- FUN FEATURES
There are times when the police must use force when an individual becomes aggressive. From the video, it looks like Mr. Evans was
was asking the officer a question. Did the officers feel so "threatened" that they had to slam Mr. Evans into the ground causing him to hurt his face? Or did the officer feel that Mr. Evans did not have the right to stand up for himself and ask for his badge?
Should we citizens that obey the laws of this country fear the police? Police departments are not perfect and should realize that more than one individual questioned by them will "dare" to ask for their information in return. Please do not be offended if we do, remember, you work for us, not the other way around.
Innocent until proven guilty.
I agree with the previous poster, alcohol needs to be introduced to kids much earlier than it is. I am not saying you serve it to your kids like water, but telling them what can happen when toomuch is consumed needs to be addressed. I also agree that we need to demystify it. We can't have them learning this on the street from their friends.
If you consume alchol in your home personally you have a responsibility to explain it to your children. Many European families serve beer and wine to their kids at 15 and 16. Moderation is the key here. Immigrant families to the US regularly served their kids small glasses of wine. I have personally seen that by doing this in the family home, those kids do not feel like they are drinking the "forbidden fruit" at 18. They have learned alochol is not to be obver consumed, and they don't feel the need to keep drinking to impress their friends.
In the 70's the cry was if kids could fight for their county at 18, they should be able to vote and drink alochol too. This is something to think about. People need to educate their kids about alcohol. There are entirely too many kids underage getting arrested for drinking, as well as their parents. It is an epidemic.
whats the best way to get someone to do something that you dont want them to do? Tell them they CANT do it. Especially seventeen and eighteen year old kids. Make a big deal of it, and every kid will prove that they CAN and WILL drink. Look at other countries, and maybe the answer is right there for everyone to see. Kids are always going to party. there is no right answer. It's not right for parents to allow other kids to break the law and drink in their house, but at the same time they are concerned for their safety. I give up.
Seems like unions all over the country are causing job losses and plant closers... The auto workers priced themselves out of work and many plant closers with the powerful UAW.. Of course the non union taxpayer is paying to bail them out to keep those lib votes.. This is a pure situation of the tail wagging the dog.. If these union machinists are as indispensable as they and the union claims, they should have another job in a heart beat.. The state is full of manufacturing jobs...(or was) The state and the courts should keep out of private business before all of New England moves down south, where many of the roads are still dirt..
Good luck to P&W and capitalism.. And to all you union libs, "how's that hope and change working out for you" ??????????
There's no doubt that this jury pool is selecting only those who have no problem with the death penalty, because that's what the prosecution wants at sentencing and is one reason for the delay. It's unanimous that these two criminals are guilty in degrees, to the charges. The death penalty is not justice, but a barbaric primitive reaction filled with hatred and evil intent. Those who want justice = punishment, will be causing pain and suffering upon the innocent family members & loved ones, of at least one of these two criminals.
To kill is illegal and legal killing is just as savage and uncivilized. Execution will not bring a conclusion to the suffering & pain to anyone but the criminal. The criminally insane don't seem to have consciences' and the death penalty hasn't proven effective as a deterrant. The true populous consists of people who believe as me. So, to select only those who have no problem "no conscience" with executioning the mentally ill or criminally insane is like selecting a jury of Christians to decide if Christmas should be dropped as a federal holiday. It's discrimination and segregation, which is unconstitutional.
Speculation, that both are equally guilty without a fair trial has filled the news media. With so many out of work or collecting unemployment, one would think that there wouldn't be a shortage of potential jurors. Has anyone noticed the description of a "Petit Jury"? Meaning an ordinary jury for the trial of a civil or criminal action. Well, there's nothing ordinary about this trial's jury selection.
What a terrible waste of taxpayers money for these two bottom feeders. I know everyone is entitled to a fair trial under the law, but this dog and pony show is reprehensible. To put the Petit family through all this is horrible. They ran into the arms of the waiting police, what else do we need to know. Where was their compassion for the victims; why should they have this much consideration. Either death or a life sentence, lets be done with them once and for all.
While people can point to many studies and statistics that show that lower the drinking age leads to more traffic fatalites etc, I think that we are overlooking a very important point in the discussion.. That is: Is it constitutional to restrict adults aged 18 - 20 from being able to consume alcohol? In my opinion it is not. People over 18 years of age can get married without parental consent, they can be drafted, they can vote and they can be punished for their crimes in adult prisons. So as a society we need to ask ourselves do we have two classes of adulthood? I cannot see how in good conscience we can denegrate people between the ages of 18 and 21 to a sub-adult status. You are either an adult in a legal sence or you are not. There is no law governing alcohol consumption for people over 21. You do not need a license go out an buy beer or wine. If we think that it is ok for government to restrict the activities of 18 - 20 yr olds in this area, what is preventing the government from resticting anyone else from any activity that the government deems unsavory. What is the difference between separating out 18 - 20 yr olds from the group we call adults and separating out Blacks, Hispanics, Asians or Native Americans from that same group. There would be rioting in the streets if laws were enacted restricting certain the activities of certain ethic groups. What if the goverment enacted laws restricting what types of activities we could do in the privacy of our own homes. People would be up in arms and the ACLU would be busy for the next 20 years filing lawsuit after lawsuit.
I understand that there is a problem with teenage drinking in this country. Much of that problem, in my opinion, is due to a lack of education. We have created a mystique about alcohol consumption for young teens. It is the taboo forbidden fruit that draws teens to experiment with alcohol. It is also readily available in almost every home. Teens need to be educated by their parents about alcohol and take away that air of mystic that surounds drinking. Additionally, we should stiffen the penalties for bars, liquor stores or adults who give liquor to minors. Parents however, should be allowed to give their children small amounts of alcohol in order to educate them about it.
Yes underage drinking is a problem and yes there is no easy solution, but trouncing on the rights of ADULTS between the ages of 18 and 20 years old is not the appropriate solution.
It is not a matter of choice or family beliefs. Adults who allow or raise their children with alcohol consumption are doing an illegal act. Just the same as allowing your teen to smoke. Some parents go as far as buying cigarettes for their teenager because the teen can't. Both are detrimental to the health. It's seems that the cigarette industry and adults who smoke have been targeted, selected out and have been ordered to pay for choice by the state of CT. So, why would anyone even consider lowing the drinking or smokingn age? We do not have a draft, although the U.S. is fighting terrorism, I do not believe a Declaration of War has been declared. The U.S ought too declare WWIII on terrorism, especially Islamic Muslem terrorist on on home land or over seas. Science has proven that the brain is not fully matured to reaason until age 25, so why even try to change it, unless it's just to get teenagers into the discussion to educate. A teenager can be 19 years old and given alcohol by a friend of a household then the parent of that household ought to be arrested, but wasn't because they say they knew nothing about it or that the drunken teen stole it from them. When the parent of the sicken teen picks up her son or daughter from that household and has to bring their teen to the hospital to find out if it's just alchol or something else that caused sickness, calls the household and Cheshire police and no one is arrested or held responsible except the drunken teen, something is wrong with law enforcement here!
I don't understand why the legal drinking age is a controversial debate specially now that we have access the all kinds of statistics that practically put the answer right in front of us. The legal drinking age should be as high as possible, even a 21 years old isn't mature enough to think wisely about drinking habits on wheels, what can we expect from those that just turned 18?
Reggis, alcohol treatment center counselor
Do you have experience with Psychopaths? Don't you dare put this person with a prison no. in the same ranks as the mentally ill, that is exactly what he wants! I work in Forensics, the criminally insane and the mentally ill. He is a Psychopath, you need to get some education and read books that have some credit to them. The criminal mentally ill have delusions, they don't plot , plan and then carry out such hideous crimes. As far as our youth, yes they are headed down a bad path, but it has to do more with a lack of morals and values. This is exactly how the mentally ill get a bad rap! And as far as the person that you are referring to look into the DSM1V or DSMV under psychopath and then decide.
Wow, you realize that though this may be supported by the law, you are also supporting this shell of a person with a prison no. One must consisder the moral limitations of the law, and examine our your value system. I am also curious if the library has an age requirement upon this book before checking it out? I don't know, maybe I missed that. Would the library allow Pornographic books, or perhaps it already does. Regardless of the law, which may need to be addressed, do you realize you are inadvertently supporting this person with a prison no. You do see he continues to create chaos and manipulate you readers by this law? People without a conscious are very good at calcualion and using the system and to meet their own selfish needs.. I mean, people get real! This isn't a person that has good intentions!. Go by past and present behaviors! It makes them feel important. It's all about them. They never operate without a self-serving motive. Using the library, especially in Cheshire were the hainess murders took place, he is getting the publicity he wants The more publicicity, ultimately the more people to purchase his book, perhaps even to get on the Oprah Winfrey show. Overall you read this book , you are in support of him reaching that goal. This populationare more caculating and know the law better than some lawyers who are in practice, to the demise of society, not the lawyers, the one with a prison no. Hey, if you are curious about reading this book in support of this shell of person without a concious then do it! Realize that someone of this caliber, is manipulating you to do just that. Anything you read in this book is distortion and usually view themselves as the entitled victim. Do healthy people with a good sense of self and respect for life resort such hainess crimes? Have a conscious? Then, above all have the ordasity to write a book about it! Absolutely not! He has writen a book about the most horrendous acts one could only imagine, and actually carries it out. That is someone , something, I would not want to support ,read or otherwise. Such a person doesn't have feelings or empathy for others and views others as objects, otherwise he wouldn't be in this situation. Our prisons are filled with this population. How do they get to this point? There are many good books out there written by Pschiatrist who will give you the facts. Look up Psychopath. You are only enabling this population without a conscoius to expand, despite what the law states. A better question to ypurself is; why would you read this book? Curious? want an inside view ? you won't get an honest, realistic inside view from this book. If you want to feel pain, lack of empathy for all life, distorted views and confusion; then read the book. Then plan to have nightmares, or if you enjoy reading the book about such happenings, then get some HELP! or put to some good use and work in Forensic Research or in the Prison System to help erradicate this syndrome. Do you really want your curiosity to overide your good sense values! If you do, than travel in the same ranks as this shell of a person with a prison no. Please, don't be a coward and hide behind the law and say it's your legal right! Then expect societies prisons to shrink or your taxes not to up! Your not just reading a book, of calculating murderer, it does have a ripple effect. I personally do my best to promote life. Not to spend one breathe on something so low and horrendously evil. I wouldn't want anyone to experience what those three women did, nor would I support it. Law or not, it's on your conscious.
Why in the world would the schoolteacher invite this man in from a organization
which has a history of it FBI agents getting arrested for pedophilia?
Having this book available at any CT library will not change the outcome of these two murderer's trial nor the opinions of the readers. Clearly, after reading this book my opinion hasn't changed on keeping it available to the public. I feel sorry for all those people who have suffered from these murders and wish them peace. This book has less description or graphic details on the actual murders then most true story books and 3/4 of it's content is not about the Petits. CHS has us reading books with immoral content of hatred, swearing and violence then this book. The fact that these murders happened in Cheshire is an eye opener to all teenagers who are on the path of criminal minded activities and could actual help in deterring this type mindset of selfishness and want. As unpleasant as the subject matter is, it was national news and can't be covered up. The criminally insane and mentally ill have brains & voices too and must be heard for us to try to understand them, so we can better are laws, public schools, community based help and teen programs. Open discussion on this book and the murders should be part of public education and required reading.
This year, the FAFSA online application has added new data-sharing options that families should be aware of before they go to the site to file their FAFSA.
Even today discrimination remains a major problem, it's like we refuse to understand that we need to go beyond racial disparities, we have all the resources to do that. This would be a great step towards progress. At least people can defend their rights in court now, at least someone hears them now if they wanna be heard.
Regg, civil procedure expert
Censoring a book is not the same as discriminating against buying it for a library until the Petit trial is over. I read that there was a gag order on the case. So it shouldn't have been published even, until AFTER the trial. That's not a call for censorship, it's a call for doing things in the proper order.
Selecting a book for study at CHS is also an action that requires good judgement.
Out of all the books out in the wide world, which students could purchase or borrow from other libraries at their own leisure, why would our school decide to have them study THIS? Is this book of some social, political or literary importance? Really, it's gossip over a tragedy.
I don't know the Petits. But I put myself in the Dr. Petit's shoes. You lose your family tragically, then the small minds in town go on to politicize the very personal assault that's come to you. They take your personal tragedy and a book that came out during a gag order, and make it their issue. The library sensationalizes your pain. Can you imagine.
If Dr. Petit had somehow his constitutional rights infringed by town government -instead of his family murdered- then I suppose a book written about his plight would be something educational worth reading.
Pushing this book through the library before the trial is over, then suggesting it be a subject at school...that's just like studying a book written by Charlie Manson. How is ANY of this contributory to our community and our society at large?
Has our view of truth and knowledge fallen down to the ranks of a report you'd be watching on Hollywood Extra?
This book should be required reading to compensate for poor parenting that leads to behavorial problems in teens?
A communistic society would be one in which you concede to the state to raise your children.
People do need truth, knowledge and an accurate account of history. There is real news out there but people are quibbling over being able to read a book focusing on the latest local gossip. The suspects are behind bars, there's no need to be informed until the trial is over and we know the legal outcome which is something that affects everyone through legal precedent. But this book being published before the end of trial is only going to contribute to skewing that truth.
What kind of truth, knowledge and history is going to be imparted to our children by studying the story of a murderer through his own words? Is this a person you expect to be truthful?
This is not an issue of censorship.
The issue is not that this book exists; rather, that there is a gag order on the court case. This book might somehow affect the trial and should not have even been published until after the trial - yet it was not only published, but purchased for use at the very library in the very town where the crimes were commited.
The timing of this book going onto the shelves at the library just might affect Petit's case. That's not fair.
I think it is sickening that the author used this story to make money. It is sickening that it might somehow make people sympathetic to at least one perpetrator of a crime.
However, I wholeheartedly believe in freedom of speech. Just the timing is not right.
Waiting until the trial is over to publish or the library purchase a book is not censorship.
In Los Angeles, once an individual is defined as mentally disabled and the court settles a conservatorship, different fees will be required by the conservator on the custody. It is actually expensive. People would have to spend funds even before the conservatorship is settled by the court, same as persistent expenses after the conservator is in place.
The same person has commented on this story about 4 or 5 times. Its obvious because they cant spell, and write the same things over and over. But my question to them is, what kind of person do you have to be to think that this book should be taught at CHS? What kind of person do you have to be to defend the animal who murdered three people and cowrote a book about it? And then to comment on this story numerous times about how bad the teenagers of Cheshire are. It sounds like you're a few french fries short of a happy meal and perhaps you should find something better to do than comment on a family that you "don't care about," read trash with your child, promote trash to the "proud" community of Cheshire, support people who are nothing but trash and waste your time and lack of spelling skills commenting numerous times on this story.
One of the people at the recent meeting regarding the book titled "In The Middle of the Night: The Shocking True Story of a Family Murdered in Cold Blood", made the following statement. “This is a bigger deal than we need to make it out to be. Let’s make a stand and not have it on our shelves.” I can't agree with him/her more about this being a "bigger deal than we need to make it to be", of course he forgets to mention that he is also one of the people who is making this a "big deal". I like to ask all of you parents out there what is the best way to get your child to play with something they shouldn't? Put in the middle of the room and make a "big deal" about how they are absolutely not supposed to touch it. Guess what happens right after you leave the room they have to go look at it to see what all the fuss was about.
I think we have to return those principals (the Constitution) that our countries founding fathers fought and died for. Those same principles and ideals, which were prevalent in the revolutionist’s minds as they fought to remove this country from a tyranny, which was bent on keeping the colonists subservient to a dictator king and his enforcers. I'm not saying that the censorship of this one book is that, but even the Great-Wall of China started with just one stone. Haven't we given up enough in this country all ready?
The public & world have the right to be informed, knowledgable and allowed to read this book. The Cheshire BOE has approved other fiction & nonfiction works for CHS students that have worse content, language and descriptions then "In the Middle of the Night". There r many teens today in Cheshire that smoke cigs, drink, have sex using condoms, steal, lie, cheat, do drugs that could benefit from reading this book. It touches home. Joshua growup in Cheshire, didn't do well in school. How many teens r in Hummerston School for one reason or another? This book should be required reading for all CHS. I vote to allow the people to read what they want and those who dislike the subject matter not be allowed to control Cheshire or CT. The public has the right to live in peace and not to be intiminated. Joshua may be guity of contempt of court for communicating his story to McDonald, but the weight of being guilty of murder or censorship as in a communistic society is doesn't balance the scale. It's not unethical or illegal, wouldn't u say?
If u don't like or will be hurt by something, don't do it. I personally have no feeling for the petits, but i do for victims, the law and freedoms. To censor or block the public or the world from knowing someones truth is not right . I read McDonald's book " In the Middle of the Night" and found it very informative and lacking details of the murders. They r many teens in Cheshire that can learn from Joshua's mistakes. Cheshire teens smoke cigs, have sex using cindoms, steal, lie, drink and do drugs. This book should be part of required reading by CHS students. The boe has approve worse and I read these books with my teen and was amazed at the content, language and desciption. Take Mice or Men, The Kite Runner, etc. A true story about CA high school students beating up a black boy, etc. Ethically, more people than a few Cheshirites, neighbors and relative's opinion isn't worth more than the truth, knowledge or history. Let the pubic read what they want. This shouldn't be a communistic society.
U can try, but can't control the truth, the public, freedoms or the mentally ill. When the public is censored from the truth, as horrible as it may be, the objectionable content must be weighted againt the law. I recall not to long ago how the Proud Cheshirites tried to disrupt Rte. 10 with their bags of candles that gave a vigil like appearence for the petits murders, besides a fund raiser. They didn't care about it being the beginning of the Christmas season or High Holy Holidays. They seemed to only care about what they were doing & being for a good cause. So, why would anyone one speak out about how awful it was to be reminded of these murders? Then they tried to educate me about their purpose, besides bashing me all to hell. Their minds were stuck in a box and couldn't see the overall picture on how these candles paraded along the shoulder/gutter of public roads were a sore reminder and fightening. If Joshua was mentally ill, does he not have the right to tell his truth or Mc Donald the right to write about it? Education is being informed and understanding, but when it disturbs the vast majority or public not just a minority, then there maybe censorship. I don't see this book causes a disturbance of the peace or disorderly conduct. Could the protesters of this book "In the Middle of the Night" be self serving, filled with hate or seeking revenge? Could they only wish to keep Joshua on drugs to silence him, to take away anything of value from him cause he is mentally ill? Well, there r alot among us that suffer from diseases and we r subjected to their weird appearances, speech and way of thinking, but r they with no rights? It's frightening to children and adults to in their presence or subjected to their ideas, yet it is forced upon us to be educated about their disease so we will accept them. Why would anyone's opinion matter that this diseased person is deserving the same quality of life as everyone else? Joshua's punishment is prison for life. With or without this book people were hurt by these murders. Joshua being guilty of contempt of court for communicating his story, doesn't matter to being guilty of murder? I vote to let this informative book be read by the public and for those who wish not to be reminded, not to read it. Ethically is doesn't fit to censor. Their opinion can't stop history or the truth to be told.
So, u think ur feelings and loyalty to the petite's r more important then the right of a writer, reader, freedom of speech and literature? Communicating the truth from whatever source is legal. This book "In the Middle of the Night" was quite informative, especially that Joshua growup in Cheshire. The Board of Ed has allowed and made other books required reading for high school students in English Lit., which had stronger and grosser details that this book. Fiction or nonfiction it doesn't matter. This book ought to be required reading for CHS, because as much as u may not like ur friends, neighbors or relatives written about, how they lived or died, it the truth, real, knowledge, history and perhaps honest. The PROUD Cheshirites who think they r holier then God, have to be knocked off their high horse and shut up. I personally do not care about how much u loved, knew or fell about the petit's, as u don't care about my life. What I wanted and millions of others is to be informed, seach the truth and read books. McDonal did an OK job, but I was expecting detail on the murders, which he didn't write, but I bet he knows and didn't disclose in this book. Still for all the teens in Cheshire who r smoking cigs, swearing like troupers, having sex using condoms, drinking, doing drugs, stealing from others or business and looking for excitement, this book could very well be a good read, a deterrent and realization that like Joshua they could be heading down the wrong rode. Even if this read saves a teen from this sort of activety, thinking or life style, it is worth the read. So, stop thinking and defending the petits! We all know the horror, ur grief and anger that these murders caused. Go on with ur lives and leave others alone to live theirs'.