• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!

Not this again.

Excon said:
This is just wrong.
His faulty reasoning is the cause, not someone being a bully.

I hope the jury finds her not guilty as they should.

This thinking that someone else or an object has to be responsible for the deeds of another needs to stop. ​

It is sickening to think anyone would think another is culpable for another's faulty reasoning.
Click to expand...

Two words: Charles Manson.
 
Captain Adverse said:
I already provided the answer in my first post:

8. If on view of the dead body and after personal inquiry into the cause and manner of death, the coroner considers a further inquiry and examination necessary in the public interest, the coroner shall make out the coroner's warrant directed to the sheriff of the city or county requiring the sheriff forthwith to summon six good and lawful citizens of the county to appear before the coroner, at the time and place expressed in the warrant, and to inquire how and by whom the deceased died.​

More details are available at the link.



Yes, a Grand Jury is a non-judicial body which in those States that use them allows a Prosecutor to present before them reasons why he thinks a person has committed a crime, and then votes whether or not such evidence supports a criminal indictment charging a person with one or more crimes. It is not a trial, just (usually) a rubber stamp for the Prosecutor's office to get charges to court. This leads to a criminal trial.
Click to expand...

So the coroner calls for an inquiry into a cause of death that he thinks is in the "public interest" (see bolded)...such as a threat to public safety or health. So perhaps the coroner in this case felt that what happened to the boy is becoming epidemic and warrants public attention. Perhaps, he's seen the statistics...or perhaps he autopsied one too many young suicide victims due to bullying. Whatever his reason, I don't think it was as self serving as you seem to think.
 
Excon said:
This is what it said.

In an unusual legal twist on an all-too-common sad story, Branham has been arrested after a prosecutor charged her with involuntary manslaughter.

Missouri law allows for a coroner to seek an official inquest, which as the AP noted is a rare process in the U.S. similar to a grand jury investigation save for a vast difference — coroner’s inquests are public. Following Suttner’s suicide, Howard County Coroner Frank Flaspohler asked a six-person jury to decide whether the boy’s death was an accident or a crime.

“I felt there was bullying going on and things weren’t getting corrected,” Flaspohler said. “Hopefully this makes the school pay attention to what’s going on. And it’s not just in that school. We all need to wake up and say this exists and we need to take care of it.”​



Had you followed the link in that article to the original AP report you would have found the following explaining why he called for the inquest.

FAYETTE, Mo. • A manager of a small-town Dairy Queen accused of bullying a teenage employee who later killed himself was charged Wednesday with involuntary manslaughter following a rare investigation in Missouri requested by the local coroner.

[...]

The Howard County coroner sought an official inquest following Suttner's death, a process similar to a grand jury investigation but public. Such investigations can be sought if a coroner believes a death could be related to a continuing safety and health hazard. In this case, the coroner said he pursued the inquest to publicly acknowledge bullying as a problem.

[...]

Dairy Queen manager charged after Missouri teen's suicide ​
Click to expand...


Thats what I thought it said...see post #53

http://www.debatepolitics.com/law-and-order/277841-not-again-6.html#post1066845619

Yes, yes, I know, I said the word "unusal" instead of "rare"...quibble, quibble.
 
Last edited:
Kobie said:
Of course it is. Because it destroys your "argument.'
Click to expand...
iLOL
No. It destroys nothing I said.
And yes, it is irrelevant to this case.
 
Last edited:
Excon said:
This thinking that someone else or an object has to be responsible for the deeds of another needs to stop.
Click to expand...

Bullying needs to stop. You can certainly argue that involuntary manslaughter is a bit much, but bully's need to be dealt with. Teaching victims to be strong and fight back is fine, but exposing people to mental and verbal abuse needs to be dealt with in a similar manner to physical abuse. Just because you can't see a bruise on the victims skin doesn't mean it isn't damaging.
 
Excon said:
A horribly bullied teen committed suicide. Now his former Dairy Queen boss has been charged with involuntary manslaughter.

[...]

“A lot of people, kids, made fun of the way — basically everything about him,” his best friend Lexie Graves testified, according to the Columbia Daily Tribune. Suttner was overweight and spoke with a speech impediment: two prime targets for bullies at Glasgow High School in Glasgow, Mo.

[...]

“Every time we went to the school to do something about the bullying, it just got worse,” Smith said.

Perhaps the worst alleged offender, though, was his 21-year-old supervisor at the Dairy Queen where he worked. Harley Branham, a manager there, allegedly did everything she could to make the boy’s life miserable.

Allison Bennett, a former co-worker, testified that Branham constantly ridiculed him. She made him lie prostrate on his stomach while cleaning the fast food restaurant’s floor by hand. Once, she even threw a cheeseburger at Suttner because he made it incorrectly, Bennett said. (Branham claimed this was all meant, and taken by Suttner, in jest.)

[...]

After placing a few calls to friends and family, he raised a .22 to his head and ended his life.

In an unusual legal twist on an all-too-common sad story, Branham has been arrested after a prosecutor charged her with involuntary manslaughter.

[...]

Following the inquest, the jurors concluded the Dairy Queen “negligently failed to properly train employees about harassment prevention and resolution” and that the school district was “negligent in failing to prevent bullying.” Finally, they found Branham was the “primary actor” in the boy’s death.

On Wednesday, Wilson filed a second-degree involuntary manslaughter charge against Branham, KTVI reported. She was arrested by a Howard County sheriff’s deputy, the Columbia Daily Tribune reported.

[...]

​
A horribly bullied teen committed suicide. Now his former Dairy Queen boss has been charged with involuntary manslaughter. ​


This is just wrong.
His faulty reasoning is the cause, not someone being a bully.

I hope the jury finds her not guilty as they should.


This thinking that someone else or an object has to be responsible for the deeds of another needs to stop.
Click to expand...

It sure does. No one makes you pull the trigger or jump off the GG Bridge.

MaggieD said:
Why does this happen? How does this happen? Involuntary manslaughter. Well, it's VERY harsh. There's a whole village to blame for this. His supervisor, the school, his parents. How long would any parent let his son be bullied by his employer? And if the parent didn't know? He should have.

Yes, kids have faulty reasoning. They're kids. They have a very limited toolbox for dealing with emotions. There's enough blame to go around... So sad.
Click to expand...

Absolutely correct. Good post!

Excon said:
There is definitely blame to go around for bullying.

The majority who are bullied do not take their own life, those who do have faulty reasoning. That is the point I am trying to make.
No one should be held responsible for the faulty thinking of another.




Ah hello? Are you a special snowflake?
This is a debate sight. We have enough information to debate what I presented.

He took his own life and they charged her because she bullied him.

As I presented this, it was his faulty reasoning that lead to his taking his life, not someone being a bully.
Do you have anything to argue against that? If not, push on.
Click to expand...

:thumbs:

Moot said:
Bullying is akin to gaslighting...so it is entirely possible that she bullied the boy to suicide.

This notion that everything happens in a vacuum needs to stop.
Click to expand...

Preposterous! I was bullied as a kid. I never entertained the thought of suicide, nor did I try and figure out ways to blow up the school or kill anyone. Karma got them later.....
Excon said:
No.

His reasoning led to his suicide.
Click to expand...

Correct.
 
MaggieD said:
Why does this happen? How does this happen? Involuntary manslaughter. Well, it's VERY harsh. There's a whole village to blame for this. His supervisor, the school, his parents. How long would any parent let his son be bullied by his employer? And if the parent didn't know? He should have.

Yes, kids have faulty reasoning. They're kids. They have a very limited toolbox for dealing with emotions. There's enough blame to go around... So sad.
Click to expand...

I have to disagree with this MaggieD...Whether or not this comes across a bit cold and unfeeling the truth of it is, the kid made a choice. Now, maybe he had some undiagnosed issue somewhere and then that is on the parents or his school perhaps to not be aware of the signs, (mainly his parents I believe) but if he had a clean bill of health than the only person to "blame" in this is the kid.
 
MickeyW said:
Preposterous! I was bullied as a kid. I never entertained the thought of suicide, nor did I try and figure out ways to blow up the school or kill anyone. Karma got them later.....
Click to expand...
Well, aren't you special...and now you're the bully. Karma is as karma does, I suppose.
 
Moot said:
Good question. But not sure how it compares though because the columbine perps were on a revenge trip and seemed to feed off each others rage rather than internalizing it enough to doubt their own self worth and reason for living by committing their own suicide.
Click to expand...
Death occured at their hands, though. Fueled by, in the words of the Columbinitas, bullying by teachers and students.
 
Moot said:
Well, aren't you special...and now you're the bully. Karma is as karma does, I suppose.
Click to expand...

I am not now, nor have I ever been a bully. I treat people that I meet with respect, if they disrespect me, then I deal with it. Just like Trump does.
 
MickeyW said:
I am not now, nor have I ever been a bully. I treat people that I meet with respect, if they disrespect me, then I deal with it. Just like Trump does.
Click to expand...

Trump is a narcissistic bully. The only people who treat him with respect are those that are afraid of him.
 
cabse5 said:
Death occured at their hands, though. Fueled by, in the words of the Columbinitas, bullying by teachers and students.
Click to expand...

They also wanted attention....whereas this kid didn't.
 
MrWonka said:
Bullying needs to stop. You can certainly argue that involuntary manslaughter is a bit much, but bully's need to be dealt with. Teaching victims to be strong and fight back is fine, but exposing people to mental and verbal abuse needs to be dealt with in a similar manner to physical abuse. Just because you can't see a bruise on the victims skin doesn't mean it isn't damaging.
Click to expand...

As far as I am concerned there is a difference between bullying (physical contact) and teasing (words).
Just teasing is not, and should never be, a criminal matter.
 
Moot said:
Trump is a narcissistic bully. The only people who treat him with respect are those that are afraid of him.
Click to expand...

So is obama, Hillary, Schumer, Pelosi, Jesse Jackson, Gov. Cuomo, Bloomberg, Soros, et al......goes with the territory
 
Excon said:
As far as I am concerned there is a difference between bullying (physical contact) and teasing (words).
Just teasing is not, and should never be, a criminal matter.
Click to expand...

Agreed. Pansy assed, liberal snowflakes, want it to be thou....

When their arrogant, fat mouths, don't bully Conservatives well enough, then they resort to making new laws, that will.
Trump gives it right back to them....and that's why I like the guy. He doesn't take any crap off liberal dopes!

And that folks has been waaaay passed due!!!!!!
 
Excon said:
As far as I am concerned there is a difference between bullying (physical contact) and teasing (words).
Just teasing is not, and should never be, a criminal matter.
Click to expand...

Just like with physical contact there are those who are predisposed to handling mental abuse more than others. That doesn't necessarily mean they are mentally weak, but when you're young and maybe not all that popular for various reasons what you seem to think is just "teasing" can have serious effects.

Normally punching someone in the chest won't cause any serious long term damage either. It's just kids being kids, and it probably won't matter long term. But what if the kid that gets hit has asthma and this causes them to go into a panic attack of some sort?

Or maybe more appropriately. What if someone regularly punches someone every time they see them. The punch itself causes little or no long term damage, but eventually the kid who's getting punched starts to hate their life and decides to end it. Does the fact that someone was physically torturing them justify a crime if the victim commits suicide?
 
Wouldn't there be a selective prosecution issue in this case?

If it has been admitted that his peers at school were doing the same thing, why charge only this person for a crime?

Shouldn't there be multiple defendants, if you want to blame somebody other than the boy himself?
 
MrWonka said:
Just like with physical contact there are those who are predisposed to handling mental abuse more than others. That doesn't necessarily mean they are mentally weak, but when you're young and maybe not all that popular for various reasons what you seem to think is just "teasing" can have serious effects.
Click to expand...
Whaaaaaaaaaaa!
It is not the mentally stable people taking their lives.
Faulty thinking on the part of the person taking their life should never be placed on another.


MrWonka said:
Normally punching someone in the chest won't cause any serious long term damage either. It's just kids being kids, and it probably won't matter long term. But what if the kid that gets hit has asthma and this causes them to go into a panic attack of some sort?
Click to expand...
It is acting our physically against another. That is and should be a criminal matter. Speaking not so, and should never be.


MrWonka said:
Or maybe more appropriately. What if someone regularly punches someone every time they see them. The punch itself causes little or no long term damage, but eventually the kid who's getting punched starts to hate their life and decides to end it. Does the fact that someone was physically torturing them justify a crime if the victim commits suicide?
Click to expand...
Wtf are you talking about? Aggressive physical contact we are talking about is against the law.
 
If these things were a crime, all my drill instructors would be serving life.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom