Texas judge beats his daughter for gaming [trigger warning]

[Cleverbeans]

I was outraged when ran into a video of Judge William Adams beating his 16 year old daughter after discovering she had installed games on the computer without permission. What's worse,it's apparently legal. Hopefully this impacts his re-election chances, but being Texas who knows. In any event, I'd like to thinks there is still some justice in this world, so I figured I'd pass it on. My thoughts on the video are spoilered below.

Spoiler:

The rage I experienced when I heard him yell "lay down or I'll spank you in the fucking face" was only trumped by my disbelief when her mother tells her to "take it like a grown women." It's really hard to believe there is any hope for humanity these days.

[sourmìlk]

... legal? I'm pretty sure child abuse isn't legal, even in Texas. How loose, exactly, is their definition of "abuse"?

[IronicalVitriol]

The fact that said daughter also has ataxic cerebral palsy is the cyanide icing on the cake.

I don't really know what I can say to this right now.

EDIT:

... legal? I'm pretty sure child abuse isn't legal, even in Texas. How loose, exactly, is their definition of "abuse"?

Also, this. Elaboration please?

[sourmìlk]

On the one hand, this is disgustingly immoral and depressingly sickening (or sickeningly depressing?). On the other hand, as I'm going to sleep now, assuming my CPAP doesn't cut out most of my REM sleep, I will have excellent dreams about beating the shit out of this guy. Good night.

[IcedT]

So I had my fingers crossed that this happened in just some minor ignorant redneck hellhole, but I got worried when I discovered it was really close to Corpus and not that far from my own town. Then I looked up the county's demographics, and 20% of its 22,000 residents are below the poverty line. For comparison, my own East Texas county is roughly the same size, but has a population of half a million and a poverty rate of less that 10%. So I think it is safe to say that this happened in a minor ignorant redneck hellhole. I'm a little less concerned for my state for knowing that.

[Magnanimous]

This can only end badly.

[yurell]

When I saw the title I thought maybe he had smacked his daughter on the rear with his hand a couple of times and someone overreacted. After having seen that video ... it brought me to tears. That is fucking disgusting, and the closest he should ever come to public office is to be in front of a judge sentencing him for child abuse.

[sourmìlk]

This is apparently from 2004 though. Why is it coming to light now?

EDIT: never mind. Apparently she was waiting to release it at the right time, this time after a bout of verbal abuse from her dad.
Also, Adams is up for reelection on the 8th. Hopefully that's enough time for this to spread and make an impact on votes.

The internet is creepy. Simply googling the story I ended up finding her Steam account, and so now I know what a random person who I've never met and only seen referenced on the internet spends her days doing. Apparently she's a fan of Guild Wars.

[johnny_7713]

... legal? I'm pretty sure child abuse isn't legal, even in Texas. How loose, exactly, is their definition of "abuse"?

IANAL and I haven't watched the video, but I'm guessing that Texas allows parents the use of corporeal punishment, and that the definition thereof is loose enough that the judge's actions would count as that.

[Belial]

So I had my fingers crossed that this happened in just some minor ignorant redneck hellhole

Well, it did say it was in Texas.

Sorry, had to.

[Izawwlgood]

Evidently the video was made in 2004, and since then, the girl in the video has gotten out of the home, and the mother has gotten out of the relationship. There is still a younger sister that the father has partial custody over (I'm fuzzy on this part), and the elder sister, the one in the video, is hoping to keep the Judge away from her.

I think there's also some issues with the statute of limitations on crimes in Texas being 5 years from the event.

[The Great Hippo]

It was a bit horrible to watch; I wish the woman in question luck in helping her younger sister, and I'm glad that she's out of that situation herself.

I don't see violence as an effective tool to correct behavior. I wish less people would. It's more about satisfying the attacker than helping the victim.

[Princess Marzipan]

I don't see violence as an effective tool to correct behavior. I wish less people would. It's more about satisfying the attacker than helping the victim.

I think that this video makes that ABUNDANTLY clear. At a certain point this guy is quite obviously less concerned with whatever action he wanted to correct and more concerned with the fact that his daughter had the sheer unmitigated gall to not meekly acquiesce to his desire to cause her pain.

Disgusting.

[Belial]

Well, that, and she saved the video to smear him later. If that doesn't demonstrate that the obedience that comes from violence is only temporary and bought at the price of retaliation later, I don't know what does.

[Cleverbeans]

... legal? I'm pretty sure child abuse isn't legal, even in Texas. How loose, exactly, is their definition of "abuse"?

They make paticular exception under Texas law to allow corporal punishment with a belt, and what constitutes "abuse" is left up to interpretation by the judge. The best resources I found suggested as long as you're aiming for the butt/lower body and don't leave obvious bruising, it's generally not going to be viewed as abuse. In combination with the verbal abuse maybe it could have gone the other way, but it was four years ago and the statute of limitations is only two years for personal injury and that's passed so definitely nothing is going to happen legally at this point. It's like sourmilk said, he's up for re-election and it'd be nice to stop him.

[Minerva]

I think there's something seriously wrong if you're spanking a 16-year-old.

[Shifter]

Oh good a sane thread about this video. I'm actually having to try and explain to people on another forum why this isn't okay.

More importantly, I really hope she can get his parenting "rights" to her sister revoked.

[Роберт]

I think there's something seriously wrong if you're spanking a 16-year-old.

Yes. Or treating someone of ANY age like that. I'm not against using pain as discipline, but I am against abuse and if this video doesn't make you sick I'd be surprised. I couldn't stomach it for long at all. How do people end up justifying that sort of thing?

It was a bit horrible to watch;

Rather an understatement.

[Izawwlgood]

Rather inconsequential nitpick, but Adams was beating her because she was downloading music or somesuch from p2p networks. Not because she was gaming.

http://www.kristv.com/news/video-claims ... -daughter/
It's spreading. So, that's good.

[Cleverbeans]

It's spreading. So, that's good.

Glad to hear it, the video had 312 views when I ran into it last night, definitely great to see it's over 225k view and getting local corporate media coverage now. Hopefully it opens the debate on corporal punishment here, as it's been closed book for a long time now. It seems a significant portion of the EU banned the practice in the last decade, but it still widely supported here. It's at least comforting to know that with the internet putting mass media into the hands of the general population we're more capable than ever of identifying and addressing these long standing social ills.

[buddy431]

CNN has an article on it now.

The Rockport police department is aware of and investigating the incident. The judge has evidently made some statements on a Texas TV station to the effect of "I screwed up, it's not as bad as it looks, and wait until the investigation is complete". The Texas State Commission on Judicial Conduct have said they are aware of the video, and aren't making further comment at this time.

[Lucrece]

Bea.tings is the entirely appropriate wording here. This wasn't just a parent backhanding a belligerent, vulgar teenager. This asshole terrorized her. He wasn't out to maintain a boundary in exchange, given that even though his daughter was long reduced to whimpering sobs and sheltering in a bed, he kept on wanting to get "proper" hits in and showed no pain in delivering further abuse.

That's not a parent seeking to raise their children as best as they can. This is narcissism. She was a liability to his career through illegal downloads, and he raged on her for it.

... legal? I'm pretty sure child abuse isn't legal, even in Texas. How loose, exactly, is their definition of "abuse"?

They make paticular exception under Texas law to allow corporal punishment with a belt, and what constitutes "abuse" is left up to interpretation by the judge. The best resources I found suggested as long as you're aiming for the butt/lower body and don't leave obvious bruising, it's generally not going to be viewed as abuse. In combination with the verbal abuse maybe it could have gone the other way, but it was four years ago and the statute of limitations is only two years for personal injury and that's passed so definitely nothing is going to happen legally at this point. It's like sourmilk said, he's up for re-election and it'd be nice to stop him.

Corporal punishment is one of those loopholes where minors are reduced to subhuman status in terms of rights. Many people are unaware just how easy it is to abuse a minor without consequences in this country.

A friend had gotten bruising on his leg from his father using a stick on him in a fit of rage, and he called 911 later. Basically, what they told him is "Go back to the house." Physical abuse against minors is still largely acceptable across society, and the 911 operator also kept in mind that if this guy's temperamental father suffered arrest, the family would be deprived of financial sustenance.

I wish we had some systems in place to allow for children and financially inferior partners to be more self-sustaining, just so that we can prevent these cases. Dependence creates a power imbalance that's too easy to abuse.

[sourmìlk]

Corporal punishment is one of those loopholes where minors are reduced to subhuman status in terms of rights. Many people are unaware just how easy it is to abuse a minor without consequences in this country.

Denying minors rights isn't necessarily a bad thing. Obviously though, right to not be physically harmed is one of the rights that shouldn't be taken away.

A friend had gotten bruising on his leg from his father using a stick on him in a fit of rage, and he called 911 later. Basically, what they told him is "Go back to the house." Physical abuse against minors is still largely acceptable across society, and the 911 operator also kept in mind that if this guy's temperamental father suffered arrest, the family would be deprived of financial sustenance.

I'd take that to court, personally. If I'm in immediate physical danger, then I'm under no obligation to remain in that position. And if the police are unwilling to assist, maybe the court system will.

[Belial]

As far as I know minors aren't allowed to begin court proceedings on their own behalf. If they can't convince the cops or child protective services or one of their parents or whomever to file for them, they're SOL.

[sourmìlk]

As far as I know minors aren't allowed to begin court proceedings on their own behalf. If they can't convince the cops or child protective services or one of their parents or whomever to file for them, they're SOL.

I don't think this is the case, but I'm having trouble fining a citation regarding the issue.

[Belial]

I think even for emancipation you need either CPS (if you're doing it without either parents' approval) or one or both parents (if with their approval) to start things off. And for that, you need to be able to prove both that the home situation is shitty/dangerous for you *and* that you can support yourself. Otherwise you'd be looking at removal to a foster home by CPS which is under their control. So again, not something you can just file for through the courts.

[sourmìlk]

Emancipation has some strict requirements that Hilary probably didn't meat, but I don't think it's required for a minor to be emancipated before they can sue their parents.

[Belial]

Emancipation has some strict requirements that Hilary probably didn't meat, but I don't think it's required for a minor to be emancipated before they can sue their parents.

Pretty sure that's not the case. Suit before emancipation would be pretty pointless since they'd just be paying the money into their own household where they'd have access to it again. And you'd still be in a place that isn't safe for you.

[sourmìlk]

Depending on the method of income, I don't think a parent necessarily has rights to a minor's money. For example: even though I'm 17, I have a paying job, and cheques are addressed to me directly, where I then deposit them in my bank account. I don't think my parents legally have access to that money.

If it were the case that a minor could own the money earned in a suit (though I'm not certain that is the case), then she could actually use that income to show she's financially independent enough to be emancipated (depending on the size of the settlement.)

[Decker]

There's still the fact that you just sued someone who:
A: Has a habit of beating the shit out of you.
B: Lives in the same house as you.

I certainly don't think the emancipation would happen right away.

[Belial]

Were you able to open that account without your parents signing off on it? I suspect that they could access that money, they just don't.

That said, even if you could file (which I'm pretty unsure of) and could theoretically receive the money, the suit would basically begin and end with "If there were abuse CPS would have acted. Why are we here?"

Which goes back to, if you can't get the cops or CPS to acknowledge there's a problem, the courts aren't going to be any help.

[sourmìlk]

Were you able to open that account without your parents signing off on it? I suspect that they could access that money, they just don't.

Maybe not the best example: the nature of my account specifically required my parents to sign off on it (though I don't think my parents can withdraw funds from it), but I don't know this is necessarily to case. To make it simpler, let's say that I keep it in a safe that I bought.

That said, even if you could file (which I'm pretty unsure of) and could theoretically receive the money, the suit would basically begin and end with "If there were abuse CPS would have acted. Why are we here?"

Which goes back to, if you can't get the cops or CPS to acknowledge there's a problem, the courts aren't going to be any help.

I'm sort of skeptical: is there really no precedent for winning a case when the police didn't think there was a problem?

[JBJ]

Are you all talking about a civil suit or a criminal case? A minor can hire a lawyer and sue their parent(s) in a civil case without involving police or CPS. A petition for a guardian ad litem can be issued and decided ex parte. As for a criminal case, that can only be initiated by the cops/DA.

[The Great Hippo]

Maybe not the best example: the nature of my account specifically required my parents to sign off on it (though I don't think my parents can withdraw funds from it), but I don't know this is necessarily to case. To make it simpler, let's say that I keep it in a safe that I bought.

Most banks will require that you have a driver's license to cash a check, particularly if you don't have an account (and making an account requires that you, again, have a driver's license). You're probably at least partially dependent on your parents for acquiring a driver's license (unless you can somehow magic up the car to drive there and take the test in). Assuming antagonistic and reasonably clever parents, you as a child are pretty much fucked.

[Belial]

Maybe not the best example: the nature of my account specifically required my parents to sign off on it (though I don't think my parents can withdraw funds from it), but I don't know this is necessarily to case. To make it simpler, let's say that I keep it in a safe that I bought.

That you keep in their house? They punch you in the head and take it. Did you forget they're abusive? Also, arguably, they may be considered to own the safe anyway.

I'm sort of skeptical: is there really no precedent for winning a case when the police didn't think there was a problem?

When the allegation is abuse still ongoing, yeah, I'm pretty sure that's never happened.

[sourmìlk]

Maybe not the best example: the nature of my account specifically required my parents to sign off on it (though I don't think my parents can withdraw funds from it), but I don't know this is necessarily to case. To make it simpler, let's say that I keep it in a safe that I bought.

That you keep in their house? They punch you in the head and take it. Did you forget they're abusive? Also, arguably, they may be considered to own the safe anyway.

Assuming you do legally own the money (and thus what it buys), the you definitely have a case: assault and theft.

When the allegation is abuse still ongoing, yeah, I'm pretty sure that's never happened.

I'm not sure what you mean here. Isn't this always the case until the trial ends?

[The Great Hippo]

Assuming you do legally own the money (and thus what it buys), the you definitely have a case: assault and theft.

Who legally owns the money a teenager makes? I'm genuinely curious, now; I'd suspect the parents legally own all the property that a teenager possesses, but if there was an argument and it went to the courts, the judge would inevitably decide.

[sourmìlk]

Assuming you do legally own the money (and thus what it buys), the you definitely have a case: assault and theft.

Who legally owns the money a teenager makes? I'm genuinely curious, now; I'd suspect the parents legally own all the property that a teenager possesses, but if there was an argument and it went to the courts, the judge would inevitably decide.

My dad's opinion (note that he is not a lawyer, but has a decent amount of experience with law is that it's sort of a gray area, and that it probably depends based on district and judge. If the minor gets the money via his own job, and if the cheques are addressed to him, then probably it's his money and the parents can't use it.

[JBJ]

Assuming you do legally own the money (and thus what it buys), the you definitely have a case: assault and theft.

Who legally owns the money a teenager makes? I'm genuinely curious, now; I'd suspect the parents legally own all the property that a teenager possesses, but if there was an argument and it went to the courts, the judge would inevitably decide.

My dad's opinion (note that he is not a lawyer, but has a decent amount of experience with law is that it's sort of a gray area, and that it probably depends based on district and judge. If the minor gets the money via his own job, and if the cheques are addressed to him, then probably it's his money and the parents can't use it.

IANAL... From what I understand, minors can own property, and property owned exclusively in the minor's name cannot be accessed by the parents. Earnings are different. Since the parents have a duty of care they can have the right to a minor's earnings. They can even require that the child's employer change the name on payroll checks to go to the parent(s). If the minor has a checking account solely in their name, once money is deposited I am reasonably sure it falls under the property definition.

[Belial]

When the allegation is abuse still ongoing, yeah, I'm pretty sure that's never happened.

I'm not sure what you mean here. Isn't this always the case until the trial ends?

No? If your allegation is not "he abused me at some time in the past" but rather "he is abusing me now", I am pretty sure the answer will always be "then CPS will investigate and possibly remove you". And if CPS says "nope" then it's your word against theirs.

Our system: it is some shit.