Saturday, June 28, 2014

AZ - Arizona Boy, 5, Gets Accused Of ‘Sexual Misconduct’

Sexual Misconduct
Original Article

06/27/2014

By Lisa Fogarty

_____, a kindergartner at Ashton Ranch Elementary School in Surprise, Arizona, was recently forced to serve detention for an unusual offense: sexual misconduct.

The little boy was playing on his school’s playground when another child instructed him to pull his pants down “or else he would do it for him,” reports Daily Mail. The child did as he was told, pulling down both his pants and underwear in front of other students.

School administrators responded to this incident by taking _____ to the principal’s office and forcing him to sign a document that labeled his actions as "sexual misconduct," according to the child’s mother.
- So what about the bully who told him to do this?

_____ says the school did not contact her immediately after the incident and that she only learned about it after her son was told to sign the paper.

He’s a 5-year-old,” _____ said. “He does not know right from wrong yet.”

_____ says she fears the label will follow her son throughout school and that he only signed the paper because he was forced to do so. When she tried to appeal the school’s actions and have the document removed from _____’s permanent record, she was told it couldn't be done.

My son is not a sexualized minor,” _____ told AZ Family. “I’m just heartbroken. That’s not my son.”

Dysart Unified School District representatives insist the school’s administrators were simply following the proper protocol when they took disciplinary action against the young boy. Indecent exposure is considered a form of sexual misconduct, according to their rules, and parents are not required to be at the school during the meeting that follows the incident, unless the child asks for them.


8 comments :

sloan44 said...

Employers fined if they hire a sex offender!? Fines and jail time given to registrants just for applying for work at a "Designated safe zone"?! (How will they know where not to apply) "Sex offenders / pedophiles are predators, they seek out their prey"?! 20 other states with similar legislation in place?
The way the minds of people are coerced / manipulated into believing such lies just blows me away!! Just another law that will make it harder for registrants and their family's!

Charles Durden said...

So now we are interrogating 5 y/o children w/o their parents? They labeled him something he doesn't understand.

sloan44 said...

Guess nothing will happen to the bully since he did not show his "Wee Wee". The other kid did tell him if he did not pull them down,he would do it for him. That sounds to me like a threat of rape. I guess threatening someone is not a serious matter to the school but showing a penis is a nightmare! Instead of "proper protocol" they need to use common sense.

Mark said...

The mind of Amerika folks. If anyone believes this is an isolated incident with school administrators "JUST FOLLOWING ORDERS," why think? Just follow orders, then I have prime real estate I will sell you at the South Pole. These actions by this school is emblematic of the poisoned mind-set Amerika has become. My fear is this type of "administrative" action in schools will get worse; especially when it involves little children such as this 5 year old, in spite of the fact that this little 5 year old was bullied, by an older child. If this were me as a parent, the school would not know what hit them at the very least. And mama better get a darn lawyer and go for their juggler vain QUICK.

Mark said...

“Given the recidivism rates
involved in sexual assault cases, especially those victimizing
children, there’s a lot to be said for keeping the public informed of
legitimate threats. There does need to be some way for the public to be
informed.” Of course this had to be stated in the editorial! This way there will be no backlash over the editorial, it relieves the writer of any possible exposure that the writer is "sticking up" for any sex offender; and last, and most important, this particular comment is, in short: "B.S." because sex offenders have the lowest rate of recidivism of all crimes, and because of the comment box here, I withhold all of the DOJ, state and other federal studies contradicting the quoted statement above. Even the corrupt state and federal courts think, believe, and hold that sex offenders are these rampant, compulsive, repetitive, humans waiting in the shadows. The truth be told, only about perhaps 1-2% are truly dangerous in this regard. Regrettably, sexual crimes, registration, and restrictions are politically uncontested, therefore you get jellyfish statements as quoted in this comment.

Tom said...

As a NH Registrant, I fully am aware of the vigilantism that has gone on lately. I'm more afraid for my family than I am for myself. I couldn't imagine someone killing one of my family members thinking it was me. That is a danger that ALL registrants face. But, as I've said before in these comment sections, the state of NH makes MONEY off of the registry. $50 a year times 30,000(est.) registrants in NH = $1.5 million dollars a year in free money. It doesn't take a million dollars to operate a free govt web site. Yet, the State Police and a vigilante group called Homefacts keep our faces and info plastered all over the net - coming up first when one inputs our names in a Google search. Homefacts even keeps old info of sex offenders who died, moved, or were removed from the list, on the net. They claim to do it to "keep our children safe." Let us not forget what a man said back in history: "People will accept any loss of their rights as long as you say it's for the children." That man was Adolf Hitler.

getting closer to the street said...

Did anyone notice that everyone was caucasion . This same type of predjudice was called racial discrimination one time and over filled the prisons . But they made good slaves for profit . If this law is carved in cyber space this type of ignorant government needs to re-think how to protect citizens from child NO zones and where children do and do not belong . The woman with the news station and with the hospitol got their minute of fame and displayed the look of sucsess modestly , that again the level system has a flaw along with definitions of conviction, and mostly after time served . I would like to see the looks on their face when a child is in real danger of parental neglect and the trauma of not coming to the aid of a child by being struck by a car, bus, train, or falling off a cliff and have to turn away and admit bye law Sex offenders are restricted by law to help or prevent the injury or death of a child under the age of 18 . There is more to this hunch back of norte dam scare and ignorance and what law says in the united states that can not be challenged or sued ? The President, commander and chief of the USA has law suits brought against him . The hospitol should be sued for slander saying registed citizens are all out their TO SEEK THEIR PREY . How dare they after time served .

Jason Sanders said...

pitiful and so very wrong!!! tho this child will never have to go to court and do jail time he will be labeled as a sex offender the rest of his life according to his school records. because with that offense and label in his grade school records it will follow him thru every school he attends. and to any job that requires school transcripts. how many collages or universities will turn him down because that's in his school records? how many jobs that he will end up applying to will he lose because that is in his school records.

why? how can we or anyone justify crucifying someone from the age of 5 until the day he dies all because of a label???