Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

Boy charged with felony for carrying sugar
suntimes ^ | February 11, 2006

Posted on 02/11/2006 4:11:34 PM PST by Revel

Boy charged with felony for carrying sugar

BY JUSTINA WANG A 12-year-old Aurora boy who said he brought powdered sugar to school for a science project this week has been charged with a felony for possessing a look-alike drug, Aurora police have confirmed.

The sixth-grade student at Waldo Middle School was also suspended for two weeks from school after showing the bag of powdered sugar to his friends.

The boy, who is not being identified because he is a juvenile, said he brought the bag to school to ask his science teacher if he could run an experiment using sugar.

Two other boys asked if the bag contained cocaine after he showed it to them in the bathroom Wednesday morning, the boy's mother said.

He joked that it was cocaine, before telling them, "just kidding," she said.

Aurora police arrested the boy after a custodian at the school reported the boy's comments. The youngster was taken to the police station and detained, before being released to his parents that afternoon.

"This is getting ridiculous," said the boy's mother. "They treated my son like a criminal. .. . This is no way to treat a 12-year-old kid."

East Aurora School District officials declined to comment on the case, citing privacy issues.

The district issued a written statement, which said: "The dangers of illegal drugs and controlled substances are clear.

Could get probation "Look-alike drugs and substances can cause that same level of danger because staff and students are not equipped to differentiate between the two."

The school handbook states that students can be suspended or expelled for carrying a look-alike drug.

Penalties for juveniles are decided on a case-by-case basis, but if convicted, the sixth-grader could likely face up to five years' probation, said Jeffery Jefko, deputy director of Kane County juvenile court services.

Juveniles who have prior criminal records could also be placed in a residential treatment program if convicted, he said.

Aurora Beacon-News


TOPICS: Crime/Corruption; Culture/Society; Government; News/Current Events
KEYWORDS: alibi; anarchy; barneyfife; billofrights; chiefwiggum; constitutionlist; drugsarebadmkay; education; fructose; glucose; govwatch; healthypeople2010; hifructosecornsyrup; keystonecops; libertarians; maltose; nipitinthebud; officerbarbrady; pspl; respectmyauthority; schools; student; students; stupidsneversleep; sugarhigh; suger; sweet; sweettooth; wod; wodlist; zerotolerance
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-50 ... 501-550551-600601-650651-663 next last
To: robertpaulsen
Maybe they can bring in look-alike guns and simulate drive-by shootings? Oh, what fun! Then the teachers could simulate the public paying for simulated medical care and simulated drug rehab for the victims! Education? Who cares!"

Really. I mean, the kids are all thugs and deserve to be treated as such! Too bad so sad when good kids make dumb mistakes!! I mean, if a kid sticks his finger out of the car window and goes "bang bang" to his buddy while his mom drives out of the car line...slap a felony on that thug! Anyway, the distraction is really helpful to the REAL thugs.

551 posted on 02/14/2006 7:12:53 AM PST by sweet_diane (I support TheShoulder dot org)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 545 | View Replies]

To: takenoprisoner
In America, the doctor provides the permission slip

He said, as he quickly and furtively altered his original argument.

552 posted on 02/14/2006 7:14:56 AM PST by Mojave
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 544 | View Replies]

To: sweet_diane
Too bad so sad when good kids make dumb mistakes!!

There seems to be a question about how "good" he is and what the nature of his "mistake" was.

"The sixth-grader at Waldo Middle School was charged after telling a classmate that the bag of powdered sugar was crack cocaine and inviting him to a bathroom to ingest it, Aurora police said Saturday."

553 posted on 02/14/2006 7:18:20 AM PST by Mojave
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 551 | View Replies]

To: mysterio
Mojave supports a child being thrown in jail for carrying a bag of sugar.

Mysterio supports drug dealers being able to legally sell young children crack.

554 posted on 02/14/2006 7:24:44 AM PST by Mojave
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 548 | View Replies]

To: Mojave
You are a liar. I support the full legalization of drugs to be sold to adults. YOU support their sales to children and puppies by KEEPING THEM ILLEGAL AND UNREGULATED. YOU are the reason that children are getting drugs, and YOU are the reason that it's easier for a kid to get a joint than a shot of whiskey.

All that you have are emotion based arguments and strawmen.
555 posted on 02/14/2006 7:31:27 AM PST by mysterio
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 554 | View Replies]

To: mysterio
1. Mojave supports a child being thrown in jail for carrying a bag of sugar.

2. You are a liar.

Look in the mirror.

556 posted on 02/14/2006 7:38:28 AM PST by Mojave
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 555 | View Replies]

To: Mojave

You do not support the child being prosecuted and convicted for carrying a bag of sugar? Please clarify your position.


557 posted on 02/14/2006 7:46:59 AM PST by mysterio
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 556 | View Replies]

To: mysterio

Back your lie up with a quote.


558 posted on 02/14/2006 7:48:24 AM PST by Mojave
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 557 | View Replies]

To: Mojave

Clarify your position. Do you or do you not support the prosecution and conviction of this boy for carrying a bag of sugar?


559 posted on 02/14/2006 7:49:40 AM PST by mysterio
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 558 | View Replies]

To: mysterio
Clarify your position.

Produce the quote, don't beg me to bail you out.

560 posted on 02/14/2006 7:53:33 AM PST by Mojave
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 559 | View Replies]

To: Mojave
You have spent this entire thread desperately defending you failed war on some drugs against an onslaught of posters with a small amount of common sense, and now you expect me to believe that you are against the child being prosecuted for carrying a bag of sugar?

Clarify your position.
561 posted on 02/14/2006 7:56:00 AM PST by mysterio
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 560 | View Replies]

To: ohhhh

Bump!


562 posted on 02/14/2006 7:56:26 AM PST by jpsb
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 27 | View Replies]

To: robertpaulsen

You know such votes happened and passed in other states as well.


563 posted on 02/14/2006 8:11:39 AM PST by Paul C. Jesup
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 542 | View Replies]

To: Mojave
Not even once.

Do you actually check your statements before posting completely false comments.

For the record, I check my statements before hand.

564 posted on 02/14/2006 8:14:53 AM PST by Paul C. Jesup
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 549 | View Replies]

To: mysterio
Mojave supports a child being thrown in jail for carrying a bag of sugar. Anyone who was taking Mojave seriously before this point should certainly reconsider that now.

I'll keep that in mind.

565 posted on 02/14/2006 8:15:54 AM PST by Paul C. Jesup
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 548 | View Replies]

To: Paul C. Jesup

He's backtracking now and implying that he doesn't support it. But he won't clarify his position.


566 posted on 02/14/2006 8:18:13 AM PST by mysterio
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 565 | View Replies]

To: Uncledave

One day, when the kid is 19, he'll be shaping up for the re-instituted draft, and he'll be rejected due to his criminal record. When the other rejects ask him his crime, he'll have to tell them, "carrying sugar in a plastic bag". And they'll all be very afraid.


567 posted on 02/14/2006 8:19:22 AM PST by swain_forkbeard (Rationality may not be sufficient, but it is necessary.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 4 | View Replies]

To: Mojave; mysterio

"Mysterio supports drug dealers being able to legally sell young children crack."

Show us the post where mysterio "supports drug dealers being able to legally sell young children crack."

Nevermind, I know you can't...and with that in mind, I have become convinced that mojave is a big time lying disruptive poster whose goal is to stifle any serious debate on matters important to a freedom loving people.


568 posted on 02/14/2006 8:20:08 AM PST by takenoprisoner (All I know is that people in pursuit of happiness will need to seek a new homeland)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 554 | View Replies]

To: Paul C. Jesup
"You know such votes happened and passed in other states as well."

For the legalization of medical marijuana, not recreational marijuana, yes. I believe 9 out of the 11 states used a public referendum rather than the state legislature to legalize.

You've got Soros and NORML and the MPP and the DPA and all these outside pro-marijuana organizations funding and organizing these state measures, coupled with a motivated minority, and you end up with 51% of those who voted establishing state policy. That's not representative of the state.

You say you disagree with the method, yet you support the results as representing the will of the state. What gives?

569 posted on 02/14/2006 11:33:11 AM PST by robertpaulsen
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 563 | View Replies]

To: BlueMondaySkipper
I think I froze the whole left side of my brain woah!
570 posted on 02/14/2006 11:42:55 AM PST by freepatriot32 (Holding you head high & voting Libertarian is better then holding your nose and voting republican)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 547 | View Replies]

To: Washi
"Here is a link to a previous, but similar, story on FreeRepublic. I'm curious to know if you agree with the school's action in this case."

I do, but for a different reason. Disrespecting a teacher entitles a student to suspension in my book, followed by a spanking at home by the parents to emphasize the point. A spitball directed at the teacher, a tack on their chair, foul language, talking back, physical contact of any sort, or pointing at them and saying, "Bang bang, you're dead" is grounds in my book.

Or, three whacks across an open palm with a half-inch diameter 42" wooden pointer by the teacher is also acceptable. (Yes, I went to Catholic grade school taught by nuns.) But, since that is no longer allowed, a three day suspension is what it has to be.

Too bad. I thought the old way was better. At a number of levels.

571 posted on 02/14/2006 11:47:21 AM PST by robertpaulsen
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 546 | View Replies]

To: sweet_diane

So, as long as it's not real drugs or real money or real guns, the kids should be allowed to do it at school? You've really been dancing around this issue, you know. Why is that?


572 posted on 02/14/2006 11:51:34 AM PST by robertpaulsen
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 551 | View Replies]

To: robertpaulsen
You cannot get high from fake drugs.
You cannot buy anything with fake money.
You cannot kill a person with a fake gun.
KIDS DO STUPID THINGS SOMETIMES and I personally don't see the need to destroy futures when it serves no purpose.

RP...I don't know what you're drinking to think I've been 'dancing around this issue'. Oh...and I'm not advocating kids waving fake guns at cops.

573 posted on 02/14/2006 12:08:53 PM PST by sweet_diane (I support TheShoulder dot org)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 572 | View Replies]

To: sweet_diane

So you're saying that you would do away with the school policy on look-alike drugs.


574 posted on 02/14/2006 12:15:05 PM PST by robertpaulsen
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 573 | View Replies]

To: robertpaulsen
Two weeks later, the kid brings that same pocket knife back to school, gets in a fight, and stabs another student in the eye, blinding him in that eye for life. The mother sues. The previous incident comes out in court testimony. The press goes crazy. The community is incredulous -- why didn't the principal do something before? Why wasn't this kid suspended? This could have been avoided! Can't you just see the headlines? So, the school gets sued for millions and the principal loses his cushy six-figure income because he gave the kid a break. But it was all worth it because the principal exercised the "spirit of the law". Not in today's world, amigo. Those days are long gone.

Hey, don't forget we're on the same side here. I just about forgot. This happened in FIRST GRADE so I can't apply it to this or EVERY situation as some like to do.

If anything your statement reaffirms that often in education, you are darned if you do and darned if you don't, especially with some out there ready to pounce on any little negative morsel they can find.

BTW--no principal around here makes a six-figure income. In fact, here they probably make less than some teachers in some areas.

I respect you enough not to argue with you here. I probably would have handled it differently, but as you hinted at--people will use it for their own purposes in hindsight especially in a negative-loving MSM.

Thanks for the comments.

575 posted on 02/14/2006 12:20:00 PM PST by moog
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 473 | View Replies]

To: robertpaulsen
"So you're saying that you would do away with the school policy on look-alike drugs."

Nope...just some use of common sense. 'Zero tolerance' would work so much better were we not dealing with real people.

Would you feel justice was served if this kid, in THIS case, were charged with and convicted of a felony? (even tho the beloved handbook says suspension)

576 posted on 02/14/2006 2:25:21 PM PST by sweet_diane (I support TheShoulder dot org)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 574 | View Replies]

To: robertpaulsen

disregard my previous post... your answer in #571 just about says it all.


577 posted on 02/14/2006 2:28:13 PM PST by sweet_diane (I support TheShoulder dot org)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 576 | View Replies]

To: sweet_diane; robertpaulsen
Diane, baby, give up. RP is the ultimate drug warrior. To him everything is wrong unless he says so...

Hello RP, still trying to defend the indefensible, I see...

No drugs were found, as usual, but somebody has to pay a price, right!


578 posted on 02/14/2006 2:39:05 PM PST by pageonetoo (FReepmail for Celebrity Cruises (and more)- www.acorntogo.com -Acorn Travel)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 573 | View Replies]

To: pageonetoo
"Diane, baby, give up"

lol.. i know. I must've been feeling a bit masochistic this morning when I got on this thread!

579 posted on 02/14/2006 2:51:10 PM PST by sweet_diane (I support TheShoulder dot org)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 578 | View Replies]

To: sweet_diane
"Nope...just some use of common sense."

Huh? So the school should have a policy against look-alike drugs. Fine. Now, this kid certainly met the standard, wouldn't you agree?

So what should happen to him? Nothing? What's the point of the school policy then?

(Forget about the felony. That's a state charge and has nothing to do with the school. I'm asking what the school should do.)

580 posted on 02/14/2006 3:03:03 PM PST by robertpaulsen
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 576 | View Replies]

To: pageonetoo
"No drugs were found, as usual, but somebody has to pay a price, right!"

Are you willing to go on record to say that drug dealing was NOT going on in the hallways at Stratford High School in Goose Creek?

581 posted on 02/14/2006 3:11:50 PM PST by robertpaulsen
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 578 | View Replies]

To: robertpaulsen
You can't explain it except to say the janitor shouldn't have believed the kid when the kid claimed it was cocaine, but he should have believed him when he said he was kidding.

Red herring. The issue is not what was believed but whether the totality of the kid's statement (as opposed to a tendentiously extracted fragment) amounted to a representation that the sugar was cocaine ... which it did not.

He was charged with possessing a substance that looked like cocaine and was represented as cocaine to his friends.

As the totality of his statement makes clear, he did not so represent.

582 posted on 02/14/2006 3:33:17 PM PST by Know your rights (The modern enlightened liberal doesn't care what you believe as long as you don't really believe it.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 480 | View Replies]

To: robertpaulsen
this kid certainly met the standard, wouldn't you agree?

No, since he didn't represent the sugar as being cocaine.

583 posted on 02/14/2006 3:38:58 PM PST by Know your rights (The modern enlightened liberal doesn't care what you believe as long as you don't really believe it.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 580 | View Replies]

To: robertpaulsen
pointing at them and saying, "Bang bang, you're dead" is grounds in my book.

Or, three whacks across an open palm with a half-inch diameter 42" wooden pointer by the teacher is also acceptable. (Yes, I went to Catholic grade school taught by nuns.) But, since that is no longer allowed, a three day suspension is what it has to be.

You have to be joking about this. Back in the days when I was in Catholic school, Father Vogel frequently would have a finger gunfight with one of us on the playground. We all wanted to be Tom Mix and would try to out draw him with our finger guns. He always beat us, so three of us ambushed him one day as he came out the door. None of us got hit with a pointer for “shooting” him with finger guns.

Nor did we get charged with terrorists threats for singing to the tune of The Battle Hymn of the Republic, “My eyes have seen the glory of the burning of the school; We tortured all the teachers and we broke the Golden Rule . . .”

Nor did we get in trouble for drawing pictures of killing Nazis and Japs. Even the kids in socialized schools didn’t get in trouble for those things in those days. The bureaucrats in the classrooms and the administration had more sense than their counterparts today.

Nor did the nuns or Father Vogel have to call the cops for every little thing. Today the bureaucrats call the cops and have kids arrested for little things like fist fights. In 7th grade two alter boys got caught drinking the Communion wine. Sister Mary took them to Father Vogel and he never even called their parents. He sure didn’t call the cops for underage drinking and theft of church property. He just made them hand oil all the pews in the church. It took them a whole week of after school and all day one Saturday.

Later in Lutheran school, things weren’t much different. Pastor Gresser and Mr. Hauptman, the principal, never called the cops. Most of our kids were from the inner city and it was rare for any of us to even get hit. Although I have to admit, I got as many swats on the hand as anyone in my class.

Two of us brought water guns to school one day that looked real if you didn’t get too close. Mrs. Lang sent us to Mr. Hauptman’s office and we had too eat lunch there for the rest of the week, but at the end of the day he gave us our guns back and let us take them home. If things then were like they are now in the socialized government schools, we might still be in jail. At the very least we’d have police records.

Hell, I can’t think of a single boy I was in school with who wouldn’t have a police record if we were in socialized schools today.

Today’s classroom bureaucrats and the administration bureaucrats would have never made it in the schools I went to. I can just imagine how fast Father Vogel or Pastor Gresser would have fired the principal in this story. My guess is Father Vogel would have dragged him out of the school by the scruff of the neck.

584 posted on 02/14/2006 5:13:27 PM PST by SUSSA
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 571 | View Replies]

To: robertpaulsen
I agree that children today have far less respect for adults. I agree that it is primarily because of a lack of discipline. However, this kid was not punished because he displayed a lack of respect, he was punished because of a zero-tolerance guidline and because of a "look-a-like gun." It wasn't a gun (niether was the sugar a drug) but he portrayed it as such (just as the kid did with the sugar.)

So if you support zero-tolerence rules for look-a-like drugs, it would seem to me to be hypocritical not to support zero-tolerence rules for look-a-like guns. Even if the "gun" is a piece of chicken.

585 posted on 02/14/2006 5:57:20 PM PST by Washi
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 571 | View Replies]

To: robertpaulsen
For the legalization of medical marijuana, not recreational marijuana, yes.

Loosing of legal restriction is legalization at a limited level. You're parsing words here and by your standards smoking and drinking beer are not legal because there are restrictions on them like for example children cannot use them.

You've got Soros and NORML and the MPP and the DPA and all these outside pro-marijuana organizations funding and organizing these state measures

If Soros was just funding this one issue and not trying to wreck the U.S. economy (which he is by among other things shorting oil futures and driving up the price of gas), I would not much problems with him.

586 posted on 02/14/2006 7:18:00 PM PST by Paul C. Jesup
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 569 | View Replies]

To: sweet_diane
"I bet your students parents would LOVE to hear that comment. If teaching 7th graders is so horrible, why do you do it? Not that your attitude is any different than what I experienced when mine were in middle school. You see, kids at that age ARE NOT ADULTS. It's a brain chemistry/function thing."

I intended to teach high school, not middle school. Also, this particular 7th grade class (at the school, not just in my room) is widely known as a bunch of little kids, who happen to be older than they ought to be for the way they act. I don't expect them to be adults, as I still (vaguely) remember being that age myself. I do expect them to exhibit brain function now and then, at least in my class. I'm seeing precious little of that, however. I replaced a teacher who left early in the fall, and my kids had to deal with subs and TAs for the rest of last year. They are supposed to already know something about our subject, but their test scores indicate that they spent all last fall somewhere else than in class. The good news is that after a month and a half as their teacher, I now have four students passing the class, instead of only one. 19 to go.

I also have four classes of 9th graders. They are much better behaved than the one class of 7th graders. I've spoken to the parents of several of my worst offenders, btw, and the parents tend to characterize them as "brain-dead."
587 posted on 02/14/2006 7:46:14 PM PST by Old Student (WRM, MSgt, USAF(Ret.))
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 442 | View Replies]

To: Paul C. Jesup
For the record, I check my statements before hand.

I hope you washed your hand afterwards.

Name one state here pot is legal.

588 posted on 02/14/2006 8:24:35 PM PST by Mojave
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 564 | View Replies]

To: takenoprisoner
Show us the post where mysterio "supports drug dealers being able to legally sell young children crack."

It's in the same post where Mojave "supports a child being thrown in jail for carrying a bag of sugar."

Perhaps you couldn't see it through your cloud of selective indignation.

589 posted on 02/14/2006 8:26:52 PM PST by Mojave
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 568 | View Replies]

To: robertpaulsen
Are you willing to go on record to say that drug dealing was NOT going on in the hallways at Stratford High School in Goose Creek?

Are you saying that they did find drugs?

Why don't you get a real life...

590 posted on 02/14/2006 8:41:42 PM PST by pageonetoo (FReepmail for Celebrity Cruises (and more)- www.acorntogo.com -Acorn Travel)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 581 | View Replies]

To: Mojave; mysterio

"Perhaps you couldn't see it through your cloud of selective indignation."

The only cloud I saw was the smokescreen you left while
refusing to answer the question asked by Mysterio so I shall ask again. Do you support throwing a child in jail for possessing sugar? Do you believe this is a good, reasonable, and constitutional law?




591 posted on 02/14/2006 8:48:32 PM PST by takenoprisoner (Afterall, American ports run by muslims is a good thing right?)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 589 | View Replies]

To: takenoprisoner

Find the quote.


592 posted on 02/14/2006 8:53:37 PM PST by Mojave
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 591 | View Replies]

To: Mojave

Do you support jailing elementary aged children for possessing sugar?


593 posted on 02/14/2006 8:55:44 PM PST by takenoprisoner (Afterall, American ports run by muslims is a good thing right?)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 592 | View Replies]

To: Mojave

Clarify your position.


594 posted on 02/14/2006 8:57:00 PM PST by mysterio
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 592 | View Replies]

To: mysterio
Clarify your position.

Again?

Mojave supports a child being thrown in jail for carrying a bag of sugar.

Mysterio supports drug dealers being able to legally sell young children crack.


595 posted on 02/14/2006 8:58:57 PM PST by Mojave
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 594 | View Replies]

To: Mojave

Do you or do you not support the child being charged with a felony for having a bag of sugar?


596 posted on 02/14/2006 9:02:39 PM PST by mysterio
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 595 | View Replies]

To: Mojave

Do you support removing a child from school and taking him to jail for possessing sugar?


597 posted on 02/14/2006 9:06:52 PM PST by takenoprisoner (Afterall, American ports run by muslims is a good thing right?)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 595 | View Replies]

To: mysterio
1. Mojave supports a child being thrown in jail for carrying a bag of sugar.

2. Do you or do you not support the child being charged with a felony for having a bag of sugar?

Careful. You'll overstimulate takenoprisoner's selective indignation gland.

598 posted on 02/14/2006 9:12:35 PM PST by Mojave
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 596 | View Replies]

To: Mojave

Answer the question.


599 posted on 02/14/2006 9:13:32 PM PST by mysterio
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 598 | View Replies]

To: mysterio

I'd rather expose your hypocrisy. :)


600 posted on 02/14/2006 9:14:27 PM PST by Mojave
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 599 | View Replies]


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-50 ... 501-550551-600601-650651-663 next last

Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson