• 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!

13 year old interrogated by Secret Service.

Did the Secret Service over-step it's bounds?

  • Total voters
    6
DashingAmerican

DashingAmerican

Civil Libertarian
DP Veteran
Joined
Jul 23, 2009
Messages
3,357
Reaction score
986
Location
Alabama
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Libertarian
Last edited:
If she's letting him wander around Facebook WITH his real name then obviously she doesn't care too damn much about his safety.

And you know what - that's what the secret service does - they seek out issues and identify threats and intervene and investigate.

If Mommy was really watching then it never would have happened. She's an idiot and the kids suffering for her inabilities.
 
Last edited:
Why did the secret service interrogate the 13 year old in the first place? Does law enforcement need consent from parents to preform an interrogation on a minor?
 
digsbe said:
Why did the secret service interrogate the 13 year old in the first place? Does law enforcement need consent from parents to preform an interrogation on a minor?
Click to expand...

They have to the parent present or at least a third party
 
I don't think they overstepped their boundaries as long as their was a school employee present during the questioning. I could be wrong though. They probably should have either waited for the mother or at least contacted her though. It would have been much less of an issue.

As for the questioning in general, I think it was probably pretty routine and they were just trying to determine what type of kid this was and whether he should be considered a threat or just someone who made a dumb comment on a website. They most likely checked into any background they could find on this kid. Maybe something stood out about him or they just couldn't find enough info about him to figure out what to make of his post, so they decided to interview him in person.

Then again, maybe it was something in the mother's background that made this kid stand out to get interviewed and why they didn't inform the mother. I don't know. Definitely need a little more information, including whether there was someone else in with the kid during interview.
 
digsbe said:
Why did the secret service interrogate the 13 year old in the first place? Does law enforcement need consent from parents to preform an interrogation on a minor?
Click to expand...

As I understand it, if they were building a case against the child, either a lawyer, or a guardian would need to be present of anything were being entered into evidence, to make sure no coercion look place.

But as far as "questioning" goes, and sometimes that word can be ambiguous depending on the circumstances of said questioning, the police can question a child without supervision, it just cant or would be very difficult to use it as evidence, also depending nn state/local law.

But this is the secret service we're talking about here.
 
roguenuke said:
I don't think they overstepped their boundaries as long as their was a school employee present during the questioning. I could be wrong though. They probably should have either waited for the mother or at least contacted her though. It would have been much less of an issue.

As for the questioning in general, I think it was probably pretty routine and they were just trying to determine what type of kid this was and whether he should be considered a threat or just someone who made a dumb comment on a website. They most likely checked into any background they could find on this kid. Maybe something stood out about him or they just couldn't find enough info about him to figure out what to make of his post, so they decided to interview him in person.

Then again, maybe it was something in the mother's background that made this kid stand out to get interviewed and why they didn't inform the mother. I don't know. Definitely need a little more information, including whether there was someone else in with the kid during interview.
Click to expand...

It still seems like rights are being infringed. He was questioned for something he posted on FB. Last I checked we still had freedom of speech.
 
Tacoma, Wa. school, she says she "just about lost it," — especially after they told her it was over a Facebook post the boy had written warning President Barack Obama of suicide attacks in the wake of Osama bin Laden's death.
Click to expand...

They were within their full right to interrigate the boy.. They don't need mom's permission to protect the president.. That was from the link in the OP in case you were wondering...
 
DashingAmerican said:
It still seems like rights are being infringed. He was questioned for something he posted on FB. Last I checked we still had freedom of speech.
Click to expand...

Sure.. But not when it is about possible threats to the president..
 
I think it's actually silly to suggest that *she* should have been there.

What if *she* was a terrorist actually plotting something - her kid got wind of it - and he gave a hint? Having *her* present or even knowing would deter the truth - if there was any.
Ths is the is how the situation really is - they knew NOTHING about this kid - they went in with the thouht that he might have actually heard about a plot of some type *from* someone - maybe.

Now they've ruled that out, he knows nothing.

Moving on.
 
DashingAmerican said:
It still seems like rights are being infringed. He was questioned for something he posted on FB. Last I checked we still had freedom of speech.
Click to expand...

And the kid wasn't charged with anything or really even detained for more than, what, an hour? And he was in school anyway.

Plus, how many times have we heard about a shooting where the teens or young adults that did it put something up on a social networking site or you-tube?
This kid was probably just posting a comment that he thought sounded good, but who knows if the next comment from a teen on facebook is really a threat or not from an actual terrorist or a warning from someone who knows about a terrorist threat.
 
This is the same procedure that reports of child abuse go through - a CPS/DHS employee questions children without the parent's knowledge or involvement - but is done so in tandem with school rules.

Parents can be a problem, sometimes.
 
Last edited:
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom