads down to the tips of their toes.

If it had been me who did this, my dad would have shaved my head bald as a cue ball in front of everyone in my school, then made me wear a sign around my neck saying, "I'm disrespectful, insolent, and can't keep my hands to myself." I would also be made to babysit the little girl whenever her parents wanted to go out, I would have to do their yard work AND maybe possibly housework too.

My dad tolerated NO shiat from either myself or my sister. Never had to hit us/spank us, hardly ever raised his voice. We just knew - don't fark with dad.

RCon: Oh. Your. God. It's farking hair and it will grow the fark back before your delinquent twat of a snowflake has her school pictures taken in the fall. The 3 year old probably doesn't even care. The mothers should each be sentenced to gargle a bag of dicks until they stop crippling their children into thinking that a bad haircut is worth histrionics and taking up the court's time.

thought I agree it's just hair, and hair grows back, if someone was to 'befriend' me on a night out, then casually chop my hair off while I was say, distracted waiting for them to get back from the lady's room. I'd be more than a bit peeved and, depending on how late the night was, either lawyer up or try (and fail) to beat the snot out of her.

You can't go around doing that to people.

reported: FTA: At a May 28 hearing, Lopan entered admissions in the assault case, as well as another case stemming from eight months of phone calls she made to another teen in Colorado that included threats of rape and mutilation, according to an audio recording of the hearing provided to the Deseret News by Bruno.

13 and already a sociopathic psycho biatch. I do not see a bright future for this girl.

I thought all 13 year old girls were? Let's followup on this in 5 years and hopefully she's matured a bit. Or not.

Of course statements like this from the mother just enables the kid:

"But I never dreamt it would be that much of a punishment."

DerAppie: titwrench: I don't completely disagree with the court's decision but I disagree with the philosophy behind it. If the court decided what the girl did was assault and that it was an egregious act wouldn't the court's punishment also be assault and egregious? My logic puts this in the category of cruel and unusual punishment. In essence that are assaulting a minor if by the court's account that the cutting of the 3 year holds hair was assault.

Cutting the hair wasn't a punishment in and of itself, it was offered in return for a reduced sentence. The mother could have refused to cut the hair but then her daughter would have to do the full 276 hours of community service instead of just 126. Since the mother consented it can hardly be considered cruel and unusual.

Apply the decision to a more practical scenario. Lets say the 13 year old girl stabbed the 3 year old nothing fatal but obviously malicious and cruel. Now lets say the judge offered a reduced sentence to the girl if her mother would stab her right then and there in the court. It is a leap but if the judge deemed this action an assault then the judge is offering assault as an alternate punishment. Again there is a distinction between the severity of the girl's action and my example but it is in essence the same thing. Again I don't disagree with the judge's decision it just doesn't sit right that the judge offered a reduced sentence if the mother commits the very same crime against her daughter. "What you did was wrong and illegal so your mom can do the same to you."

They tried to borrow some from McDonald's employees, but when they were turned down, they walked across the street and bought scissors from a dollar store.

that just totally made my day, thank you fark

whats the correlation rate of sociopaths having sociopathic offspring?

I can kind of understand how the mother of the 3 year old wouldn't have realized what was going on. The case doesn't make a point of saying that the older kids hurt the 3 year old. I would suspect that they suggested 'playing hairdresser' to the 3 year old and at that age, the attention from the older kids probably seemed nice. I doubt they hurt her otherwise you can be that would be in the article.

So probably they played nice, perhaps mum looked out a few times and saw her 3 year old having fun with the older kids, they got the scissors and then did the quick cutting whilst mum wasn't looking. So yeah, 3 year olds mum probably didn't do anything wrong.

Plus we are all forgetting who is really to blame here. The dollar store! They armed these felonious criminals with a potentially lethal weapon!

FloydA: What Lopan might look like.



would like a word

Hagenhatesyouall: [upload.wikimedia.org image 376x301]

[www.artesianpools.com image 565x375]

[www.chillwestseattle.com image 305x393]

[www.lesliespool.com image 240x240]

Gene pool dough bleach?

As a straight chick with a fauxhawk: it's just HAIR, you silly bints!Arbitrarily cutting off a small child's hair for no reason was the WRONG thing to do, so now you get to lose yours to the exact same length!

And guess what! Chin length hair is NOT SHORT HAIR. You'll get over it.

/seriously, do you know how frustrating it is to find hairstyles for very short hair?
//because these idiot salons think short is anything above the shoulder line

While I agree she's a little sh*t that's heading nowhere and should have been punished... And I mean, heck, I don't even care that she got her ponytail cut off. My only observation is that this seems a lot like Sharia. I'll be surprised if the judge gets away with that.

Hands up if you were offered a reduced sentence if you cut off your hair.

...


See what I mean?

Gunny Walker:
Hook, line, and sinker, eh?

I guess so, and still don't get it. But that happens, so I'll just laugh at myself and move along. :)

AbbeySomeone: Hagenhatesyouall: [upload.wikimedia.org image 376x301]

[www.artesianpools.com image 565x375]

[www.chillwestseattle.com image 305x393]

[www.lesliespool.com image 240x240]

Gene pool dough bleach?

Gene pool "knead" bleach

Babwa Wawa: teeny: Does the term 'assault' really apply here?

Combined with the other issues (threats of rape a mutilation) associated with the defendant, yes. They "befriended" the child, then deliberately victimized her. The difference cutting her hair and lasting abuse is only a matter of degree and imagination.

I'm not talking about the word assault in terms of everything she's done, I just meant in this particular case. To me the word brings up images of being threatening and scary. Unless the journalist failed to report it, there was no psychological or physical damage done to the child. The 3-year-old was probably confused as to why her mom was suddenly pissed. In fact, she was probably more upset that her mcdonalds outing had suddenly come to an abrupt end.

Not to diminish the cruel-hearted biatchiness of the teenager, but older siblings do this kind of shiat to toddlers all the time and it's not considered assault.

Teenager deserved what she got (and more) and definitely needs counseling (as does the mother, most likely). I'm just wondering about the accuracy of the specific charge.

Somebody doesn't understand the origin of and meaning of eye for an eye punishment. It doesn't mean that the punishment is to be the same as the crime or to "fit the crime." It came into being because the way punishment was meeted out 2000+ years ago. If you did crime X and you were rich or person of higher social standing then your sentence was less severe than if you were of lower standing. It was one of the things that early Christians tried to change by talking about an eye for an eye.

Fark Me To Tears: FTFA: "She definitely needed to be punished for what had happened," Valerie Bruno told the Deseret News. "But I never dreamt it would be that much of a punishment."

Give me the damned scissors, Your Honor. I'll cut it!

The world we live in really has changed. My mother would have agreed with the judge's logic completely. I can see by the mother's reaction that the judge knew exactly what he was doing when he made his sentence reduction offer to her. Mom really doesn't think that her daughter did anything wrong -- what was the big deal? What harm did her daughter cause? Mom doesn't understand it, which is probably a contributing factor to why her daughter did what she did.

Heck, my mother would have have shaved my head before court just to teach me a lesson. My mom was hardcore and I'm a decent human being because of it.

titwrench: AbbeySomeone: Hagenhatesyouall: [upload.wikimedia.org image 376x301]

[www.artesianpools.com image 565x375]

[www.chillwestseattle.com image 305x393]

[www.lesliespool.com image 240x240]

Gene pool dough bleach?

Gene pool "knead" bleach

Actually it's "gene pool "kneads" bleach." Knead in the singular doesn't sound right in the sentence otherwise.

Babwa Wawa: teeny: Does the term 'assault' really apply here?

Combined with the other issues (threats of rape a mutilation) associated with the defendant, yes. They "befriended" the child, then deliberately victimized her. The difference cutting her hair and lasting abuse is only a matter of degree and imagination.

That little girl will have trust issues as well as self esteem issues for sure. The older girls were cunning and predatorial; downright goddamn evil and that isn't a fluke.
50 bucks says the 13 yr old is planning to attempt to seduce her teacher or scream she was touched when she gets a bad grade or reprimand, if she hasn't tried it already.

RCon: Oh. Your. God. It's farking hair and it will grow the fark back before your delinquent twat of a snowflake has her school pictures taken in the fall. The 3 year old probably doesn't even care. The mothers should each be sentenced to gargle a bag of dicks until they stop crippling their children into thinking that a bad haircut is worth histrionics and taking up the court's time.

I think the problem she has is public humiliation. Quite frankly, I have a problem with that. This kid has serious issues, and this is not the way to resolve them.

The end goal with any punishment is to stop the problem from repeating itself. In this case, I'd say an effective punishment would be to take what's already been given and add in mandatory counseling, both solo and for the whole family. However, humiliation, especially public humiliation, causes new problems. If this girl is truly a psychopath or sociopath, then those problems could actually interfere with the punishment itself.

An eye for an eye makes you temporarily feel better. It doesn't actually achieve anything beyond shooting yourself in the foot. And the judge is supposed to be above humiliating other people.

titwrench: In essence that are assaulting a minor if by the court's account that the cutting of the 3 year holds hair was assault.

Nope. It's not the hair cutting that matters here, but the lack of consent. It's perfectly OK for a mother to cut her child's hair, in a court room or at home. It's perfectly OK for a hairdresser to cut a child's hair. It's not perfectly OK for a couple of teenagers to cut the hair of a small child they met in McDonalds.

Do you get equally upset when people are fined for theft?

The perp is , the judge is , and the perp's mom gets a big fat .

Peeple. Sheeesh.

biff1: FTA: "They tried to borrow some from McDonald's employees, but when they were turned down, they walked across the street and bought scissors from a dollar store.
"After acquiring the scissors, they returned to McDonald's, where they both took a turn ... cutting some of the little girl's hair off the back of her head,""


Where was the 3-year-old's mother during all of this?

My wife and I used to sit in the lobby doing the best we could. No accounting for what happens up in the play fortress. We relied on our kids to come forward when a bully was messing with them. Where were the parents of those kids who walked across the street to get a pair of scissors?

My daughter gave they other one a haircut only once- was down at the hairdressers donating 3+ inches toward kids with cancer that weekend. FWIW- they continued donating hair for wigs for the next 5 years.

Link

DerAppie: titwrench: I don't completely disagree with the court's decision but I disagree with the philosophy behind it. If the court decided what the girl did was assault and that it was an egregious act wouldn't the court's punishment also be assault and egregious? My logic puts this in the category of cruel and unusual punishment. In essence that are assaulting a minor if by the court's account that the cutting of the 3 year holds hair was assault.

Cutting the hair wasn't a punishment in and of itself, it was offered in return for a reduced sentence. The mother could have refused to cut the hair but then her daughter would have to do the full 276 hours of community service instead of just 126. Since the mother consented it can hardly be considered cruel and unusual.

I think titwrench's point was that eye for an eye can logically be extended to assault for assault.

The judge held the haircutting was a crime. The judge then offered an alternative that is essentially asking the mom to commit the same crime he found her daughter guilty of. In that sense, it is puzzling.

However, that same logic would also call into question a fine as punishment for petty theft. Obviously, it doesn't hold up well.

The answer is that the mom voluntarily entered into the agreement. And as parent/guardian, she has the power to make legal decisions on behalf of her daughter. She did so and is now screaming it was wrong. The sad/amusing part is that her inability to accept the consequences of her choices is apparently what her daughter is learning as demonstrated by her daughter's actions. Which are what led mom to demonstrate her remonstrable ethics. Thus showing her daughter ... Ah, screw it. People like this make me kind of wish in eugenics.

AbbeySomeone: That little girl will have trust issues as well as self esteem issues for sure. The older girls were cunning and predatorial; downright goddamn evil and that isn't a fluke.

I don't think so. When a 3-year-old cuts her own hair, allows a persuasive sibling to do it, or gets gum in it requiring it to be cut, it's only the mom that mourns for more than 5 seconds. Her hair was cut to chin-length....the horror.

The teenagers preyed on her, that's undisputed. But lasting damage? Naw.

Benjimin_Dover: Somebody doesn't understand the origin of and meaning of eye for an eye punishment. It doesn't mean that the punishment is to be the same as the crime or to "fit the crime." It came into being because the way punishment was meeted out 2000+ years ago. If you did crime X and you were rich or person of higher social standing then your sentence was less severe than if you were of lower standing. It was one of the things that early Christians tried to change by talking about an eye for an eye.

Minor point of clarification- eye for an eye predated christianity by a loooong time.
Check out the code of Hammurabi.Link

PsiChick: RCon: Oh. Your. God. It's farking hair and it will grow the fark back before your delinquent twat of a snowflake has her school pictures taken in the fall. The 3 year old probably doesn't even care. The mothers should each be sentenced to gargle a bag of dicks until they stop crippling their children into thinking that a bad haircut is worth histrionics and taking up the court's time.

I think the problem she has is public humiliation. Quite frankly, I have a problem with that. This kid has serious issues, and this is not the way to resolve them.

The end goal with any punishment is to stop the problem from repeating itself. In this case, I'd say an effective punishment would be to take what's already been given and add in mandatory counseling, both solo and for the whole family. However, humiliation, especially public humiliation, causes new problems. If this girl is truly a psychopath or sociopath, then those problems could actually interfere with the punishment itself.

An eye for an eye makes you temporarily feel better. It doesn't actually achieve anything beyond shooting yourself in the foot. And the judge is supposed to be above humiliating other people.

Fark that- the kids who cut the hair were bullying for public humiliation. Sometimes humiliation is all it takes to put the kid on the strait and narrow.

WTFDYW: hbomb1129: OregonVet: biff1: Where was the 3-year-old's mother during all of this?

I don't feel overprotective as a parent when say my sons were never, ever, out of my sight in a public place. Never put a leash on them tho. I think it's better Lopan did get the reduced sentence- the less exposure other troubled youth have to her the better. And it's too bad it will come to a head when she gets tried as an adult for something else in the near future since it's obvious her parent(s) knew she was stalking someone and let her roam around freely.

Still, it is really disturbing the three-year old was able to end up in that situation.... There's no excuse in the article given, so I just have to go with another bad mom.

Without all the details from the case it's hard to say how she lost sight of her daughter but it's not hard to imagine that there are plenty of nooks and crannies in those jungle gyms where you can lose sight for a few moments. If it's especially busy with lots of children it's even more chaotic. One flick of the scissors and instant hair cut for a 3 year old. It's not like they have a heap load of hair at that age. I bet the act took all of a few seconds.

how bout RTFA.

What part of the article exactly did I not read correctly according the statement I made?

Coco LaFemme: If it had been me who did this, my dad would have shaved my head bald as a cue ball in front of everyone in my school, then made me wear a sign around my neck saying, "I'm disrespectful, insolent, and can't keep my hands to myself." I would also be made to babysit the little girl whenever her parents wanted to go out, I would have to do their yard work AND maybe possibly housework too.

My dad tolerated NO shiat from either myself or my sister. Never had to hit us/spank us, hardly ever raised his voice. We just knew - don't fark with dad.

Except you'd probably never do anything like this. Not because you'd be punished that way by your Dad, but because anyone (I'd hope) who's parent would dish out that kind of punishment would have been raised better than to do this kind of crazy shiat.

The 3 year old getting her hair cut off was bad............but if her parents weren't watching her for long enough to let something like that to happen, she's lucky that's all that happened to her.

hbomb1129: WTFDYW: hbomb1129: OregonVet: biff1: Where was the 3-year-old's mother during all of this?

I don't feel overprotective as a parent when say my sons were never, ever, out of my sight in a public place. Never put a leash on them tho. I think it's better Lopan did get the reduced sentence- the less exposure other troubled youth have to her the better. And it's too bad it will come to a head when she gets tried as an adult for something else in the near future since it's obvious her parent(s) knew she was stalking someone and let her roam around freely.

Still, it is really disturbing the three-year old was able to end up in that situation.... There's no excuse in the article given, so I just have to go with another bad mom.

Without all the details from the case it's hard to say how she lost sight of her daughter but it's not hard to imagine that there are plenty of nooks and crannies in those jungle gyms where you can lose sight for a few moments. If it's especially busy with lots of children it's even more chaotic. One flick of the scissors and instant hair cut for a 3 year old. It's not like they have a heap load of hair at that age. I bet the act took all of a few seconds.

how bout RTFA.

What part of the article exactly did I not read correctly according the statement I made?

I'm gonna go there. The 3 yr old probably wasn't humiliated. probably proud as a peach with that new hair cut. That does not excuse the perps for their actions. By 12, you know better. Lets lay off the "humiliation" angle of the 3 yr old and focus on the bad behavior of the 12 yr olds.

tjassen: Coco LaFemme: If it had been me who did this, my dad would have shaved my head bald as a cue ball in front of everyone in my school, then made me wear a sign around my neck saying, "I'm disrespectful, insolent, and can't keep my hands to myself." I would also be made to babysit the little girl whenever her parents wanted to go out, I would have to do their yard work AND maybe possibly housework too.

My dad tolerated NO shiat from either myself or my sister. Never had to hit us/spank us, hardly ever raised his voice. We just knew - don't fark with dad.

Except you'd probably never do anything like this. Not because you'd be punished that way by your Dad, but because anyone (I'd hope) who's parent would dish out that kind of punishment would have been raised better than to do this kind of crazy shiat.

Just maybe some kids have an innert sense of right and wrong.

BroncoFan_17: The 3 year old getting her hair cut off was bad............but if her parents weren't watching her for long enough to let something like that to happen, she's lucky that's all that happened to her.

shiat happens in that House of Balls....

hbomb1129: An eye for an eye style punishment actually teaches more empathy for the victim in this instance so I have no problem with this form of punishment. It fit the crime perfectly. No permanent damage done.

And had the 13 year old's Mom been better at her role in her child's life this incident would never have happened. Who goes around taking out their inadequacies on a 3 year old?

/13 year old needs to be seeing a shrink for a while. I would have made that part of the ruling myself.

This!