 sj |
||
|
||
BS: Traveller Discrimination in the US 3
|
|
|
Subject: Traveller Discrimination in the US 3 From: InOBU Date: 30 Sep 02 - 07:21 PM I slept four hours two nights ago, two hours last night. I am too knackered to say much other than this is a huge huge wonderful badge of honnor and I want us to have another wee look and pat ourselves on the back for all the prayers for Spaw when he had his wee crisis... tick tock old boy... Pat and Karen Patterson Adoptive/Foster Parents to over 30 long term kids Emergency Foster Home Providers to over 50 children State of Ohio "Adoptive/Foster Family of the Year" 1996 Certified Adoptive/Foster Trainer Now as to the unsound arguements, etc, I am enjoying a wee rant with my pals because of all the having to be very scholarly in the papers. But, everything we are saying here is quite intersting, it seems to me that folks are having a huge time getting past their desire to see this as a country that treats Travellers well... now, seems to me we spoke of racial profiling, out placing of children, denial of liceneces to work, group slander in the press, you have seen folks get on these posts and make clearly racist comments about Travellers and still you say, I have some chip on my shoulder, by the way, thanks Barnical ol pal... cheers to all, I am off to the kip; Larry |
|
Subject: RE: Traveller Discrimination in the US 3 From: Blues=Life Date: 30 Sep 02 - 10:46 PM Larry. As in any ethnic group: They ain't all good. They ain't all bad. She still hit the kid. Find your way back to that, before you state that the folks here are "having a huge time getting past their desire to see this as a country that treats Travellers well." You have been ranting a bit, and assuming that "we all" give a damn one way or the other about an ethnic group that until a few weeks ago MOST OF US HAD NEVER HEARD OF! I'll state again, the only place I've even heard of the Travellers has been here in the Mudcat. (Aine, it doesn't matter if you can search and find it, I still have not seen anything in the news reports I've seen.) Finally: She still hit the kid. Justify that. And just that. Peace, Blues |
|
Subject: RE: Traveller Discrimination in the US 3 From: catspaw49 Date: 01 Oct 02 - 12:48 AM Justify nothing. When I entered into this discussion I had no intent of trying to justify the actions of the mother. What she did happens everyday in every class of society all across the country and my concern here is that she be treated no differently and that a caseworker is acting in the best interests of the child without prejudice. To do this requires that certain elements be taken into account when it comes to the placement of the child and on that side of the equation, cultural issues do enter in. The mother doesn't need a "break" because she is anything....the child does. What she did was wrong. She needs help. She is not alone. So do thousands of others. Were it within my power I would happily play God and decide who should and can be a parent....but that ain't the way things work. Mom needs help, possibly punishment...that's another issue. The child needs to be cared for and protected in the best possible way which is another issue. And my only issue here. Spaw |
|
Subject: RE: Traveller Discrimination in the US 3 From: McGrath of Harlow Date: 01 Oct 02 - 05:24 AM Are people saying that they they have never heard of Travellers, as a term widely used for various people known otherwise by such names as Gypsies or Tinkers? Or do you just mean that you didn't know that there were Travellers in the USA as well? Áine has given some very good links on this thread about Travellers. And there are some great songs in the DT.
|
|
Subject: RE: BS: Traveller Discrimination in the US 3 From: Áine Date: 01 Oct 02 - 10:19 AM Dear Blues=Life, I didn't have to search for the newspaper quote I posted in my message here in Part 2 of this thread. All I had to do was open the Sunday edition of my local newspaper, as I stated in that post. I won't argue that you (a) have never heard of the Irish Travellers or (b) have not seen any coverage whatsoever about them in the newspapers you read or electronic media to which you may have access. However, I would suggest that this is a great opportunity for you to learn about the Irish Travellers (and the other travelling communities of the world), and the prejudice that they have faced in the past and still face with today. Besides the informational links that I provided in my previous post (which I provide once again below), other folks have provided links to informational sites and songs. Why don't you take advantage of this chance to inform yourself about the Irish Travellers; and perhaps you'll better understand why there is a genuine concern about how this group is treated by civil and law enforcement authorities and the media. All the best, Áine Links: The Handbook of Texas Online The Gypsy Lore Society; Information on Gypsy & Traveler Cultures, Gypsy and Traveler Groups in North America, (adapted from the introduction to Gypsies and Travelers in North America: An Annotated Bibliography (where the original citations will be found) Travellers' Rest: Fact And Fiction About Irish Travellers in the U.S.A. Irish Traveller Notes and Resources Pavee Point Travellers Centre; Supporting Human Rights For Irish Travellers The Irish Traveller Movement |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Traveller Discrimination in the US 3 From: M.Ted Date: 01 Oct 02 - 11:18 AM Blues=Life--Your input here seems to boil down to the idea that if *you* haven't heard about it, then it can't possibly matter--curious why you think that-- |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Traveller Discrimination in the US 3 From: wysiwyg Date: 01 Oct 02 - 12:38 PM No, I think the posts from Blues are about looking at what the real issue is, and asking Larry to address his/her idea of what that is-- the fact the child was abused. ~Susan |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Traveller Discrimination in the US 3 From: SharonA Date: 01 Oct 02 - 05:20 PM Click on the following link to return to Part 2 of this discussion: BS: Traveller Discrimination in USA - Part 2 |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Traveller Discrimination in the US 3 From: SharonA Date: 01 Oct 02 - 05:32 PM If you wish to return to Part 2 of the discussion, but would prefer it to appear as a "split" thread, click on this link: BS: Traveller Discrimination in USA - Part 2 (page 1 of "split" thread) ...or should I have linked this thread to the last page of the "split" thread? Would that be the more proper protocol during this transitional period, when there are still multi-thread discussions (soon to be a thing of the past)? |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Traveller Discrimination in the US 3 From: Nerd Date: 02 Oct 02 - 02:28 AM Hey Larry, what's the status of that exculpatory evidence you were so excited about a couple days ago? It seems to me that (as Blues and others have noted) the issue of whether and why Ms Toogood slapped the bejeezis out of her kid is taking second place to advocacy on behalf of the Traveller community. Hey, I credit travellers with keeping musical traditions (remember them?) alive and well, with bearing cultural riches and social burdens out of proportion to their small numbers. But I STILL think Togood deserves much of the scrutiny she's received. I want to be clear again: I do not deny that anti-Traveller discrimination exists. BUT, showing that there is any such discrimination in this case is hard, at least until a final decision is reached concerning placement of the child. We are jumping the gun if we assume the courts will reach a bad decision because Toogood is a Traveller. So far they have done precisely the same thing they would do to me if I were on that tape slapping Martha. There has been a lot of illogical talk suggesting that any scrutiny of Toogood amounts to discrimination. One of the great illogical moments of part II, for example, came when someone complained that they were only looking at Togood because they KNEW she was a traveller. I countered: did Kohl's really know she was a traveller? What's the evidence for that? My interlocutor responded: well, they prosecuted her for shoplifting before, they must know her ethnic group. SO...how do you know they weren't looking at her because they prosecuted her before for shoplifting? Do we expect them NOT to be suspicious of people they have previously prosecuted for shoplifting? Where is there any evidence that her ethnicity ever entered into this case at all? Aine: your links to Traveller articles, both positive and negative, are wonderful. But all the media babble about Irish Travellers doesn't prove that Toogood's ethnicity affected the CASE at all, only the media's coverage of the case. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Traveller Discrimination in the US 3 From: McGrath of Harlow Date: 02 Oct 02 - 06:20 AM If the focus of attention moves on here from looking at a particular case to looking at wider issues, that seems sensible enough. The particular case is in the court system, and there are people busily assembling the facts and so forth. That's where it belongs surely, at this time, where all relevant information can be brought together and examined, with, as catspaw noted, the interests of the child being the central and most important thing. I can't see how arguing about the facts of a particular case at this point really adds anything useful. That leaves a lot of wider issues where there's room for valuable discussion - the Mudcat brings together a range of people you don't very often find. For example, what do you do when you see someone treating their children badly, the situation of marginalised communities, how the media reshape stories to fit the preconceptions of their readers...and perhaps songs and stories relating to these kinds of things and this kind of episode. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Traveller Discrimination in the US 3 From: InOBU Date: 02 Oct 02 - 07:07 AM Hi Nerd: No, I can't yet speak about exculpatory evidence, but will soon, most likely. 2. Store security guards had already identified her as a Traveller and dumped the contence of her purse out on the counter and were going through her things when she went a third time to retrieve her child who had gotten away from her again, 3. The anti traveller bias as I have said for the umteenth time, is removal of a child of a cultural, isolate from her community and out placing that child with a family of a culture which is not her own. 4. The courts already reached a bad decision when they removed the child, even temporarily from the community. I have said all the above until I am blue in the face. Run, do not walk to the nearest Indian nation, and politely ask to speak to anyone who lives there. Ask them why the Indian Child Welfare act exists. The youngest child who can talk will tell you. Jeeze louise! Larry line breaks added by mudelf ;-) |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Traveller Discrimination in the US 3 From: GUEST,Louise (they say I'm not half bad) Date: 02 Oct 02 - 11:21 AM "Jeeze louise!" Larry, I don't why you brought me into it. But since you did, I will break my silence. I get the sense that you're mitigating the fact that this woman beat her kid because store security had identified her as a potential shoplifter. From what I've gathered about Ms. Toogood, their suspicion was not misplaced (regardless of her ethnic group). However, SHE HAS NO EXCUSE FOR BEATING HER CHILD! I was beaten as a child. Beleive me, even when there are not physical scars, the psychological scars last a very long time, if not a lifetime. Louise |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Traveller Discrimination in the US 3 From: Ron Olesko Date: 02 Oct 02 - 11:59 AM Larry, blue does not become you! :) The problem is some of us do not agree - or rather do not SEE - the prejudice that you claim in #2, 3 & 4 of your statements - AS THEY RELATE TO THIS SPECIFIC CASE. Is prejudice the factor in this case? It still hasn't been proven with facts, and I hope that it won't be a loophole to exonerate this woman from any crime that was committed. From what we are READING in various media cases, these procedures seem to be in line with similar cases, regardless of the ethnic background. If YOU can divorce the ethnic background from this case, the punishment - or rather procedures - seem to justify the suspected crime. Again, we are all just expressing our opinions based on the information that we have received. This is what a jury does, but they have an advantage of hearing the evidence and arguements first hand. I don't think the majority of us have been as prejudiced as you claim in previous statements. There is a difference of prejudice and ignorance. Ignorance is easier to fix - research, discovery and learning will make that go away. Prejudice is harder to fix but it is still a reachable goal. Please don't let your frustrations get to you - your work is honorable and perhaps you need to step back and listen to what people are saying in order to combat. I wish you luck and I am doing my best to keep an open mind. This past weekend I shared some excerpts from the Ewan MacColl/ Peggy Seeger radio ballad The Travelling People on my radio program. I hope people will listen to items like this and some of the things that you are saying and realize that prejudice does exist, even if it turns out not to be the factor in this case. Ron |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Traveller Discrimination in the US 3 From: GUEST,Nerd Date: 02 Oct 02 - 01:00 PM Larry, I don't think it's valid to say that the removal of the child from her culture is a bias or an example of discrimination. You can say it is unjust because Travellers deserve special treatment for this, this and that reason. But that's not the same as saying the failure to give that special treatment is discrimination or bias. The Indian example is a good one. If there is a policy to give children to other Indians, that is a special case created solely for the Indian community and does not pertain to German Americans, Filipino Americans, or Irish Travellers! Thus you can argue that new laws are needed to address the specific needs of travellers, but that's not the same thing as saying that people in this case are discriminating against them. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Traveller Discrimination in the US 3 From: catspaw49 Date: 02 Oct 02 - 01:19 PM Well, the precedent set by the American Indian laws does lend credence to the accepted idea of placing kids as I have stated. I have a personal problem with that set of laws myself because of the extent to which they go. Adoption has been a problem with Native American children because the law allows that any child with 1/32 Native American heritage is in fact Native American. Now that is just flat ridiculous and has been finally overturned in court. The case in question was one where the biological father tried to stop an adoption of two children who had lived with their adoptive parents for their entire lives because he could prove he was 1/16 Indian......Never lived with them or was involved in the culture in any way, but he was 1/16 Indian. It went to the SC and was overturned in favor of the adoptive parents....."in the best interests of the children." Once in awhile they get it right. Spaw |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Traveller Discrimination in the US 3 From: McGrath of Harlow Date: 02 Oct 02 - 02:47 PM Any system of having rules based on mathematics like that is daft. The only thing to do is to find trustworthy people who know what they are doing, and give them the job of making decisions like this. Maybe they'll get it wrong sometimes, but less often than the mathematical formulae will. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Traveller Discrimination in the US 3 From: Nerd Date: 02 Oct 02 - 03:13 PM Larry, in your most recent post, as regards #2: My point was this: the argument that their knowledge that she was a traveller made them suspect she was a criminal is illogical because the reason they knew she was a traveller is that they had previously caught her shoplifting. This is not according to me, but according to one of the posters in part two who was agreeing with your position. If this is the case, they did not assume she was a criminal because she was a traveller, they learned she was a traveller because she was a criminal! Thus, it is far more likely that they were suspicious of her this time based on her prior crime, than based on her ethnicity. After all, they could not tell by looking at her that she was a traveller, and would never have found out if they hadn't had to investigate her. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Traveller Discrimination in the US 3 From: Áine Date: 02 Oct 02 - 05:21 PM Dear Mudcatters, I found a very well-balanced article on the Newsweek magazine website that I believe gives a well-rounded report of what Larry, I, and others on this thread having been trying to say about the Toogood case. Click here to read the article. I hope that this will help to inform and enlighten us all. All the best, Áine |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Traveller Discrimination in the US 3 From: NicoleC Date: 02 Oct 02 - 05:35 PM I don't really consider an article that only quotes the opinions of the defense lawyers and supporters of Mrs. Toogood "well-balanced." Perhaps it was because they had a difficult time finding any anti-Traveller sentiment among the parties involved, like the prosecutors office? |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Traveller Discrimination in the US 3 From: SharonA Date: 02 Oct 02 - 05:52 PM I, too, read the article Áine posted and wasn't any better informed than before I'd read it, except for this sentence in the article: "On Friday [September 27], she [Madelyn Toogood] was arrested a second time for giving false addresses to authorities." This is just unbelievable!!! Doesn't this woman understand that, by continuing to show such disregard for the law while under arrest and under the court's scrutiny, she is further damaging her case????? So much for her statement that she'd be willing to do anything to get her child back... she can't even tell the truth to the authorities about her addresses. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Traveller Discrimination in the US 3 From: McGrath of Harlow Date: 02 Oct 02 - 06:16 PM "...an article that only quotes the opinions of the defense lawyers and supporters of Mrs. Toogood." "Joe Livingston, a senior agent with the South Carolina Law Enforcement Division" - which would he be, a defense lawyer or a supporter of Mrs Toogood? |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Traveller Discrimination in the US 3 From: NicoleC Date: 02 Oct 02 - 07:07 PM You're right, I missed that one. It was right before it mentions he has investigated Traveller cases for 2 decades. And his statements are pro-Traveller; not, as some would have us believe, rife with discrimination by law enforcement. And he's not -- I think -- actually involved in the case, is he? So why did they dig him up for a quote? Then we have her lawyer, an anthropologist, and an Irish Traveller who lives in Ireland. Where's the supposed "serious prejudice" shown by people involved in the case? Couldn't they find any for the article? Or are we judging the merits of her case based on the poor journalism of local TV stations and ratings-hounds in the newspaper industry? |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Traveller Discrimination in the US 3 From: catspaw49 Date: 02 Oct 02 - 07:26 PM Geeziz.....Aine said it was a well balanced article and it seems to give a history, some background, etc, in a pretty even fashion. What's the problem? Good overall job of reporting. Thanks Aine. I'd like a lot more info on several aspects but we're unlikely to get any without an inside source to CPS. Spaw |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Traveller Discrimination in the US 3 From: M.Ted Date: 03 Oct 02 - 04:28 PM A lot of you seem to feel that "It's obvious that she broke the law, so she deserves whatever she gets" because it satisfies their sense of anger at the crimes that seem to have occurred--The legal system goes to great pains to see that things don't happen this way, though--- First, the legal process sets high standards of proof--evidence goes through a very elaborate screening process before it can be considered by a jury, and second, the process is careful to evaluate every factor that might be prejudicial to those who must decide a case--in other words, anything that might encourage a jury to decide that a defendent deserves punishment for anything other than the crime that he or she is being prosecuted-- Most of you are not ready to consider that prejudice should be considered here because you are certain of the defendents guilt, and believe that if it is considered, it will allow to the defendent to escape punishment--what you should really think about is the idea that if unfair discrimination has been a factor, it will prevent justice from being done- |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Traveller Discrimination in the US 3 From: McGrath of Harlow Date: 03 Oct 02 - 04:55 PM Those are the reasons why in the UK it would be contempt of court to be having that kind of stuff in newspapers once someone's been charged with an offence. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Traveller Discrimination in the US 3 From: Wolfgang Date: 04 Oct 02 - 05:48 AM Thanks for the link, Áine, 'well-balanced' is a good description of its content. Two bits from it: (1) "That this woman and the people involved happen to be of Irish Traveler descent is totally irrelevant to the case and we fail to understand why such an issue is being made about her ethnicity," says Collins. " Yeah, that's what many here thought from the very first posts on. (2) Did I read correctly (it qwas not completely unambiguous) that Ms. Toogood was the first to introduce her ethnic background into this case? Wolfgang |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Traveller Discrimination in the US 3 From: GUEST Date: 05 Oct 02 - 12:38 AM They are making and issue of her ethnicity because Ms. Toogood made an issue of her ethnicity. Trapped and desperate she played the "Victum Card" identifying herself as an "Irish Traveler" and now she must suffer the lashes of her own community for breaking "the code."
|
|
Subject: RE: BS: Traveller Discrimination in the US 3 From: InOBU Date: 05 Oct 02 - 04:17 AM Dear Wolfgang,
No, she was not the first to introduce her ethnicity, the police and press did, and then began to publicly slander her entire ethnic community so that bigoted racist trolls like the anonamous guest who wrote "Sociologists/Pscychologists have reaped premium, raw material for analysis since the young child has been removed from the norms of her cult-like society and is available for "de-briefing." could carry on the tradition of prejudice that for almost ten centuries has put these people on a forced migration towards genocide, slavery, exclusion and all the host of violations of human rights heeped on Travellers and "Gypsys" and excused by ignorant bigots from the shadows by the use of words like "cult like." |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Traveller Discrimination in the US 3 From: GUEST Date: 06 Oct 02 - 05:43 PM As long as your are "Gathering Material for the Defence" this is the BEST article I have read about the subject. Your "friends" must be paying you well, or you are very twisted in your ideologies, or perhaps, this is the "price you pay" so you can get closer to the "inner circle" of traveler trust.
The following editorial is enough for the prosecution to get any jury to send your client to jail for a long time. (I refuse to watch television, except in an emergency, and seldom listen to the radio - therefore, I have not seen the horrific tape - nor do I ever want to - but I have seen films of the Harlow experiments - they are chilling.)
EXCERPTS from:
Los Angeles Times - Op/Ed page one CHILDREN -Young Brains Shaped by Abuse October 6, 2002
It's a kind of gospel of neuroscience that our brains do their best job of preserving a memory when emotion helps burn it in. We need photographic records of the easy moments because they slip away. Our neurons, those busy nerve cells in our brains, are careless with contentment. They don't pay close attention. It's the jolt of shock or grief or fear that etches a memory deepest.
To understand just how powerful this effect is--like national tragedy, like death in the family--you have to recognize just how important a parent is to a small child. Actually, we ought to have that one down by now. The most compelling experiments ever, illuminating the inescapable bond between an abusive mother and a child who needs her, were done in the 1960s. Let's not fool ourselves: We've known for decades what a dangerous parent means to a small child.
The studies I'm thinking of were done by the late Harry Harlow, a University of Wisconsin psychologist who used baby monkeys as his model for small children. In this particular set of experiments, he wanted to know what happens to a child whose mother rejects her. He wanted to be very precise about the nature of rejection. So he and his colleagues built a series of "evil" robot mothers. They had soft padded bodies and blandly smiling faces. But they were evil, all right. One shook infants until their teeth rattled. One was spring-loaded to hurl the baby animals away. The most infamous came equipped with brass knobs that would ram into a baby as it cuddled in.
Harlow and his colleagues expected that they would end up with neurotic babies. And they did. But, unexpectedly, they also produced devoted ones. No matter what the mothers did, the babies always came back. A baby monkey would pick itself up, wait until the knobs retracted, and once again wrap itself around the mother. It would cling hopefully to the shaking mother, trying to stay on. The infants seemed tireless in their willingness to try again to persuade their mothers to, well, be mothers--be loving, be safe.
Those studies represent only a fraction of Harlow's sometimes lovely, sometimes explicitly painful research into parent-child relationships. He believed that his other work, demonstrating the importance of a loving touch, mattered more in everyday life. No one grows up whole and healthy, he insisted, without "a solid foundation of affection." But he was emphatic about the value of the darker studies. Not every child gets that foundation; some get the opposite, obviously. And yet all children need loving adult support. If you're going to study love, Harlow insisted, you have to study all its aspects.
Since the Harlow days, psychology has leaped forward in illuminating our need for that foundation of affection, and nurturing, and security. No psychologist argues that parents need to be perfect, that we permanently damage a child through the occasional gust of impatience or anger. But the emphasis there is on occasional. Consider once again the accidental gotcha of that parking lot security tape. Does anyone believe that this was the one, the only time that Martha Toogood's mother took out her frustrations on her child?
Researchers such as Robert Sapolsky, at Stanford University, have shown that a young brain does its desperate best to cope with an environment of fear and threat. It restructures. It notches up the stress response. It keeps the body poised for flight. It floods the nervous system with angst. When the child grows up, the adult brain is beautifully designed to hover right on the edge of panic. Although there's a certain hyper-alertness in that, Sapolsky and his colleagues see no advantage. They see cost. Stress-related hormones and neurotransmitters put real wear and tear on the system and have been linked to destruction of brain cells and to memory loss.
And abuse wears away at the potential of the child in other ways. Psychologists once thought that all people had an innate ability to read facial expressions, were born knowing how to register a friendly smile and an angry frown. Now studies contradict that. Experiments instead show that abused children can be face-blind. Consistently, these boys and girls will read anger into a smile, see real threat in even the mild irritation of a raised eyebrow. Their brains show a sudden furious leap of response, one that doesn't register in children from more supportive homes.
So "I had a bad day" doesn't make it as an excuse, not for Martha Toogood's mother, not for any of us. Let's go ahead and file the videotape away. And, yes, let's give that child a break from home. I hope she has a chance for some silly, happy moments, gets to pile up some of those bright, casual photographs. Memories count. Let's not forget that.
* Deborah Blum is a Pulitzer Prize-winning science writer and the author of "Love at Goon Park: Harry Harlow and the Science of Affection."
|
|
Subject: RE: BS: Traveller Discrimination in the US 3 From: Big Mick Date: 06 Oct 02 - 05:54 PM The trouble, M. Ted, with your analysis is that it presumes the prejudice had something to do with the arrest and outrage. The genesis of this whole ridiculously long thread was that it was premised by Larry as an example of prejudice against Travelling People. The simple fact is, regardless of who put it out first, the outrage and response came before anyone knew she was a traveller. My personal opinion is that our friend Larry knows this too. He is using this to elevate the discussion of prejudices against Travellers. And most of us sucked right in. Aine, thanks for the great reporting. Mick |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Traveller Discrimination in the US 3 From: InOBU Date: 06 Oct 02 - 06:27 PM Hi Mick: Hope all is well with ya, The store reported, though they refuse to comment how they knew, (legal questions about racial profiling...) that they did know she was a traveller, which is why they turned her purse out, and so, yes, from right before the incident, as I said, this was about Madalynne as a Traveller, as far as the evil monkey crap above, some nonsence is not worthy of comment. Larry |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Traveller Discrimination in the US 3 From: GUEST Date: 07 Oct 02 - 12:22 AM Big Mick--Outrage is a form of rage, rage is the problem here-- I see many people here responding out of their own anger and the anger is being fueled by allegations of every kind-- As to you Guest,the article you posted ought to be grounds for charges of cruelty to animals against the Harry Harlow, but it adds nothing but more hysteria to the discussion, which hardly needs it-- Why focus all this attention on Ms. Toodgood? If you were shocked at what you saw, you don't know much about child abuse, because that scene, and much much worse are played out everyday-- Cynic that I have come to be, I think that the wide spread anger and outrage at Ms Toogood is really outrage at being reminded that child abuse exists, and the efforts to portray her as a transient, petty criminal are really effort to make abuse look like it only occurs in the margins of society-- |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Traveller Discrimination in the US 3 From: M.Ted Date: 07 Oct 02 - 12:35 AM That was no guest, it was me--sorry-- |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Traveller Discrimination in the US 3 From: SharonA Date: 07 Oct 02 - 09:05 AM Larry says, "[The Kohl's store in Indiana] reported... that they did know she was a traveller, which is why they turned her purse out..." Not quite. The news stories I had read at the time of Toogood's arrest said that the Kohl's store security suspected her of having shoplifted at that store and therefore searched her purse and followed her movements with security cameras once she left the store... and she is KNOWN to have shoplifted at another Kohl's store (the one in Texas). It would make sense for store security to have a policy of being on alert for people who travel between two areas and are known to have shoplifted in one or both of those store locations. They didn't detain her because she's a Traveler, they detained her because she's a Traveler who shoplifts. I'm sure that the Travelers who don't shoplift are free to shop at Kohl's without having their purses emptied (was Toogood's sister's purse emptied?). There's no "effort" (as M Ted says) involved in portraying her as a transient, petty criminal; she is a petty criminal who also happens to be a transient. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Traveller Discrimination in the US 3 From: Ron Olesko Date: 07 Oct 02 - 09:46 AM This arguement keeps going around in circles and the frustration seems to be coming out on both sides. It bothers me that people who do not see the "prejudice" that many claim is the basis of this case are being labeled at "bigots" and "racists". Is that how we settle arguements, by labeling the opposition in such a manner? Seems like the acorn doesn't fall far from the tree. There needs to be education. It is obvious that there is a prejudice against Travelers and transients in this country. The fact that it may or maynot be a factor in this case should be a separate issue. I wish those with facts about prejudice would continue to share and educate those of us that are looking for enlightenment on a situation that has not been in the limelight before this. Keep a level head, put yourself in the shoes of those with opposing viewpoints and try to fathom why they don't always agree. There is no way we can eliminate discrimination and prejudice until we can remove the threads of its existence from our own hearts and minds. Ron |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Traveller Discrimination in the US 3 From: Big Mick Date: 07 Oct 02 - 10:10 AM Right on, Ron. I am fine, Larry. With everything but your arguments here, that is. You have used an old tactic called obfuscation, and I am disappointed in it. The simple fact is that this woman is a petty thief. She is also someone who has abused a child and it was captured on film. Further, her actions show that this is a pattern with her. The authorities had a responsibility to protect the child, and they did. Some folks with an agenda (and I include you in this group, Larry) have used it to elevate their own cause. I understand the tactic, but in this case it disappoints me. We are dealing here with the physical and mental abuse of a child. You are attempting to place that in a subservient position to your own agenda of traveller discrimination. It is my opinion that you should be ashamed of this. If a woman were beat up by a traveller, would you do the same? If a traveller committed murder, would it be the same tactic? You are too far in to back off, but it is my sincere hope that in your private thoughts, you will re-examine the stand you have taken. This is not about travellers rights and prejudice against these folk. It is about a child. Period. Mick |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Traveller Discrimination in the US 3 From: GUEST Date: 07 Oct 02 - 12:21 PM From the South Bend Tribune: September 29, 2002 Real life justice Everyday cases of abuse reflect difficult decisions By MARTI GOODLAD HELINE Tribune Staff Writer SOUTH BEND -- Worldwide attention on the Madelyne Toogood child battery case has prompted heated debate over what her punishment should be if she is convicted of beating her little girl. From the streets of South Bend to the call-in shows on talk radio and cable television on both coasts, the speculation continues. Strong emotions have been raised by the 25-year-old woman seen on a security camera videotape appearing to repeatedly hit her 4-year-old daughter in the parking lot of a Grape Road shopping center. Some have expressed concern that the punishment will be too lenient. Others fear that all the media attention will lead to the mother being punished more severely than she deserves -- or more than someone who committed a more serious act of abuse. With all the attention focused last week on Toogood's case, St. Joseph Probate Judge Peter J. Nemeth noted, "This goes on every day. We have these cases all the time." Attorney Michael Gotsch, who works with CPS, noted that the Toogood case "is not the worst case of abuse in St. Joseph County. We see much more serious cases frequently." Here are some real child battery cases from St. Joseph County. In these crimes, the defendants pleaded guilty to charges like Toogood's. To protect the identities of the children, we're not publishing the defendants' names. Dirty kitchen, beaten children A 34-year-old father of four from South Bend was charged with beating his four children, aged 8 to 14, with a thick, 2-foot-long wooden rod when he became upset with them for not cleaning the kitchen and being disrespectful while their mother was sick in bed with the flu. After being alerted by school officials, police took the 11-year-old girl to a hospital to treat wrist and head injuries. The three boys had bruises in places such as their lower backs, legs, shoulders and heads, according to court documents. The children told police their father roused them from bed and beat them about 2:30 a.m. when he came home from work. The father pleaded guilty to two of the four felony counts of battery on a child and was sentenced earlier this month by Superior Court Judge Roland W. Chamblee Jr. to a suspended 18-month term on each charge. The father was placed on probation for 18 months and ordered to participate in counseling. The prosecutor's office asked the judge not to suspend the sentence and to require the father to serve some time, but Chamblee chose not to. Mom uses extension cord A 45-year-old South Bend mother came home to find the bathroom a mess and her things moved around. She whipped her three children with an extension cord, causing large, red welt marks on the backs of the legs of her 11-year-old daughter and 10- and 13-year-old sons. One child secretly called police and reported the beating. The children said their mother tied them to a pole in the basement before the whipping. The mother was charged with three felony counts of battery on a child and three counts of criminal confinement. She pleaded guilty last year to the three battery charges, and the confinement charges were dismissed. In the plea agreement, the prosecution agreed not to recommend prison time. Judge Jerome Frese treated the batteries as misdemeanors for sentencing and imposed a one-year sentence on each, which was suspended. He placed the mother on probation for three years and ordered her to complete whatever counseling was recommended in Probate Court. Stepfather uses belt on boy Last September, an 11-year-old boy told his stepfather he had done his homework and then later admitted he lied about it. The 28-year-old stepfather took the boy to the basement, where he used his belt to whip the boy on his buttocks and legs, leaving many bruises. Someone from the boy's school in Mishawaka contacted Child Protective Services. The stepfather was charged with battery on a child, a felony, and the boy was removed from the home for a time. Two months later, the stepfather pleaded guilty to the charge with an agreement with the prosecutor that the case would be treated as a misdemeanor for sentencing. The stepfather received a suspended six-month jail sentence from Superior Court Judge William H. Albright, who put him on probation for six months with an order to complete parenting classes. A similar charge of child battery was filed against the stepfather last month and is pending. He is accused again of using his belt to whip the boy, now 12, many times because the boy had not cleaned his room. The boy's mother has been charged with neglect. The boy's aunt contacted authorities when he came to her house after the latest beating. 3-year-old stepdaughter hit A 22-year-old Mishawaka man was charged twice in four months with striking his 3-year-old stepdaughter, once in the face with his hands and another time by throwing a telephone caller-identification box that hit the girl. The second incident resulted in a deep cut that required stitches and the loss of a tooth. The stepfather pleaded guilty in 1999 to both felonies of battery on a child and was sentenced on each case to three years in prison, but Judge Frese suspended the sentences. The man was placed on probation for six years and ordered to spend two years on home detention. The man spent more than three months in jail while the cases were pending. He was also ordered to have no contact with the girl and her mother without the judge's prior approval. Two stepsons, two cases A 24-year-old South Bend man struck his 5-year-old stepson in the face, leaving bruises and a black eye, after the boy had run out of the house. The man pleaded guilty in 1999 to a felony charge of child battery in a plea agreement that said the prosecution would not oppose misdemeanor treatment. Judge Frese placed the man on probation for a year, suspended a one-year jail term and ordered the man to stay in counseling. A year later, the same man was charged with child battery for beating his 10-year-old stepson with a leather belt, leaving behind severe bruises on his leg and buttocks. A police report showed the younger boy, the 10-year-old's brother, had also been whipped. The stepfather pleaded guilty to the charge under an agreement that called for an 18-month suspended sentence, parenting classes and counseling. Superior Court Judge William T. Means placed the man on probation for 18 months, ordered 80 hours of community service, counseling and no contact with the victims without approval. When parents fail Sometimes, a parent or guardian fails to meet those or other court-ordered requirements. "While it's our initial goal to reunify the family, unfortunately, we do fairly regularly terminate the rights of parents," said Charles Smith, director of the St. Joseph County Office of Family and Children, which oversees CPS. In such cases, the child is put up for adoption, or guardianship arrangements are made. Parents could also face further criminal action. Reports of child abuse often come through third parties such as relatives, neighbors, schools, hospitals, physicians and police. According to statistics from the Indiana Family and Social Services Administration, of the 434 cases of physical abuse to children reported in St. Joseph County in 2001, 166 were substantiated. "Every case we substantiate, or unsubstantiated, a copy of the complaint and findings go to the prosecutor's office," Smith said. It is then up to the prosecutor's office to decide whether criminal charges are warranted. Tough choices Professionals who deal with child abuse cases say no case is typical and that often there are only hard choices to make. "There's no one action we do in every case. Each has different circumstances," said Carolyn Hahn, executive director of CASIE Center, an agency that coordinates investigations of child abuse cases. "Children are usually attached to the people who abuse them," Hahn noted. "You don't want to punish the victim when you're trying to rehabilitate the offender. It's a real tough call." Child Protective Services, the agency that investigates cases of child abuse and neglect, handles every case according to its circumstances, which can vary widely, Smith said. The severity and type of abuse are among factors taken into account. "It's a situation where there is a range of seriousness within which any number of things can happen," Smith said. The victims of substantiated cases of child abuse often are placed in foster or residential care, as Toogood's little girl was, at least long enough to begin to resolve the issues that led to the abuse. While the victims may undergo counseling and/or treatment for physical injury, the parent or guardian may have to meet a number of requirements to regain custody, such as counseling, alcohol- and drug-abuse treatment, and classes in parenting, anger management and home management. Nemeth's court deals with the children's issues and decides whether youngsters should be removed from their home. "I think, where possible, the child should be with family members," Nemeth said last week. "I think the statute requires the Office of Family and Children to look at that. I think it's certainly preferential to the child rather than to be with strangers. It all depends on the individual circumstances." How the system works The Superior Court where the criminal cases of child abuse are heard attempts to work with the Probate Court, which oversees the children if they are removed from the home by CPS. In a typical St. Joseph County case of child battery, a defendant pleads guilty to the Class D felony charge and receives a suspended jail sentence along with a term of probation that mandates counseling and, sometimes, community service, fines or other requirements. A Class D felony carries a sentence of up to three years but can also be treated as a misdemeanor, which has a one-year maximum sentence. Whether the St. Joseph County prosecutor's office will agree to a suspended sentence or try to persuade the judge to impose some jail time depends on the circumstances of a case. From his experience, longtime defense attorney Philip Skodinski believes probation to be appropriate in child abuse cases when the parent is making an effort to turn around his or her situation. He also believes that a child battery offense should not be treated any differently than any other Class D felony, so that someone with no prior record should be entitled to have the conviction entered as a misdemeanor just as much as someone charged with theft. Records show that many child battery convictions do end up as misdemeanors. "I would say there are a lot of cases that are not serious enough to prosecute," Smith said. It's extremely rare to have videotaped evidence of abuse as in the Toogood case. "There's a witness for the child," said Chief Deputy Prosecutor Ellen Corcella. Without that, the case may not have been charged at all or possibly charged as a misdemeanor, she said. Many felony child abuse cases involve an injury -- bruises that were noticed or a fracture that required medical attention -- which result in the incident being reported. Photos of the injuries provide critical evidence. If the Toogood case happened without the videotape and some security guards or shoppers were witnesses, it's questionable the case would have been charged or even been sent to the prosecutor's office, Corcella said. Even if the child in a situation said she was hit, the parent could explain it away by saying it was just a spanking and that witnesses did not have a clear view. A spanking -- like a hand clapping a child's rear end -- is not illegal or considered abuse, CPS attorney Gotsch said. It becomes abusive if it leaves visible injuries. But repeatedly striking a child in the face or pulling hair as Toogood is alleged to have done in the video can be considered abusive. Regarding what the prosecutor's office will seek as a penalty in Toogood's case, Toth has said, "Obviously, jail is something you have to seriously consider in a case like this. In all child abuse cases, there has to be some kind of accountability. As the case progresses through the criminal justice system, we will be making more decisions about how we are going to proceed." J |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Traveller Discrimination in the US 3 From: Nerd Date: 07 Oct 02 - 04:43 PM Hey Larry, I hate to be a one-reed accordion, but any news on exculpatory evidence? Thanks, SharonA. That's exactly what I was trying to say on the 2nd, but Larry chose not to respond to that one... And, just to be evenhanded, Larry is right to call certain people on this thread bigoted, but not most of us. I refer to the anonymous guest who says "the young child has been removed from the norms of her cult-like society and is available for 'de-briefing.'" Please, GUEST, don't judge people so harshly. Travellers are often secretive, it's true, but to call them "cult-like" is unfair. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Traveller Discrimination in the US 3 From: Ron Olesko Date: 07 Oct 02 - 05:01 PM Nerd, you are right that CERTAIN people (notably guests) have been very bigoted in their remarks. Most appear to be trolls that are trying to stir trouble and not really add to the conversation. My problem is that whether intentionally or not, the words "bigot" and "racist" have been applied in wider terms. Many of us are trying to understand the issue and it has appeared that when a comment is made that contradicts the "b" and "r" words are quickly used even when there is no apparent or intended prejudice involved. For the most part, people need to be taught. It is hard to learn when the feeling being given is "you're either with us or against us". This Ayn Rand black/white thinking is what divides us, not brings us together - or more importantly gives us a respect for one another. Ron |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Traveller Discrimination in the US 3 From: Nerd Date: 07 Oct 02 - 05:05 PM Well said, Ron. I agree, and I think a little less hand-wringing and name-calling on this thread would be a good thing. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Traveller Discrimination in the US 3 From: Ron Olesko Date: 07 Oct 02 - 05:10 PM You are right! I'm sorry I called the Guest a troll! Some of my best friends are trolls! :) Ron |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Traveller Discrimination in the US 3 From: Nerd Date: 07 Oct 02 - 05:33 PM The Troll-American community frowns on this sort of racist attack, Ron. You'll be hearing from my Lawyer...but then, Lawyers suffer from this sort of thing too :-) |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Traveller Discrimination in the US 3 From: Ron Olesko Date: 07 Oct 02 - 05:39 PM Hey, we know all about lawyers. Ever sit down to dinner with one? Plus they have short arms, never can quite reach the check. Ron (hey comeon, that was sarcasm!!! I love lawyers too!) |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Traveller Discrimination in the US 3 From: SharonA Date: 07 Oct 02 - 06:02 PM Thanks, Nerd. I'm having trouble finding any news reports on the internet to support Larry's claim that Kohl's store security "turned her purse out." I could only find one mention of Toogood's purse at all: in a CNN interview with Toogood on September 22nd (click on link to go to interview: http://asia.cnn.com/2002/US/Midwest/09/23/tuchman.toogood.cnna/). Here's the "purse" excerpt from that interview: CNN's GARY TUCHMAN: Not that anything went wrong in the store? Not that you took anything or ... TOOGOOD: No -- I never took nothing. I come in with a bag and I double-knotted it before I went in. As soon as I walked through the door, I double-knotted that bag twice. TUCHMAN: But you think the camera outside was following you? TOOGOOD: No ... TUCHMAN: Why was the camera following you, do you think? TOOGOOD: Because -- I -- because they opened my bag in the middle of the store. I have in my shopping cart with my little girl. And somebody come over and opened up my bag -- unknotted it and opened it and looked through it. And I come over and said, "That's mine. What are you doing?" TUCHMAN: So they were suspicious of you? TOOGOOD: My purse was in it. Yeah -- it wasn't unattended. It would be like a shopping cart -- a lady with a shopping cart that left -- yeah. I gather from this account that the plastic bag that Toogood took into the Kohl's store, into which she had put her purse, is the bag that was opened and searched. This is not at all unusual. Many department stores have a policy that prohibits shopping bags from being brought into the stores – in order to prevent shoplifting. Even at Wal-Mart, the "greeter" will stop you if you carry a bag into the store, and will send you directly to the customer-service counter if the bag contains an item you wish to return (and will prevent you from going anywhere else in the store!). So if Toogood entered the store with a shopping bag, I'm not surprised that she was stopped by security and that the bag was searched. Nowhere does she say that the purse itself was searched, just the shopping bag, but if the purse in the shopping bag had been searched it would again be standard procedure for anyone suspected of shoplifting because of his or her actions. Elsewhere in that interview, she claims that she was nervous in the store because she thought people were identifying her as a Traveler and were going to take her child because she had no permanent address, but that makes no sense unless authorities had already identified her as an individual who was endangering her child in some way. Sounds to me as if she was just spouting some rhetoric about prejudice, but it also seems that she doesn't believe that prejudice played a part in the court's decisions concerning custody of her daughter. I say this because the following exchange occurred later in the same interview: TUCHMAN: Madelyne, do you think you're a victim here? TOOGOOD: No. TUCHMAN: It seems like you're saying that the state is doing something wrong. TOOGOOD: They're probably just doing their job.... |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Traveller Discrimination in the US 3 From: McGrath of Harlow Date: 07 Oct 02 - 06:41 PM Sometimes people say really acute things here thta can get missed in the rush - and I think what MTed said here was one of those times: I think that the wide spread anger and outrage at Ms Toogood is really outrage at being reminded that child abuse exists, and the efforts to portray her as a transient, petty criminal are really efforts to make abuse look like it only occurs in the margins of society. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Traveller Discrimination in the US 3 From: InOBU Date: 08 Oct 02 - 07:16 AM Hi Mick: My deep inner thoughts are very clear on this case. I have worked for years with Native Americans who have suffered the same abuse as Madalyne's daughter, being forcable removed from their people and having their self immage destroyed. We all forgive our parents their transgressions as part of growing up, we are raised by humans. When we are slapped by our folks in our lives, and it is not a pattern or does not cause injury, we forgive as we grow. What we do not recover from - and the evidence is clear, is long term assaults on who we are. Indiana seems to be comming around to this point, and over the past weeks we have been doing better and better. If this goes to a full trial exculpatory evidence can come out, and it will. As to profiling by the store there is also more to be said about this, soon. I understand folk being impatient, but trials take time and patience. I will try and get you all a site for yesterdays piece in the South Bend press which adds much light to my point. As to Madalynne being a "thief" as she was called, I have two responces. First, from the way that Travellers have been policed, I would not put much faith in convictions. I don't know a Traveller who has gone to trial, for two reasons. First, they believe, and not without reiforcement from the prejudice we see here, that juries will judge them not as Americans, but as Travellers. Second, as being a "flight risk", huge bail is set, often around $50,000, or being held on minor charges without bail until trial. So, Travellers plead guilty and pay reparations again and again to things they have not done. This linked to the view by police that they are not a culture but a criminal cult, colors the way investigations of them is carried out. So, is conviction proof to me that Madalynne is a thief? I don't know, does that have anything to do with her as a mother? Over a million folks are in jail in the US today, how many more have been in jail? What would we do if we took all their children away, or do you only want to take away the children of groups you discriminate against as "Gypsies". All the best, Larry PS I have not completely ignored exculpatory evidence... all the forensic evidence shows the child was niether seriously hit, or ever was in the past ... for the umpteenth time, check the various doctor's statememnts on both sides.
line breaks added by mudelf ;-) |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Traveller Discrimination in the US 3 From: wysiwyg Date: 08 Oct 02 - 07:56 AM Larry, discrimination is about abuse via power. The one lacking most power that day was the child. The one most abusing superior power was the mother. And-- beating a child is not a civil right. If Mommies can't be expected to keep a grip in the face of discrimination, tell me-- how the heck did all those slaves make it this far? And if they SHOULD not be expected to keep a grip-- oh my, I need to stock up on ammo, because here come all the people my great-great-greats wronged, and all the ones I unawarely insulted. OK....... so say a black man has spent the day out and around taking care of business, and everywhere he goes he gets spat on, called a nigger, invited to leave stores, pulled over by cops and searched, roughly, maybe hit... all with no reason... and he goes home and kicks his dog, and it's caught on tape. Is he a victim, or a bad guy? Now say he goes upstairs to tuck the little darling into bed and the little darling smarts off, and he smacks the little darling. Who is the victim, and of whom? In other words, does discrimination suck and make a person act (sometimes) like an a**hole? Sure. Does it victimize people? Of course. But does our society excuse the behaviors that result, or not? Does this wash?: "Mommy only hit you all those times because someone was really mean to her because of who we are." Further, "Mommy should have gotten away with hitting you all those times, and she would have if the bad people who don't like us had not had a camera running." Is that the kind of enculturation that leads to a responsible life? Discrimination sucks. Actually, though, many of us here live with it every day. (I think I'll go find someone to punch out, someone smaller since I'm not too strong.) But you can't beat a child on videotape and expect nothing to happen, anymore than a cop can beat a black man (or a Traveller should it occur), on videotape, and expect nothing to happen! ~Susan |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Traveller Discrimination in the US 3 From: catspaw49 Date: 08 Oct 02 - 08:31 AM We are looking at an entire series of issues in this case. I can't speak to most of them, having neither the particulars, the knowledge, or the background and experience needed to make any kind of substantive statement. There are two issues here where I do feel I am as qualified and knowledgeable as most and do have that particular expertise. I have addressed both in previous posts. On the issue of the abuse itself, that level of abuse occurs hundreds of times a day across the U.S. This doesn't make it right by any means but in most cases like this one, the abusive parent is generally sentenced to something, but jail isn't often a part of it. When a parent admits their need and is willing to adhere to a strictly managed case plan, a three month agreement as to treatment and whatever else is mandated is entered and then the case is reviewed at the three month or six month time and matter of the child(ren) is determined at that time. For many of you I know this sounds lenient, but I have seen it work well as I have also seen it fail miserably. Perhaps you need to understand that under any Temporary Custody agreement a parent's rights to the decisions made in the rearing of the child(ren) are not relinquished. In the overwhelming majority, the rights of the parents are used to keep the parent involved, even get them more involved, in the parenting process. Folks, foster parents cannot even get the kid a haircut without the permission of the parent(s). The other issue here is the placement of the child which I have addressed extensively in previous posts. Emergency placement is just that......placement in an emergency, and should last no longer than two weeks at which point a suitable longer term placement should have been found. As I have said before, relative placement is always the first option and offers the best and least traumatic situation for the child. I am fearful here that Indiana is not looking in that direction for other reasons. I don't know. What I do know is that this is a case needing a CASA if I ever saw one. Spaw |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Traveller Discrimination in the US 3 From: InOBU Date: 08 Oct 02 - 08:55 AM Forget walking a mile in someones shoes, some folks on Mudcat cannot take a single step. Larry |