Courthouse Rally in Kiwane Case: “Felonies Ain’t Favors! Plea Bargains Ain’t Either!”
Submitted by Brian Dolinar on November 13, 2009 - 9:27am
About 25 people, including several youth and their parents, showed up at the Champaign County courthouse on November 12, 2009 for a juvenile hearing of the other 15 year old involved in the police shooting of Kiwane Carrington. Police had originally responded to a burglary on October 9, but after it was discovered that one of the two youth lived at the house, charges of felony resisting arrest were leveled against the surviving boy. After the hearing, supporters and family members assembled in front of the courthouse for a rally.
Before the hearing, State’s Attorney Julia Rietz was seen outside her office talking with Ed Piraino, known as a local “plea doctor” who had been appointed by the court to handle the case. When inside the courtroom, Rietz appeared personally and Piraino was present for the defense―but not for long. Local attorney Alfred Ivy, who ran against Rietz in the 2008 democratic primary for State’s Attorney office, entered a substitution of counsel and will be taking over the case.
But before exiting, Piraino made a statement for the record. After talking, he and the State’s Attorney had come up with a plea bargain, what he called “an agreement in principle.” If the boy would attend Lincoln’s Challenge, a military school in Rantoul, the charges would be dropped.
After the hearing, Rietz told Mary Schenk of the News-Gazette that she often dismisses juvenile cases if they get help and if the charges do not reflect the weight of evidence. Her goal was to make this young man, “a productive member of this community.”
In a correspondence with a community member asking questions about the case, Reitz reiterated her position, stating she would not drop the charges out of pure sympathy, that some counseling was needed for the boy to stay in school and to deal with the trauma he has experienced, but she mentioned nothing about Lincoln’s Challenge.
The option of attending a military school in which her son would be taken away from her was unacceptable to Laura Manning, the boy’s mother. She apparently did not believe that the courts have the best interest of her or her son at heart. Of course, there is a long history of the court system taking children away from poor families and families of color.
At Lincoln’s Challenge, a program sponsored by the Illinois National Guard, children are enrolled for a period of five and one half months during which parents are only allowed to visit once every two weeks. Approximately half of the students are African American. Focused almost entirely on discipline, it is questionable whether they learn anything at the school and the success rates are uncertain.
Aaron Ammons, co-founder of CU Citizens for Peace and Justice, had a different explanation of the proposed plea bargain. He said, “Citizens organizing to put pressure on public officials has an impact. Specifically in the case of this teen, organizing to demonstrate, march, and speak out is impacting this case.”
Discovery materials were turned over to attorney Ivy who asked for a continuance to review the documents. A status hearing was set for January 19, 2010 at 2 p.m. in Courtroom C.
Supporters of the youth stood outside the courtroom while the hearing was taking place. During juvenile hearings, the public is not allowed, although the press is admitted. News-Gazette’s Mary Shank and I were both permitted. For a second time, the News-Gazette ran the 15 year old’s name in their coverage of the hearing.
While at the courthouse, we also found out that the Illinois State Police have completed their investigation into the death of Kiwane Carrington and turned over their report to the State’s Attorney. Although Rietz did not say when she would make her determination of the report, consisting of hundreds of pages of documents and numerous computer discs, it looks as if her conclusion is already predetermined. Champaign City Manager Steve Carter has said publicly that he has investigated the case, talked to the State’s Attorney and state police, and exonerated Chief Finney. From her decision to press a felony charge against the surviving youth and not wait for the state police report, it appears Rietz has also made her decision about what happened that fateful day.
After the hearing, supporters organized a rally outside the courthouse. They held posters that were made by youth the previous day at the Independent Media Center. They pinned buttons to their clothes reading “S.W.A.G.” which stands for Students With A Goal, an idea the youth came up with themselves. Gathering outside the second-story window of the State’s Attorney’s office, they chanted, “Felonies Ain’t Favors! Plea Bargains Ain’t Either!”
Those who would like to contact State’s Attorney Julia Rietz can call 384-3733 or email her at jrietz@co.champaign.il.us.
Wow
I can't believe this kid didn't take the plea bargain. It would have been over. Done. And he would have been done with high school 2 years earlier. This guy is going to lose. Oh well.
This is twice now.
That kid who tried hitting the police officer in Douglass Park got offered a plea bargain too. He didn't take it either, and now has a criminal record. Smart kid, huh?
"Aaron Ammons, co-founder of CU Citizens for Peace and Justice, had a different explanation of the proposed plea bargain. He said, “Citizens organizing to put pressure on public officials has an impact. Specifically in the case of this teen, organizing to demonstrate, march, and speak out is impacting this case.”"
Umm. No. If that were true, this kid would already be off the hook. Instead, thanks to you people, he's going to have a felony record. Be proud.
"She apparently did not believe that the courts have the best interest of her or her son at heart. Of course, there is a long history of the court system taking children away from poor families and families of color. "
This kid attended class FIVE TIMES in the past school term. His mother apparently didn't do anything about this. She clearly does not have his best interest at heart, or she would have been a better parent. This might not have ever happened if she had done so.
Whose Decision Was That?
Instead, thanks to you people, he's going to have a felony record.
The afternoon that Kiwane was killed, it wasn't his friend who pulled the trigger.
The day the "burglary" charges were dropped - there was no burglary - and amended to resisting, it wasn't his choice.
When various parts of this story were selectively leaked to the News-Gazette, it wasn't him either.
When a decision was made to drop the trumped up resisting charge if he'd agree to leave the community in exchange for going to Lincoln's Challenge, it wasn't something he bargained for.
When so many adults won't take responsibility for their actions, I think it's pretty hypocritical to tell a teenager it's all his fault.
When the authorities act in ways that have far more to do with political posturing and almost nothing to do with justice, don't blame citizens who are fed up with gross and repeated inequities and appalled at the way some are trying to sweep the death of another young man under the rug for resisting the attempts to silence their voices.
Can you people even speak
Can you people even speak without launching into a tirade?
EVEN IF you're right, the kid is now going to be going to jail. Which he didn't have to. Congratulate yourself, then write a manifesto about it. I don't care.
Your Tirade
Hmm, sounds like you're the one with a tirade.
Mr. Ivy might conclude that Rietz's offer is the best solution. I see no need to rush into such an agreement underr the circumstances. Certainly not before his client has access to the contents of the ISP investigation. That would be a gross failure to serve the best interests of his client.
And the offer itself could be the result of evidence so weak that Rietz hoped he'd bail because black people know exactly what kind of trial they will likely get in Champaign County. You yourself state, "...the kid is now going to be going to jail."
Assuming you have no more special access to the evidence at this point than any other citizen, I don't see how anyone with faith in the evenhandedness of Champaign County justice could make such a statement.
Oh, right. This IS Champaign County.
Or does Mr. Piraino have some special mojo that makes him the only one that can cut such a deal with Rietz?I'll repeat what I said about Mr. Ivy. I see no need to rush into such an agreement underr the circumstances. Certainly not before his client has access to the contents of the ISP investigation. That would be a gross failure to serve the best interests of his client.
'Nuf said.
Was Rietz really intent on buying quick silence? Your own haste in flinging doo-doo reflects a number of questionable assumptions and makes you a poor excuse for interrogating the motives of others.
"Hmm, sounds like you're the
"Hmm, sounds like you're the one with a tirade."
I said five sentences. That's not much of a tirade by anyone's standards.
"And the offer itself could be the result of evidence so weak that Rietz hoped he'd bail because black people know exactly what kind of trial they will likely get in Champaign County. You yourself state, '...the kid is now going to be going to jail.'
Assuming you have no more special access to the evidence at this point than any other citizen, I don't see how anyone with faith in the evenhandedness of Champaign County justice could make such a statement."
It could be, I guess. Or it could be because they almost always offer plea bargains of some kind if the lawyer tries for it, especially to kids. It's in the best interests of everyone to do this. It saves the city time and money, and it saves the defendant from having to pay huge amounts of money to their lawyers just for showing up to court for an hour.
And I can make such a statement because state's attorneys typically don't file charges against someone unless they're pretty sure they'll get a conviction for something. It would be a waste of time for them to do anything else, and not really fair to press charges against someone that there's no evidence against. If you've ever wondered why so many charges lead to convictions, that's why.
"Or does Mr. Piraino have some special mojo that makes him the only one that can cut such a deal with Rietz?"
Nope. Anyone could do the same thing. It's largely a question of how much they charge to do it.
"Your own haste in flinging doo-doo reflects a number of questionable assumptions and makes you a poor excuse for interrogating the motives of others."
Oh yeah. I'm the person on this site "flinging doo-doo" hastily. That's a good one.
No Pretense of a Disinterested Accuser in This Case
It should be clear by now that you're all for taking the accusations against the surviving teen at face value. You're probably one of the few people in this town willing to do so at this point.
Most of the time when someone is charged with a crime, the prosecutor looks over the police reports, they are checked for any obvious flaws, and the process is simply a rubber stamp. Cops make the charge and it sticks all the way to the court room, unless it gets bargained away along the way short of a trial, which it often does.
Can anyone tell me why that might not be the case here?
It's a rather obvious fact that the accusers in this case have a blatant conflict of interest against the accused. Plain and simple, what they charged the surviving teen with could very well turn into a justification for the killing of Kiwane Carrington in both criminal and civil court.
Did Rietz consider all the available evidence before making an offer to the survivor? Obviously, no, because she did not have the ISP report.
Did Piraino consider all the available evidence before suggesting that his client, the survivor, accept the offer, if that indeed was to be his advice last Thursday? Obviously, no, because he didn't have the ISP report either.
All that was available were reports from people, allbeit law enforcement officers, whose reports are typically rubber-stamped through the system, but who in this case have massive self-interest to either be less the completely honest or to outright lie about what happened the afternoon that Kiwane Carrington was killed.
We already know that the charges brought against the surviving teen were changed from the originally alleged burglary, which quickly fell apart as the facts became clear after Kiwane's death. Instead, they were quickly changed to resisting, a charge that was both easier to sustain under the circumstances and more likely to seem to justify Kiwane's death, whether legally supportable by the facts as they occurred or not.
While it's true that the surviving teen still has something at stake that he can lose, it won't be the "activists" you seem to worry about setting his legal strategy. That is between him and his attorney. Hoepfully Mr. Ivy will have those more at the forefront than his former attorney seems to have done. The only thing really pressing the surviving teen is the memory of seeing the life leak away from his friend and unfortunately that is something that will forever be with him. That may affect what he decides to do, but that is no business of anyone but himself to say whether or not that affects his decision.
Those who should have something really at stake here should be those who killed a teenager who was legally on the property. We'll see. They are the same people with a reason to prevaricate on the reports they submitted that led to one set of charges against the surviving teen, quickly to be replaced by another set of charges. I would hope that this whole sordid scenario has the opportunity to be subjected to and disinfected in the cold light of court at some point, but not necessarily in a legal action against the surviving teen.
Props
for not taking the plea bargain, which is always on the state's terms, never on the community's. He made the right decision and anyone who believes otherwise should spend a couple days in court watching young men and women of color get railroaded day in and day out by smug white prosecutors.
So...
Getting convicted for a crime and going to juvenile hall or wherever IS on the community's terms, I take it? That's a new one.
Small point, but...
"After the hearing, Rietz told Mary Schenk of the News-Gazette that she often dismisses juvenile cases if they get help and if the charges do not reflect the weight of evidence. "
That's not what she said. She said:
"After court, Rietz said criminal cases involving juveniles are often dismissed if they get help and doesn’t necessarily reflect the weight of the evidence in this case."
In other words, she said nothing about the charges not reflecting the weight of the evidence. What she said was, the fact that she dismisses charges is not a reflection of the weight of the evidence. I understand you were probably just lying as a reflex here, but I still feel like I ought to correct it.
Low Spin Zone
Well, you can get yer news from the News-Gazette or you can get it here. I think that writers on the IMC are often closer to the truth than the N-G's persistent drumbeat for the powers of authority that never seem to get us any closer to fairness. In the meantime, here are my opinions.
1. Rietz made her attempt at a deal with Piraino on what she already knew before getting the ISP investigation report. In other words, she's known for weeks that there wasn't much there on Kiwane's friend, despite her earlier decision to charge him with felony resisting. That's sad and typical of the way her office operates. There are other ways of getting kids to go to school than charging them with felonies, but this does revive an old and discredited tradition from the time of Richard Stiegmann (sp) that has been repudiated by higher authorities.
2. The injuries suffered by Chief Finney most likely resulted from him falling down or some other factor than the surviving teen's actions or inactions. Kids don't get these kind of deals from actually hurting cops.
3. While some may, including the SA, want to argue that her offer "doesn’t necessarily reflect the weight of the evidence in this case," given her penchant for charging with one eye on the political gain that she will incur in the dominant media from doing so, it is quite likely that whatever the evidence that she had previously known about or which she may discover in the ISP report, she felt fairly certain that the "go to school deal" would not implicate the teen in such a way so as to incur any future political cost to her.
4. The simple fact that Rietz hoped to wrap this part of the fallout from the killing of Kiwane Carrington up with a minimum of additional publicity at the time when the ISP report on the incident was delivered to her office indicates at least some concern that the Carrington death will, in fact, NOT turn out to be the simple slam-dunk case of "uppity black youth got what was coming to him" that the blind-faith CPD supporters have been asserting all along.
5. Rietz's indication that she has no current estimate of how much longer it will take to review the evidence in the ISP report, her description of it as voluminous, and that it may even require further investigation could mean several things.
It could simply be buying time, hoping that the firestorm the killing has set off will die over the holidays. Not likely.
It could be that she is simply being honest and straightforward for a change and this simply reflects the facts. Surprising, but Lord knows that any sinner can repent.
Or it could be that it is already known in Rietz's office that CPD is not going to come out clean from under this cloud, that the SA's office will be forced by some of the evidence now in its hands to pursue further investigation or even to actually bring serious charges against serving police officers, something it has done everything in its power previously to avoid. At the least, whatever the ISP report documents, it will lead to a very expensive lawsuit or equally costly settlement, and quite possibly end the careers of one or more officers at CPD.
Time will tell, but right now, if I was forced to choose, I might rather be Kiwane's friend than the fellows that killed him.
Yes, nightwatch.
"Well, you can get yer news from the News-Gazette or you can get it here. I think that writers on the IMC are often closer to the truth than the N-G's persistent drumbeat for the powers of authority that never seem to get us any closer to fairness. In the meantime, here are my opinions."
Yes, nightwatch. I know that you prefer the IMC website to the News-Gazette. I have known this for quite some time. In fact, in all my time on this planet, I have never been more certain of anything than I am of the fact that you, nightwatch, prefer the UCIMC website to the News-Gazette. I am less sure that the sun will rise tomorrow morning than I am that you will come rushing to the defense of UCIMC.org every time someone questions it.
You know how I know this? Because you KEEP TELLING US every time you write something here. A lot of times, the only thing you really have to contribute to a discussion is some variation of the statement "I think the UCIMC is a lot better than the News-Gazette!". So yes, I know. And to everyone out there in IMCland, if any of you have any doubts as to nightwatch's relative preferences between UCIMC.org and the News-Gazette, I implore you: put any doubts you have to rest. I give you my word that he prefers the UCIMC website to the News-Gazette.
Thank you.
Of course, I'm still not sure WHY, exactly. In this whole sordid ordeal, can you show me anything on this website that hadn't already been reported in the News-Gazette? I can only think of two things: Danielle Chynoweth's announcement that the police can now shoot you just for resisting arrest (which was, of course, a lie) and Brian's thing about how the State's Attorney is now so corrupt she ADMITS to charging people with crimes for which there is no evidence (which was also a lie). You say they're often closer to the truth than the News-Gazette, but I don't see where that is, exactly.
Anyway.
"1. Rietz made her attempt at a deal with Piraino on what she already knew before getting the ISP investigation report. In other words, she's known for weeks that there wasn't much there on Kiwane's friend, despite her earlier decision to charge him with felony resisting. That's sad and typical of the way her office operates."
She made her attempt at a deal with Piraino because that happens a lot with kids. Deals are cheaper, faster, and easier for everyone than dragging a whole thing through trial. It has nothing to do with whether or not there is much on Kiwane's friend. Remember that kid in Douglass Park who tried to hit the officer? They offered him a deal too. He turned it down and got convicted. Apparently they had plenty on him, and they still offered him a deal.
"2. The injuries suffered by Chief Finney most likely resulted from him falling down or some other factor than the surviving teen's actions or inactions. Kids don't get these kind of deals from actually hurting cops."
You could be right. You don't actually have to hurt a cop to be charged with resisting arrest. Hurting a cop would lead to assault charges. You can get charged with resisting arrest for trying to wriggle out of the handcuffs.
I don't really see what the relevance is of part 3.
"4. The simple fact that Rietz hoped to wrap this part of the fallout from the killing of Kiwane Carrington up with a minimum of additional publicity at the time when the ISP report on the incident was delivered to her office indicates at least some concern that the Carrington death will, in fact, NOT turn out to be the simple slam-dunk case of "uppity black youth got what was coming to him" that the blind-faith CPD supporters have been asserting all along."
I would imagine they ALWAYS hope to wrap these things up with the minimum of trouble. Isn't that how just about everyone goes through life, getting things done with the minimum fuss and muss? That's why they offer people deals all the time. Especially kids, as I said before. If she didn't think there was a pretty good shot at a conviction for SOMETHING, she would have dropped the charges. That would have wrapped things up with EVEN LESS negative publicity, so if she's that worried about it, why didn't she just do that?
I'm not sure where anyone said that the kid just got what was coming to him. But as long as we're putting words in each other's mouths, I think this is as good a time as any to state what I gather is the IMC view of what happened here. Specifically, your idea, nightwatch. Since you think there's no evidence that this kid resisted arrest, you apparently think these kids actually COMPLIED with the police. Is that correct? So sit back, relax, and imagine with me what must have happened on that fateful day...
It Takes A Chief
by anonymous
Part I
It was yet another miserable, rainy day on Vine Street. Officer Norbits stood there, thinking.
You know, it sure is great being an officer of the Champaign Police. We get to drive around drunk, beat up kids, and nobody ever says anything about it. I get to live in a nice house, with my wife and kids (I presume I have a wife and kids, anyway. I'm not actually sure. But I bet I do.), and all I have to do is harass the occasional kid, for no reason.
But you know. I feel like throwing all that away. I mean, I must have dealt with HUNDREDS of belligerent teenagers, and for the past fourteen years I've managed to not shoot any of them. I think today is the day. I mean, I'll grant you. I don't have any REASON to shoot this kid. It would be a lot easier for me just to handcuff them and take them to jail. Then I could get back to my nice house and probable family. And these kids aren't doing anything wrong. They're OBVIOUSLY unarmed and this is CLEARLY their house. They're not even resisting. They're just sitting there, docile as a pair of newborn lambs, with those beatific smiles on their faces. But, well, they're black.
Of course, I know that I'll get away with it, legally. Thankfully, this town is as corrupt as they come. But I'll still have to go into hiding afterwards, to make sure my house doesn't get burned down.
Ahh, what am I thinking? The News-Gazette won't cover this case. They'll just ignore a black kid getting shot by the police. Heh. Those guys really are great. I just hope word of this doesn't get to the Independent Media Center. Their heroic, highly competent reporters are the only thorn in our side as we work our demonic mischief on this city...
"Norbits! What are you doing over there?" shouted the Chief.
Norbits snapped out of his reverie. "Umm.... Uh... Nothing, boss. Just, you know, umm... savoring this moment."
"Well, hurry up. I'm getting drenched out here!"
"Right, boss."
BLAMMO!!!
"Awesome! Great work, Norbie!"
"Thanks, Chief. Say, aren't you going to shoot yours?"
"Nah. You know me. I like to leave a witness alive. You know. Someone to tell the tale."
"Yeah. I get it. BWAHAHAHAHA!!!!"
"BWAHAHAHAHA!!!"
The two of them stood there over the dead teenager for a minute.
"You know, Norbie, I'm sorry for yelling at you. I wasn't really mad, you know."
"I know, boss. I know."
The End
Is that pretty much it, nightwatch? Is that more or less what you think happened that day? If I've really misinterepreted something, will you please tell me so that I won't go around thinking that this is basically what you think happened? It's certainly possible that that is more or less what happened that day. You could be right. I just want to make sure that that's really what you think.
"5. Rietz's indication that she has no current estimate of how much longer it will take to review the evidence in the ISP report, her description of it as voluminous, and that it may even require further investigation could mean several things.
It could simply be buying time, hoping that the firestorm the killing has set off will die over the holidays. Not likely.
It could be that she is simply being honest and straightforward for a change and this simply reflects the facts. Surprising, but Lord knows that any sinner can repent.
Or it could be that it is already known in Rietz's office that CPD is not going to come out clean from under this cloud, that the SA's office will be forced by some of the evidence now in its hands to pursue further investigation or even to actually bring serious charges against serving police officers, something it has done everything in its power previously to avoid. At the least, whatever the ISP report documents, it will lead to a very expensive lawsuit or equally costly settlement, and quite possibly end the careers of one or more officers at CPD."
Well, regardless of what actually happened, don't you think it's probably TRUE that it would take her some time to go through it? It's hundreds of pages, and she only had it for a day at that time. Would you WANT her to proceed without reading it all?
There's another possibility than the ones you mention. The ISP report could say that the shooting was completely accidental, and she doesn't want to announce that right away because she doesn't want to look like she rushed to that judgment. Not necessarily the case, but it's certainly possible, wouldn't you agree?
"Time will tell, but right now, if I was forced to choose, I might rather be Kiwane's friend than the fellows that killed him."
What "fellows"? Finney and Norbits? According to Brian's own article (I know, I know, you should never trust anything Brian says, but bear with me for a minute.):
"Champaign City Manager Steve Carter has said publicly that he has investigated the case, talked to the State’s Attorney and state police, and exonerated Chief Finney."
So at least one of those "fellows" is going to have a nice job as Chief Of Police. You'd rather be some kid in reform school with a criminal record than the Chief of Police? Weird, nightwatch.
Legal vs Moral
There is sometimes a difference between what is legal and what is moral. I suspect this is one of those times and I think many others join me in this. Whether or not the surviving youth goes to jail, God fobid, he will have a clear conscience.
I don't think either Finney or Norbits will be able to do the same.
State Police Facepalm
If anybody is wondering about prospective bias when it comes to certain police/state police, read the following:
http://www.tennessean.com/article/20091114/NEWS01/911140337/TN+state+trooper+suspended+over+racially+charged+e-mail
The state trooper got suspended for 15 days after he "accidentally" sent a white power email to 787 state employees when, according to him, he was just trying to print it out for himself.
According to the Tennessee State Police, they get anti-discrimination training. Sure looks like it worked with this guy. /facepalm
The "deal"
It remains a mystery how Lincoln's Challenge can be mandated by the state if the charges of aggravated resisting an arrest were actually altogether dismissed. Somewhere in this mix with Piraino appears to be the defense conceding to the facts as presented in court on Oct. 13. What Rietz is most concerned with is the ability of the Laura Manning Family and Kenisha Williams Family to later sue the City of Champaign under the easier standard of preponderance in civil court. The deal with the surviving youth that the Good Plea Doctor orchestrated was likely to be some kind of concession to Finney's police report that Rietz recited in Ladd's court so the families won't have a case later. They were well right to reject the plea deal if it meant buying into what they considered to be a lie. While none of us can tell the families what to do in this difficult situation, we should support their efforts to expose this "story" in a court of law. And yes, the News-Gazette understood the charges of resisting resulted in Chief Finney's shoulder being dislocated, his knee sprained and him sustaining several cuts somewhere on his person. Many would like to see the state have to prove such far fetched facts.
And isn't it important to see the police report that the State's Attorney had in its possession the morning of Oct. 13 that claimed to be a report full of evidence of a residential burglary? What would be in such a report that police felt confident the State's Attorney should press such a charge?
The "Plan" That Fell Apart
Good points on the "deal" that fell apart. In retrospect, it looks a lot like Rietz knew she was going to be getting the report, hoped to have a plea in the case that helped solidify the shaky evidence in that report, and when the "deal" didn't happen after all, she had to go back to the drawing board.
I'll also bet that this is causing command and staff across Wright St, to be ordering in lots of pizza and Pepto-Abysmal. I think they were hoping to tie this thing up and walk away with very little cost. Now there's talk of lock-downs in the Champaign schools, an admission that they really do need to rewrite the "use of force" policy, and a deafening silence that if things were so simple, that ISP report would have been old news by now.
Mr. Ivy will no doubt reject
Mr. Ivy will no doubt reject any plea agreement and manage to talk this kid right into DOC. But hey, he's the suspects familys choice isnt he? Just like the kid at the Park... He listened to people who didnt have his best interests at heart and got a record that he didnt need to get.
BTW How did Jessies case turn out? The Homeless guy? He too was fighting an injustice...
walk in their shoes
First of you all need to get off ms.laura's and kaniesha's back!Have you ever been single mother...working andd raising more than one child!Not everyone can watch their kids 24/7 and if your do hover over your kids like that n were is th trust?i used to skipp school all the time but that dont make my momma a bad parent....my freshmen year i was suspened a good 15 times but that dont make her a bad parent or person.Believe it or not kids are only human{SHOCKING I KNOW}as well as parents.Us young people are going to make bad choices as well as our parents did, but should we be jjudging them because of this...NO!SO BEFORE YOU GO SAYING WHAT YOU WOULD HAVE DONE OR WHAT THEY SHOULD HAVE DONE..THINK TO YOURSELF...HAVE I EVER BEEN IN THIS SITUATION.AND IF THE ANSWER IS NO THEN SHUT THE HELL UP!REAL TALK
IF HE DONT WANT TO GO TO
IF HE DONT WANT TO GO TO LINCOLNS CHALLENGE THEN THATS HIM AND HIS MOMMA'S CHOICE...ILL BE THERE THIS SEMESTER STARTING ON JAN.13TH..BUT ITS NOT FOR EVERYONE...AND THATS HIS PERSONAL BUSSINESS..MIND WHATS YOURS AND LET THIS BOY LIVE HIS LIFE YOU GOSSIP GLORIA'S!HE SAW HIS BESTFRIEND KILLED...DAMN HE DONE SUFFERED ENOUGH!STRAIGHT UP
Post new comment