#IStandWithAhmed

[Murphy101]

Ahmed is lucky..he just found out the engineering class at his high school is a placebo. Instead of wasting his time there, he will get offers for scholarships to private high school, where he can learn the math, science, and computer programming that real engineers-to-be need. And nice to see he has an invite to meet POTUS.

Well there's optimistic thinking.

 

The pessimist in me notes that America is not the only political looking to recruit smart young men like Ahmed. It's bad enough we suck in math and sciences, if we could at least manage to not actively help the opposition in their recruitment efforts, that would be great.

 

ETA: And by "like Ahmed" - I am not referring to ethnicity. I mean smart, idealist, hopeful young, impressionable men who see or are mistreated by a political system they have little say in.

[Laurie4b]

Twenty minutes from Newtown/Sandy Hook, here.  

 

I don't fault the teacher either.  It's tragic that we live in such a world but we do.

 

 

But it's awfully hard to understand, five periods and an explanatory conversation later, why the police felt that handcuffs were necessary, or interrogation without parents or counsel.  And I truly, truly hope that the rumors about police pressing charges (as opposed to responding to a call, which would obviously be their job) for a "hoax bomb" are not true.

 

 

 

ETA: Just saw TechWife's post re: not pressing charges.  Good.

 

Oh yeah. If it was sitting around for 5 periods, no one seriously thought it was a bomb. I had thought maybe they did, were afraid, and called law enforcement right away. 5 periods later is ridiculous. 

 

However, I think it is standard to be handcuffed once they decide an arrest is going to be made. I fault them for deciding on the basis of nothing to charge him with a hoax. (and am glad charges have been dropped.) 

[HRAAB]

The police must have graduated from the same school.

 

:lol:  :lol:

 

What scares/concerns me the most is the lack of reasoning/thinking skills.  Does not forebode well for the future of our country.

[TechWife]

 I fault them for deciding on the basis of nothing to charge him with a hoax. (and am glad charges have been dropped.) 

 

They never charged him with anything! Ever. Getting arrested doesn't mean getting charged. They are two different things. Please, please get your story straight! 

[Murphy101]

They never charged him with anything! Ever. Getting arrested doesn't mean getting charged. They are two different things. Please, please get your story straight!

He shouldn't have even been arrested!

 

Making a clock is not something a kid should be hauled out of school in handcuffs for.

[Laurie4b]

There were never any charges made. Ever. He was arrested during an investigation, arrested does not mean charged. I think we should all react in a responsible manner, and that includes making sure our facts are straight. 

 

The police have since said they will not be filing charges. 

 

I don't think it's polite to lecture people. I don't appreciate it.

 

 I think you are picking at words. I think it's common usage to say police charge someone with something or they cannot detain a person. So and so was arrested for_____.  Perhaps there is a technical meaning for charge that I am not aware of that only the DA can make, but I don't appreciate being called irresponsible for making a valid point. Whether he was charged, arrested, etc. it should not have happened without any evidence. Is that okay? 

[Murphy101]

:lol: :lol:

 

What scares/concerns me the most is the lack of reasoning/thinking skills. Does not forebode well for the future of our country.

No kidding.

[redsquirrel]

If it were my kid, I would sue that school and the police department so hard. My kid would be able to attend Hogwarts by the time I was done.

 

First of all, they didn't even talk to a teacher who might be able to tell them if it were a bomb. Secondly they allowed a minor to be interviewed by the state without legal representation or a parent present. That right there is a HUGE big problem. Children have very specific legal protections because they don't understand the legal system.

 

They took that boy away in handcuffs in front of his peers. He must have been so scared and confused. He kept telling them it was a clock and they kept telling him that wasn't a good enough 'bad' answer. It's like something out of Kafka.

 

 

[Laurie4b]

I don't understand why there was even an investigation. I think almost anyone could look at a couple of circuit boards and a digital clock face and figure out that it's not a bomb. A bomb has to have something that will explode. Circuit boards do not explode. 

 

I couldn't. Honestly. 

[mom31257]

But..it's NOT dangerous! Anymore than any other digital clock. Why would the police be expected to know more about clocks than a school that teaches engineering classes? Shouldn't SOMEONE in the school know enough about science to idenify a freaking CLOCK????

 

I meant their profiling remarks. 

[LucyStoner]

Can you tell me why you would blame the teacher since it was not his engineering teacher who might have known? What if it was his English teacher who had no clue?

 

If it looked like some of the gadgetry from his home that was pictured in photos, I wouldn't know how it worked. (If it looked like a regular old clock, none of this is relevant. But we haven't seen photos of it yet. I am imagining a homemade digital clock doesn't necessarily look like an encased digital clock would look) How would the teacher know to check with the engineering teacher? Wouldn't that be the principal's job?

 

Note: I am not blaming the student at all. I just think there is some reason for teachers to be cautious in our times given all the massacres that have occurred at schools.

I don't buy the "in these dark times" argument.

 

Nor do I think any teacher, regardless of if they teach science or history or art, should know so little about science that they mistake a bit of circuitry and a digital display for a bomb.

 

I am not a scientist, I will go on record saying that I took rocks for jocks to satisfy my single lab science requirement to graduate and physics for the rest of my science distribution requirements. I have no technical expertise in electronics. I have made my bread and butter working in areas requiring literally no scientific knowledge.

 

I can also use.my.brain to discern that this is not a bomb.

 

Students deserve teachers who don't assume the very worst of them without any provocation. They also deserve teachers who can tell the difference between a bomb and a few bits of circuitry.

[TechWife]

He shouldn't have even been arrested!

 

Making a clock is not something a kid should be hauled out of school in handcuffs for.

 

I am simply commenting on the consistent lack of accuracy in some posts. If we (general "we") expect school principals to be able to recognize a bomb (which I don't, by the way), shouldn't we (again, general "we") expect each other to keep the known facts straight?  

[Word Nerd]

You know what annoys me about the story?  

 

The police are called out as the bad guys.  It is the dodo at his SCHOOL that called the police in the first place.  That person is almost completely ignored in the story and isn't even named.  

 

You don't think people should be calling out the ones who took him out in handcuffs, detained him and considered charging him with making a "hoax bomb"? 

[mom31257]

I know none of this makes sense, and it is ridiculous, but the truth of the matter is that no one wants to be wrong. The school cannot expect to use its teachers to inspect potentially harmful devices. Liability, liability, liability is what this is all about. 

 

 

[Murphy101]

I couldn't. Honestly.

Seriously? Do you think circuit boards explode or what? Not being snarky or mean, really. Just honestly dumbfounded that people don't know the difference between an everyday object like a digital clock and a bomb...

 

Here is an article with a picture of the clock he made. What do you think is going to explode?

 

http://ktla.com/2015/09/16/muslim-teen-gets-arrested-in-texas-after-bringing-homemade-clock-to-school/

[Guest]

I couldn't. Honestly. 

 

I believe you, but do you think OMG IT'S A BOMB!

 

...or, even more ridiculous in some ways,....OMG IT'S SUPPOSED TO LOOK LIKE A BOMB! It's a fake bomb you guyzzz!

 

every time you see something you don't immediately recognize?

 

I am *certain* you do not.

[kitten18]

I am simply commenting on the consistent lack of accuracy in some posts. If we (general "we") expect school principals to be able to recognize a bomb (which I don't, by the way), shouldn't we (again, general "we") expect each other to keep the known facts straight?

***WE*** are not school principals. ***WE*** are posters on a message board.

 

A young boy was ARRESTED for making a CLOCK.

I just ..... Grrrrrrrr

[Murphy101]

I don't buy the "in these dark times" argument.

 

Nor do I think any teacher, regardless of if they teach science or history or art, should know so little about science that they mistake a bit of circuitry and a digital display for a bomb.

 

I am not a scientist, I will go on record saying that I took rocks for jocks to satisfy my single lab science requirement to graduate and physics for the rest of my science distribution requirements. I have no technical expertise in electronics. I have made my bread and butter working in areas requiring literally no scientific knowledge.

 

I can also use.my.brain to discern that this is not a bomb.

 

Students deserve teachers who don't assume the very worst of them without any provocation. They also deserve teachers who can tell the difference between a bomb and a few bits of circuitry.

Amen! Let us try using our brains. And what's more, let's demand that the people we pay to educate our children use their brains too. Same goes for cops.

 

And I agree about the attitudes too. What a suck environment for a kid to be legally required to spend the majority of their young life in.

[Word Nerd]

I believe you, but do you think OMG IT'S A BOMB!

 

...or, even more ridiculous in some ways,....OMG IT'S SUPPOSED TO LOOK LIKE A BOMB! It's a fake bomb you guyzzz!

 

every time you see something you don't immediately recognize?

 

I am *certain* you do not.

 

 

That's the thing (not that there's just one thing that aggravates me about this whole mess): I haven't read that anyone actually thought it was a bomb, including the teacher who raised the alarm. He was arrested because they suspected he was trying to make people think it was a bomb, even though he kept saying it was a clock.

[redsquirrel]

Is there not a science teacher in that entire school? I would think that the principal and police would know to use the resources available to them in a school to make a determination.

 

Heck, if they were actually convinced it was a bomb, why not call the bomb squad?  Wouldn't that be the proper protocol? If it were a bomb, would the right thing to do be messing around with the kid, trying to get him to tell the truth?  In my little podunk town we had the occasional bomb scare call to the school and the fire dept came and the bomb squad.  Doesn't the principal or law enforcement even have the common sense to call in experts?

 

If it were a bomb, they still didn't manage do the right thing. They just messed up on every single level.

[TechWife]

I don't think it's polite to lecture people. I don't appreciate it.

 

 I think you are picking at words. I think it's common usage to say police charge someone with something or they cannot detain a person. So and so was arrested for_____.  Perhaps there is a technical meaning for charge that I am not aware of that only the DA can make, but I don't appreciate being called irresponsible for making a valid point. Whether he was charged, arrested, etc. it should not have happened without any evidence. Is that okay? 

 

 

There is a distinct, legal difference between "arrested" and "charged." The police decided they had probable cause to arrest him while they determined whether or not there was enough evidence that he was trying to carry out a hoax. Police officers do not have to obtain every single bit of evidence before an arrest is made, they only need probable cause. The purpose of arrest in these circumstances is to remove the risk to the general public and to prevent flight. 

 

The police had evidence. They had a clock and they had his statement that it was a clock. They arrested him in the process of determining intent, which would then determine whether or not they charged him with a carrying out a hoax. When they arrested him, they didn't intend to charge him with bringing a bomb to school or making a bomb - they knew it wasn't a bomb. At the time of his arrest, they knew that if there was a charge, it would be for carrying out a hoax, not for building a bomb. 

 

Do I think he should have been arrested? No, I think the situation could have been handled in a much different, better way. I think the officer who indicated his assumptions about the student when the student entered the room should have been taken off of the investigation immediately because it seems to me that he had a pre-existing racial/ethnic/religious prejudice. I think had the parents been contacted much earlier in the process and had all parties communicated clearly by asking the right questions and giving complete answers, then it would have turned out very differently. Under the circumstances, I don't blame the student at all for not elaborating on his "It's a clock" statement without a parent and/or attorney present. The police should have realized they were not going to get the information they needed and called the parents in much sooner in the process. That would have facilitated communication on both sides of the story.  

[LucyStoner]

The schools we have looked at for my son all have robotics teams, robotics classes and plenty of circuit boards and stuff to use on projects like this. My son took a robotics class over the summer (placing second in the culminating challenge) and takes one now through a public school (pt enrollment, class meets once a week). I find it sad that a student like Ahmed would not be able to access the same offerings.

[MooCow]

First of all, they didn't even talk to a teacher who might be able to tell them if it were a bomb. Secondly they allowed a minor to be interviewed by the state without legal representation or a parent present. That right there is a HUGE big problem. Children have very specific legal protections because they don't understand the legal system.

 

They took that boy away in handcuffs in front of his peers. He must have been so scared and confused. He kept telling them it was a clock and they kept telling him that wasn't a good enough 'bad' answer. It's like something out of Kafka.

Sadly it happens all to often. Police questioning kids in schools with out telling parents, etc. My oldest was questioned at school, suspected of theft, and I luckily received a phone call from the principal, who was furious and refused to leave the police alone with my son.

[mathnerd]

What if it was his English teacher who had no clue?

 

 

Here is what I read: Engineering teacher told him not to show it to anyone else, but did not think that it was a hoax (one of the staff members on the school district's payroll, inside that same campus). English teacher asked about what it was when it beeped in her class - and confiscated it and kept it for hours (until this kid's 6th period at school) at which time he was taken to the police.

 

Please note the following stupidity:

1. if the English teacher thought it was a bomb, s/he should have run as fast as possible and sounded the alarm to evacuate ASAP, which s/he did NOT do.

2. If the principal and the police thought it was a hoax, the very fact that this kid had showed it earlier to his Engineering teacher who DID NOT think that it was a hoax or a bomb should have let this child walk away at that point.

3. Handcuffing a child wearing a NASA T-shirt and saying that he bought a STEM project to show his Engineering teacher who did not object to the project at all is even more stupid.

4. Acting like nothing bad happened because they did not press charges is worse than all of the above.

 

I think that the English teacher is also to blame equally.

[TechWife]

The schools we have looked at for my son all have robotics teams, robotics classes and plenty of circuit boards and stuff to use on projects like this. My son took a robotics class over the summer (placing second in the culminating challenge) and takes one now through a public school. I find it sad that a student like Ahmed would not be able to access the same offerings.

 

I agree. I think he was making an effort to show his teachers his capabilities and interests in hopes that they would help him find outlets in high school similar to those he had in elementary school, at least that's how I interpret the quotes I've read that are attributed to him. I hope someone comes along side him to mentor him and help him find those outlets. 

[Wheres Toto]

. I think had the parents been contacted much earlier in the process and had all parties communicated clearly by asking the right questions and giving complete answers, then it would have turned out very differently. Under the circumstances, I don't blame the student at all for not elaborating on his "It's a clock" statement without a parent and/or attorney present. The police should have realized they were not going to get the information they needed and called the parents in much sooner in the process. That would have facilitated communication on both sides of the story.  

 

What other information did the police need that they didn't get from Ahmed's statements?

 

It's a clock.  It's a digital clock.  It's a digital clock I made?   It's not a bomb.  I didn't tell anyone it's a bomb.

 

He did all that.  What more could his parents have added to that?

[Dmmetler]

Not a source I consider super-reliable, but I liked this article-especially the kid who brought a mock bomb to school as part of a project.

 

 

http://gawker.com/7-kids-not-named-mohamed-who-brought-homemade-clocks-to-1730999866

[LucyStoner]

Perhaps Snap Circuits are more on this schools level.

I dunno. Who knows what my six year old can cook up with his snap circuits? That clock face in one of the sets looks mighty suspicious.

[Katy]

I actually understand an English teacher calling the police about an electronic device she didn't recognize.  I think she's an idiot, but I understand doing so because better safe than sorry.

 

I understand the police taking him out of the classroom because again, better safe than sorry when bombs and children and schools are concerned.

 

I do not, under any circumstance or for any reason, understand the police denying his father the right to talk to him immediately given that he is a minor child and had no advocate, parent, or attorney present.  Someone should lose their job over that one.  This is Dallas, not some podunk town in the middle of nowhere.

[Southern Ivy]

You know what annoys me about the story?  

 

The police are called out as the bad guys.  It is the dodo at his SCHOOL that called the police in the first place.  That person is almost completely ignored in the story and isn't even named.  

BUT, the police could have come in, rolled their eyes at the stupidity of the school, and then walked away. They did not have to arrest the kid. That was beyond ridiculous. 

I can, in some ways, understand them calling the police. The fact that it was taken even further, AFTER the kid explained everything - well, that just inexcusable. 

[Southern Ivy]

This probably has more to do with default zero tolerance than anything. Why think when zero tolerance means you don't have to ask questions or use your brain? They'll just let the police sort it out later and claim zero tolerance.

My last principal was the antithesis of zero tolerance. :/ I had kids threaten to slit my throat, another continually threatened to bring a gun to school, etc. Our principal just laughed at our concerns or said "Oh, they wouldn't know what to do with a gun." 

 

I think there needs to be a level of common sense brought back into the schools. Zero Tolerance obviously doesn't cut it, but  then neither does ambivalence. It's frustrating on all levels. 

[TechWife]

What other information did the police need that they didn't get from Ahmed's statements?

 

It's a clock.  It's a digital clock.  It's a digital clock I made?   It's not a bomb.  I didn't tell anyone it's a bomb.

 

He did all that.  What more could his parents have added to that?

 

Potentially, his parents could have facilitated communication by helping everyone - the police and the teen - understand what was going on. The teen probably didn't know the intricacies of the law re: intent and the police likely didn't know of his long term interest in electronics/robotics. The police stated that when they were questioning him at the school, they received limited information from him. Perhaps if they had worded their questions differently, they could have gotten the information that they needed. 

 

The issue is not whether or not he told anyone that it was a bomb, but whether or not he intended for others to think it was a bomb. The code doesn't define what a hoax bomb is (could be defined elsewhere). 

 

 

TEX PE. CODE ANN. § 46.08 : Texas Statutes - Section 46.08: HOAX BOMBS

(a) A person commits an offense if the person knowingly manufactures, sells, purchases, transports, or possesses a hoax bomb with intent to use the hoax bomb to:

(1) make another believe that the hoax bomb is an explosive or incendiary device; or

(2) cause alarm or reaction of any type by an official of a public safety agency or volunteer agency organized to deal with emergencies.

(b) An offense under this section is a Class A misdemeanor.

- See more at: http://codes.lp.findlaw.com/txstatutes/PE/10/46/46.08#sthash.Og3QbkPb.dpuf

[goldberry]

What other information did the police need that they didn't get from Ahmed's statements?

 

It's a clock.  It's a digital clock.  It's a digital clock I made?   It's not a bomb.  I didn't tell anyone it's a bomb.

 

He did all that.  What more could his parents have added to that?

 

I can't find it now, but in one article the police commented that he said it was a clock, but couldn't give a "broader explanation of its purpose" ...  It's purpose??  Broader explanation??  Whaa...??

[Lang Syne Boardie]

Potentially, his parents could have facilitated communication by helping everyone - the police and the teen - understand what was going on. The teen probably didn't know the intricacies of the law re: intent and the police likely didn't know of his long term interest in electronics/robotics. The police stated that when they were questioning him at the school, they received limited information from him. Perhaps if they had worded their questions differently, they could have gotten the information that they needed. 

 

The issue is not whether or not he told anyone that it was a bomb, but whether or not he intended for others to think it was a bomb. The code doesn't define what a hoax bomb is (could be defined elsewhere). 

 

 

TEX PE. CODE ANN. § 46.08 : Texas Statutes - Section 46.08: HOAX BOMBS

(a) A person commits an offense if the person knowingly manufactures, sells, purchases, transports, or possesses a hoax bomb with intent to use the hoax bomb to:

(1) make another believe that the hoax bomb is an explosive or incendiary device; or

(2) cause alarm or reaction of any type by an official of a public safety agency or volunteer agency organized to deal with emergencies.

(b) An offense under this section is a Class A misdemeanor.

- See more at: http://codes.lp.findlaw.com/txstatutes/PE/10/46/46.08#sthash.Og3QbkPb.dpuf

 

In the article linked upthread, the father said he first heard from the police. The school did not contact him, nor allow him to speak to his son. He was as helpless to "say it right" as Ahmed was -- Ahmed, who was suspect because when they tried to interrogate him would only say, "It is a clock."

 

Because it was a clock.

 

I stand with Ahmed, and with those who think his instructors aren't fit to educate or even supervise children of a free people.

 

[idnib]

Horrible, just horrible.

 

This probably has more to do with default zero tolerance than anything. Why think when zero tolerance means you don't have to ask questions or use your brain? They'll just let the police sort it out later and claim zero tolerance.

 

I agree. So many instances of people CYAing and not thinking.

[fraidycat]

Techwife, it seems like you are excusing the cops' behavior.

 

Why?

 

There was no hoax. No intent to deceive. No intent to cause alarm.

 

Ahmed built a clock. He even called it ..... A CLOCK. No one was evacuated from the school. The bomb squad was not called. The alarm was never raised above "Muslim looking kid brought wires to school".

 

The cops knew damn well that it was not a bomb, nor "hoax bomb" because Ahmed REPEATEDLY told everyone who asked that it was a CLOCK. See: no intent to alarm.

 

He should never have been put in handcuffs, nor removed from the school, and especially not questioned without his parent present.

 

This whole municipality needs to pay. Bigtime. The school district and police station will be costing tax payers for years to come for their ineptitude and idiocy.

[Mimm]

 

Asked if the teen's religious beliefs factored into his arrest, Boyd said the reaction “would have been the same†under any circumstances.

 

Bullsh*t. Come on, seriously? How stupid does this guy think everyone is?

 

 

“We live in an age where you can’t take things like that to school,†he said.

 

Things like... clocks? Yeah, I can see how scary.. clocks.. are. :glare: :glare:

[justasque]

Thing is, it's not a bad idea to refuse to answer police questions without a lawyer, especially when they seem to be making a big deal over something that doesn't make sense to you, and especially when you are a minority teenager, and especially when English may not be your first language.  He had already explained to the school staff that it was a clock, and not a bomb.  What more is there to say?  How much worse could this have been for him if he had said something that was taken the wrong way?  

He was smart to stick to the basics:  "It is a clock, can I call my parents?", rinse and repeat.

[ktgrok]

 Under the circumstances, I don't blame the student at all for not elaborating on his "It's a clock" statement without a parent and/or attorney present. The police should have realized they were not going to get the information they needed and called the parents in much sooner in the process. That would have facilitated communication on both sides of the story.  

 

What communication? He said it was a clock. What is there to elaborate on? What else could he possibly tell them?

[ktgrok]

 

The issue is not whether or not he told anyone that it was a bomb, but whether or not he intended for others to think it was a bomb. The code doesn't define what a hoax bomb is (could be defined elsewhere). 

 

 

TEX PE. CODE ANN. § 46.08 : Texas Statutes - Section 46.08: HOAX BOMBS

(a) A person commits an offense if the person knowingly manufactures, sells, purchases, transports, or possesses a hoax bomb with intent to use the hoax bomb to:

(1) make another believe that the hoax bomb is an explosive or incendiary device; or

(2) cause alarm or reaction of any type by an official of a public safety agency or volunteer agency organized to deal with emergencies.

(b) An offense under this section is a Class A misdemeanor.

- See more at: http://codes.lp.findlaw.com/txstatutes/PE/10/46/46.08#sthash.Og3QbkPb.dpuf

 

But the police admit that he never told anyone it was a bomb, that he only said it was a clock. 

[ktgrok]

I can't find it now, but in one article the police commented that he said it was a clock, but couldn't give a "broader explanation of its purpose" ...  It's purpose??  Broader explanation??  Whaa...??

 

I know. That broke me. Um..beyond telling time???

[Murphy101]

Potentially, his parents could have facilitated communication by helping everyone - the police and the teen - understand what was going on. The teen probably didn't know the intricacies of the law re: intent and the police likely didn't know of his long term interest in electronics/robotics. The police stated that when they were questioning him at the school, they received limited information from him. Perhaps if they had worded their questions differently, they could have gotten the information that they needed.

 

The issue is not whether or not he told anyone that it was a bomb, but whether or not he intended for others to think it was a bomb. The code doesn't define what a hoax bomb is (could be defined elsewhere).

No, that is NOT an issue either. The school and the student and even the police admit the kid was open and honest and there was no worry that he was trying to pull a hoax then or later.

 

And no, how something like this is handled should not be dependent on parents by some miracle chance of good luck being able to talk the cops and school staff into pulling their heads out their rears. Especially when none of them are even wills to let the parent come speak on behalf of their minor child anyways.

 

And this type of stuff is not solved by making excuses for it or blaming the victim or the victim's parents.

 

As a side note, four of my kids have cases almost identical to the one Ahmed used for his clock. They are very common. God forbid some dark skinned kid go walking into school with an art case and not be as "lucky" as Ahmed.

[TechWife]

Techwife, it seems like you are excusing the cops' behavior.

 

Why?

 

There was no hoax. No intent to deceive. No intent to cause alarm.

 

Ahmed built a clock. He even called it ..... A CLOCK. No one was evacuated from the school. The bomb squad was not called. The alarm was never raised above "Muslim looking kid brought wires to school".

 

The cops knew damn well that it was not a bomb, nor "hoax bomb" because Ahmed REPEATEDLY told everyone who asked that it was a CLOCK. See: no intent to alarm.

 

He should never have been put in handcuffs, nor removed from the school, and especially not questioned without his parent present.

 

This whole municipality needs to pay. Bigtime. The school district and police station will be costing tax payers for years to come for their ineptitude and idiocy.

 

No, I'm not excusing them. I'm simply saying that, from what I have read, they couldn't determine his intent.  Identifying something isn't the same as saying what you intended to do with the item. Does that mean they were right? No, it means that they don't have their act together and didn't ask the right questions. It's a stupid communication issue tainted by some presuppositions made by at least one officer (I indicated this in my previous post). None of this excuses the cops behavior. It's just how I'm seeing things - a big communication issue along with a credibility issue caused a big problem for the teen and now for the school and the police department. 

[TechWife]

 

And this type of stuff is not solved by making excuses for it or blaming the victim or the victim's parents.

 

 

 

Which is why I am not doing that. In no way do I think it is the teen's fault, nor his parents. You are taking my statements out of context to make them say what you want them to say.

 

I am out of this thread. 

[Murphy101]

I can't find it now, but in one article the police commented that he said it was a clock, but couldn't give a "broader explanation of its purpose" ... It's purpose?? Broader explanation?? Whaa...??

I was such a smart mouthed little turd at 14. I'd have ended up shot. Seriously.

 

I mean there are no respectful ways to answer such a moron question. The kid was smarter than I probably would have been at that age if he kept his mouth shut.

 

And yes, keeping your mouth shut without an attorney is the smart thing to do. Always. Thank god he did. Can you image what kind of ammo they would have managed to twist into things if he hadn't?

[Butter]

That's the thing (not that there's just one thing that aggravates me about this whole mess): I haven't read that anyone actually thought it was a bomb, including the teacher who raised the alarm. He was arrested because they suspected he was trying to make people think it was a bomb, even though he kept saying it was a clock.

 

Seriously, if he was trying to make people think it was a bomb, why would he say it was a clock?  Repeatedly.  He wouldn't have said anything if he was trying to make people think it was a bomb!

 

I actually understand an English teacher calling the police about an electronic device she didn't recognize.  I think she's an idiot, but I understand doing so because better safe than sorry.

 

After keeping it in her desk for hours?  And the POLICE?  Really?  Not, say, show it to some other teacher who is more versed in electronics or the principal or any number of people inside the school?  Why right to the police?  She clearly wasn't scared of the clock since she kept it with her so long.

 

The issue is not whether or not he told anyone that it was a bomb, but whether or not he intended for others to think it was a bomb. The code doesn't define what a hoax bomb is (could be defined elsewhere). 

 

This is why they couldn't charge him with anything.  There was clearly no intent to make others think it was a bomb.  His intent was to make others think it was a clock.  Since it was a clock.  And he told everyone it was a clock.

 

I can't find it now, but in one article the police commented that he said it was a clock, but couldn't give a "broader explanation of its purpose" ...  It's purpose??  Broader explanation??  Whaa...??

 

I can just see how that went:

Police: What is it?

Ahmed: A clock.

Police: What is it's intended use?

Ahmed: To be a clock.

Police: And just what does it do?

Ahmed: It's a clock.  That, you know, tells time.

Police: But what is the purpose?

Ahmed: It's a clock.

 

Yeah, what in the world did they expect?  Most people understand the concept of a clock.

[ktgrok]

I was such a smart mouthed little turd at 14. I'd have ended up shot. Seriously.

 

I mean there are no respectful ways to answer such a moron question. The kid was smarter than I probably would have been at that age if he kept his mouth shut.

 

And yes, keeping your mouth shut without an attorney is the smart thing to do. Always. Thank god he did. Can you image what kind of ammo they would have managed to twist into things if he hadn't?

 

I was thinking this...thank heaven it wasn't my teen. He'd have mouthed off, I have no doubt. I probably would have too. 

[Corraleno]

Things like... clocks? Yeah, I can see how scary.. clocks.. are. :glare: :glare:

 

One of the funniest responses to the story was a photo of Big Ben captioned "British appear to have developed some sort of giant bomb attached to a rocket!"  :lol:

[Dmmetler]

The other thing is that how you show respect for authority is very cultural. I know when I was teaching in Texas, sometimes migrant kids would run into trouble at school with authorities because they had been taught to show respect by not disagreeing, often didn't make eye contact, and so on. Their behavior was seen as being evasive, and especially if they weren't really solid in their English skills, would end up confessing to things they didn't do or didn't mean.

 

That could easily play in here, where a kid who doesn't necessarily have the same body language that the authorities expect comes off as being evasive when actually he's just trying to stand up for himself in a way that is accepted by his family and culture. Often smart kids who have good academic English really come off badly in this sort of thing because no one looks at them and sees ELL-but the child's cultural context is completely different.

 

It's still not an excuse, though. The adults need to be adults.

[fraidycat]

No, I'm not excusing them. I'm simply saying that, from what I have read, they couldn't determine his intent. Identifying something isn't the same as saying what you intended to do with the item. Does that mean they were right? No, it means that they don't have their act together and didn't ask the right questions. It's a stupid communication issue tainted by some presuppositions made by at least one officer (I indicated this in my previous post). None of this excuses the cops behavior. It's just how I'm seeing things - a big communication issue along with a credibility issue caused a big problem for the teen and now for the school and the police department.

I disagree that there was a communication "issue", unless by issue you mean "we policemen refused to believe this kid because of the color of his skin, accent in his speech, and possible religion - no matter what he said".

 

Then, I agree there was an issue. But it was only one sided.

 

He built a clock. He said it was a clock. Everyone could see it was a clock.

 

Still no hoax to be found. Not anywhere. Not at any time.