Loud teen party becomes a high-profile legal battle

Houston Chronicle ^ | June 17, 2005 | Erik Hanson

[L98Fiero]

"What ever happened to just telling their parents?"

I think the actions of the parents in this instance answer that question. It is the equivilent of doing nothing.

[Servant of the 9]

I would sue the shit out of the cops, prosecutors, and any other city official involved.

Maybe, but the kids will all be going away to college in the fall, and the parents are well off and will probably be glad just to see it go away after the police have been put in their place.

SO9

[kjo]

The parent in this incident is nuts. She is the problem.

[Millee]

"The parents let their underage kids go to a drinking party? Were they out drinking themselves?

No!! I was at....Bible Study.....er...I mean..how would I know???

[FormerACLUmember]

Spoiled, wealthy little sociopaths who are above the law. Obviously this neighborhood is a breeding ground for future lawyers.

[lilylangtree]

Yeah, if Johnny or Janey had an accident after leaving the party, you can bet your booties that mom and dad would be outraged and suing the owner.

[Millee]

Great point!

[monday]

"The parents let their underage kids go to a drinking party?"

The crazy way laws are in this country make it impossible for parents to supervise their kids. At 18 they are adults able to go anywhere they want without parental supervision. They aren't allowed to drink until they are 21 though. Blaming the parents for that situation is stupid.

The solution, either raise the age of adulthood to 21 or lower the drinking age to 18. Of course that makes way too much sense for legislators to ever do.

[Durus]

Spoiled, wealthy little sociopaths who are above the law.

Does drinking at a party underage make you a sociopath?

Does not drinking at a party and fighting against charges that you were make you a sociopath?

[<1/1,000,000th%]

You have a point.

In my case, if my 19-year-old daughter continues to live at home, she has to follow dad's rules. If she doesn't like dad's rules, dad can have everything she owns out in the front yard in about 15 minutes.

[em2vn]

Upon what would you base administering a breathalyzer test, a field sobriety test? I feel that action would be thrown out of court.
I think that every kid in the house could be charged with being a minor in possession since none of them were of legal drinking age and willingly placed themself in the situation by remaining were alcohol was being consumed illegally.
Furthermore, the fact that people were seen fleeing the site when police arrived certainly gave the police a sound reason to enter the house to determine what activity was taking place that compelled people to flee when police arrived.

[monday]

"Sure. It was everybody else's kids who were drinking."

The police were asked to give them Breathalyzer tests in order to determine who was drinking and refused. Why didn't they? Did they just want to bust all of those nasty little rich kids? Put them in their place?

It's so funny how many people on this thread don't even try to hide their hatred of these kids because they are rich. Class bigotry is widespread and no one even bothers to hide it like they would if they were racists. The rich are not a protected class in the politically correct world. They just have to shut up and take it like white people or men or Christians.

All the bigots on this thread should be ashamed of themselves, but I expect they aren't.

[lugsoul]

Nope. With regard to a home, 'probable cause' doesn't obviate the need for a warrant. Car, yes. Home, no.

As far as the possession charge, again, the 'everyone in the house' theory won't fly. It works in a car. But in a house, there is no way to establish that any given kid even knew the alcohol was present, or that they had any access to it.

What if their 12-year-old sister was upstairs listening to records? Charge her, too? See, it just doesn't work as a blanket assertion.

Anyway - high school seniors drinking - the horror!

[Dianna]

I didn't see anyone allege either of the above conditions here.Maybe I missed it.

I can't imagine a bunch of kids standing at the door telling the cops that they cannot enter without a warrant. I'll bet the kids probably just let them in.

[AppyPappy]

If it is an open party, it's an open party. That's why college frat parties have lists now. No undercover cops can attend.

[monday]

"Spoiled, wealthy little sociopaths who are above the law."

sociopaths? lol.... You must be joking? Do you know what a sociopath is?

[Lou L]

Upon what would you base administering a breathalyzer test, a field sobriety test? I feel that action would be thrown out of court.

Evidence.

Positive Breathalyzer + alcoholic drinks present + minors = drinking underage.

If this went to trial and you saw that evidence, what else would you need to know?

[Rushgrrl]

well, that's saying a lot

[FormerACLUmember]

sociopaths? lol.... You must be joking? Do you know what a sociopath is?

Sure, a sociopath is the alternative term for "lawyer."

[Rushgrrl]

but it's the RISK the kid takes by being somewhere where there is drinking and getting busted for being there. Cripes when I was underage I was doing it but you can be DAMN sure that if I were to get busted it was my own damn fault. Plain and simple..SO much for personal responsibility..and these parents are teaching their kids that being there is okay (it isn't because it's possession!). And for all of you that are OKAY with this....maybe you shouldn't be having kids! It's always the cops fault!! My gawd you people are disgusting and just as BAD as any liberal when it comes to this subject!! It's about RESPONSIBILITY! But then, from what I've seen here, a whole bunch of you are just as pro-gov't-baby-sitting as any lib!