A McHenry county judge denied bail for a 16-year old who's only crime was making a flyer that says "God Hates Fags".
Two girls were arrested in McHenry County, Illinois last week for distributing flyers at their school that depicted a male classmate kissing another classmate and had the words "God Hates Fags" on the flyers. The two were charged with disorderly conduct and felony hate crimes. As can be expected, debate has been generated on the wisdom of hate crimes laws, debate that's not confined solely to the right. Even gay sites are not entirely behind the arrest and charging of these girls for a minor stunt.…
Article comments
— go to most recent comments26 - John Bambenek
Lee-
Yes I do feel qualified and the qualification comes from the fact I'm a citizen of this nation. Power comes from me and others like me and it's part of my God given right to challenge authority instead of simply shrugging me shoulders and saying "well I guess they know what they're doing because the government knows best."
Right now **murderers** are getting bail but this "out-of-control" minor, who's worst offense before this was having week, has to be denied bail because *she's* a threat to society? I'm not saying what she did is right, hell, let's even skip past charging with a hate crime, let's even skip past the fact she'll do time... the point of this article was denying this girl bail. I could find any commenter in this thread, murder them in there sleep and *I* would get bail (not that I would ever do such a thing)... all this girl did was misuse photoshop.
It boggles my mind that this is even a debate. Serial convicts get bail all the time, if you've ever been in a courtroom (as I have) you'd know that. Sure, prior record goes into how much bail should be set at, sure, but curfew would never even hit the radar in any criminal case.
Murders right now are being let out on bail, even those who have prior records that include real crimes.
Why should this girl, who is a minor, be denied bail? How is that even justifiable in comparison?
27 - Dr Dreadful
Every time there is plain evidence of the bias that exists at the ACLU
Of course they're biased, Arch. Every organization is. In the ACLU's case, the bias is in favor of the Bill of Rights. The fact that more often than not, this involves opposing the activities of "Christian" conservatives intent on imposing their dubious theology in the public arena is a reflection of where most attempted rights abuses come from these days.
I don't need to remind you that Rush Limbaugh is one of the many right-wing luminaries who has benefited from the ACLU's aid, do I? Oh wait... no, that's "cherry-picking". Sigh.
I confess to being a little hazy as to what a moonbat is, but they must have blue faces - because that's the color many of ours tend to turn in our efforts to explain the above to you.
28 - Seasoned Adult
When I was a little boy I was to that "sticks and stones will break your bones but words will never hurt you". I was told that by my parents as a way to deflect an occasional jab by my peers at my apparent chubbiness. Nobody ever mentioned damaging one's self-esteem in those days (1950's) and basically approached taunting as just words.
Well, in spite of my trials as a youth, I turned out OK and still believe the previously stated motto should be applied today. If someone can be charged with a felony for simply expressing something and it carries the same weight as physically harming an individual then we have truly lost our way.
Our interpretation free speech is tends to focus on what speech suits our own agendas and hate speech, although vile and disgusting, has never harmed an otherwise healthy person.
29 - Doug Hunter
"The fact that more often than not, this involves opposing the activities of 'Christian' conservatives intent on imposing their dubious theology in the public arena"
Christian morals are no more arbitrary or taxing on non-believers than those of say socialists, enviro-nazis, or other groups on the left. The ACLU's limited effort to oppose the latter exhibits their bias.
Do you really believe your life will change more if the christians get restrictions placed on abortion than if global warming alarmists pass legislation restricting and taxing carbon usage?
30 - Lee Richards
#26:
I've already answered your question, but I'll explain it again:
Because the juvenile justice system has different goals and uses different methods from the adult justice system. The girl is a juvenile, so automatically she is treated differently than an adult offender might be. That's the way the system is supposed to work.
I don't know why the judge made this decision and neither do you--right?
BTW, you are very mistaken that murderers get to make bail in the vast numbers you imagine.
31 - Arch Conservative
NO Dreadful ...the ACLU is biased in favor of advancing an extremist leftist agenda.
"Christian morals are no more arbitrary or taxing on non-believers than those of say socialists, enviro-nazis, or other groups on the left. The ACLU's limited effort to oppose the latter exhibits their bias.
Do you really believe your life will change more if the christians get restrictions placed on abortion than if global warming alarmists pass legislation restricting and taxing carbon usage?"
Bravo to you Doug. I couldn't have said it better myself. According to leftists Christians espousing thier views on abortion, which only a small portion of our society will ever actually have first hand experience with, is more threatening to this nation than socialist leftists that want to tax us all to death, tell us we all must drive Al Gore approved vehichles while he globe trots in a private jet,and enact speech codes in the workplace and the school that prohibit free and honest speech.
32 - Nancy
The bottom line is, that since juvenile hearings are CLOSED to the public (that includes the media AND Bambanek) we DON'T have the info to judge on this case, John's contention to the opposite regardless - unless he did sit in on the case & is leaking sealed info, in which case he should be getting his own bail funds together for violating court privacy records.
33 - John Bambenek
Lee-
I've been in courtrooms, I've seen arraignments... and I've shaken my head when suspects get bail with everyone in that courtroom knowing as soon as they walk out of the courthouse they're going into hiding. I've pointed to cases where infamous criminals got bail. And those were for actual crimes.
Now what this girl did wasn't right, but it certainly isn't a serious crime and she's being treated worse.
If the juv. justice system has different goals that allow for guilt until proven innocent and for radical bail assignments, then I posit it's time to burn down that unjust system.
And yes I do know some of why the judge decided the way he did, and I know why he didn't decide it. For instance, I know there wasn't a home investigation, psych profile of the child and parent(s), and DCFS wasn't involved. No way in that time frame. This judge sat in his courtroom look at her priors and thought that some who broke **curfew** needed to spend much more time in juvy than the law actually allows and he denied bail. (And the mother indicates that there were no legal run-ins for a year before this).
34 - Ruvy in Jerusalem
Welcome to Israel, John. You're getting a look at how a capricious "justice" system works. It sucks, doesn't it? Get used to it. For as long as the US will be a sovereign nation, that is what you should expect - and worse...
TIMBERRRR!!!!!
35 - Zedd
John
This kid had several other run ins with the law.
If she had passed out a paper saying "God hates niggers" at my child's school, I would want her put in juvenile, especially if she had a habit of disregarding the law. She needs to be stopped. She was accosting other students. School is a place for learning and this kid passed out papers that were inflammatory, targeting specific students. You remember how easy it was in high school for someone to be the brunt. They would be beat up in the locker room, ostracized and treated inhumanely. This kid was pushing for that to happen to gay KIDS (someone's kid). Your son is still small, if he ends up feeling as if he's gay, would you want him to go to school in that type of environment?
36 - Vito Andolini
So where does this leave us? From reading multiple sources, and using some deductive reasoning, it appears at first blush that the girls actions, while not being condoned by me, amounts to protected free speech. Why would most of the folks upset about this care, anyway? Many of them don't believe in God anyway.
How or why have we concluded that expressing one's opinion about what God's will is, has now become a hate crime? On one hand we want to keep church and state seperate, on the other, we want to prosecute individuals and deny them the basic right of reasonable bail for expression of an opinion regarding a religious issue. When one says "God hates fags" is that not a religious argument? I may not agree with the argument, but I cannot see how it becomes a non-bailable felony. I defy anyone to make a logical argument to the contrary.
37 - John Bambenek
Nancy-
If you believe I'm fabricating facts, you should take it to the BC editors (I'd obviously recuse myself from that issue). If you believe the Associated Press, the Daily Herald, and others are fabricating facts, you should also take it to them. Specifically the characterization of the judge's decision came from somewhere, I don't think it was journalistic fiction. And the information isn't sealed, it's redacted, there's a difference.
Zedd-
I'm not saying if she committed a crime, she shouldn't do time. I'm saying that denying bail, something that rarely happens in real criminal cases is beyond extreme. If she's a problem in school with accosting people, she can be suspended or expelled (and she was). There are ways of handling these flyers without bring the full force and fury of the American justice system down by throwing her in jail **before trial**, denying bail, and then leaving her to rot. I'm not saying that she didn't do anything wrong, I'm saying denying bail while at this very moment murders and rapists are bailing out, is absurd.
38 - rofl
owned
since i know who this is rofl
39 - vic
It's amazing that this stunt landed them in jail/house arrest. In the past anything of this caliber would have been major amounts of detention, community service, suspension or being expelled from school, not jail. Interested? Read what Christopher Ruddy has to say.
40 - Belly
Whites and especially white Christians are the cause of a lot of the world's problems, so why not allow some hate speech to go their way. (I'm a white, but luckily not a religious lunatic)
41 - DG
"When one says "God hates fags" is that not a religious argument? I may not agree with the argument, but I cannot see how it becomes a non-bailable felony. I defy anyone to make a logical argument to the contrary."
If they had used a racial epithet instead of "fags" would it still have been religious in your view? Your logic is off the mark.
Remember, this was in a school situation where gay and lesbian students rarely feel safe. This wasn't about religion, it was a call to attack.
42 - Closeouts Apparel
Get arrested for a flyer?! What’s with the freedom of speech? I can understand getting suspended, which they should, but arrested is undemocratic.
43 - John Bambenek
No, it wasn't a call to attack, not even the prosecutor believes that (or he would have charged her with that also).
It simply had two boys kissing and said "God Hates Fags". Harassment, yes, Inciting violence, not so much.
44 - Simon
A sign and display like that can only spell Westboro baptist. I'm glad someone finally shut them up.
45 - Webbster
The Westboro Baptist "Church" are beaming with pride. New recruits !
46 - PJ
Whomever handed the girls these flyers should be in jail, but not for free speech, but for child abuse. Any parent who uses their children to push an adult agenda is a horrible parent and should have a psychological evaluation.
47 - 311Kevin
I believe this entire article is flawed in light of the fact that juveniles are not given bail when charged as a juvenile as opposed to an adult. They're detained on a charge, then the judge has sole discretion as to whether the child can be released to some form of supervision or must remain detained, pending the outcome of the legal proceedings. Should the girls have been distributing such material? - probably not, distasteful and uncalled for. Is it protected free speech - I believe so, applying the hate crimes law here goes a bit overboard. Should the girl be detained for this particular charge? - don't think so.
48 - Nancy
Bambenek, you're letting your neuroses get to you. No one accused you of fabricating anything, so calm down. But I DID wonder how you arrived at the info you did (or how your sources did) since juvie hearings are closed. Perhaps the families or the girls themselves are leakers, for all I know; in any event, the information is suspect IMO just for that basic reason & no other, including you. So relax.
49 - asdf
"Within the past year, the girl has been charged for marijuana possession, driving without a license, consumption of alcohol by a minor, possession of tobacco by a minor, trespassing and three curfew violations" - 'nuff said.
50 - JoeVet
More Christians supporting hate. How sad.
51 - John Bambenek
311kevin-
I'm not saying that there isn't some legal reason the judge is relying on, I'm saying it's absurd that just because someone is a minor they can be locked up without bail or put on house arrest simply because they've been, and this is the important word here, accused of a crime.
How does it make any sense that murders and rapists get bail and kids don't? Why do they get treated far worse in the courts than adults?
52 - Travis
My issue with the author of this article is quite simple. You make many claims and act to know every specific of this case when that is obviously far from the truth. There are numerous reasons as to why a judge could and should do what this judge has chosen to do. For instance, the childs mother obviously recognizes that there is an issue with the girls behavior and maybe she openly can do absolutely nothing about it. You don't know anything about the case aside from what has been published and seeing as this is a minor I'm positive there are many facts to this case that you are completely un-aware of. This being said I think that it is quite ignorant and generally rude for you to make so many blatant assumptions and un-founded theories. A very simple rule would have kept you in check I might add.....get all of the facts before making assumptions and accusations.
53 - 311Kevin
Hi John,
Good points; however, the process and outcome between the two systems differ vastly. I'm not sure that the absence of bail for kids is being "treated far worse." Keep in mind that children are never found guilty of a crime; they're found to be delinquent. When one refers to their charges as Class A, B, or C midemeanors and felonies, that's only the case in the adult system. They don't really exist in the juvenile system - the terms are used simply as a point of reference. Essentially, as far as records go, they don't stick - they don't really even matter, some kids figure this out, others don't.
In regard to the bail issue, again these are kids - what kid can afford bail? In the end, the parent would be fitting the bill and that basically defeats the purpose of bail. Further, I wonder if there are contractual issues to consider, since bail is somewhat of a contract: I pay X ammount of $ to get out of jail now, pending the court process, I show up to my hearings, I get some $ back - you can't have a legal contract with a minor.
Why the judge didn't opt to go with the least restrictive means of detention in this case - it's hard telling - if she was already on probation or had priors then those can be taken into account as well even on this new, unique charge.
All in all, kids in the juvenile justice system have the advantage as compared to the adult system. The 1 issue you've identified that points to the contrary is the difference in bail. It's funny, I hear kids say all the time they wished they'd been charged as an adult and sent to jail so they could bond out. Like kids do; however, they fail to see the bigger picture in that they go to jail, they're charged as an adult and risk facing years of their lives in prison while typically, in the juvenile system, the most they'll spend locked up for anything short of rape or murder is a few months.
54 - Dumnezo'
To prison with the religious nuts!
55 - SuckIt
Didn't like the article, the author injected too much of his own stance on this.
"In fact, the judge likely only spent a few moments looking at court documents..." You can't say "in fact" and "likely" in the same sentence. Otherwise you are "likely" full of shit.
"...for an obnoxious high school prank." Really? I thought pranks were funny.
"They are guilty until proven innocent." Didn't the flyers themselves prove that?
God hates you, dude.
56 - Justin
i say, let them distribute their hate propaganda at home! We dont need it in public school, and its great they make an exapmle out of them, let em think about what they've done!
57 - a person
Simply "being a teenager" does not include 13 separate run ins with the law, driving without a license. You are cherry picking facts to try to prove your point.
58 - Bill Clinton
Hmm.
Most of the posters here and John are making judgments based on information that they don't have. How fascinating.
Let's supposed that the judge's information said that this teenager remained unsupervised 12 hours per day.
If you were the judge, what would you do with her?
59 - curiousboyIT
In Italy the director of the school would have sent a note to the parents, no judges involved.
Doing it once would make them so unpopular they would`nt do it again! I would be too tasteless. No law, just good taste! But but americans notoriously lack of it, so they need laws....even for silly occasions.
60 - Dave Nalle
CBT, that's how it would have been here a few years ago too, but our schools have continued an ongoing slide into incompetence and spinelessness and removing authority from teachers and administrators, and this is the result.
Dave
61 - Wes
The ACLU, predictably, said it indicates the struggle between protecting targeted groups and free speech, which apparently means hate speech directed at whites, Christians, or men is a-ok in the ACLU's book.
I love inherent bias in reporting. God hates bias.
Wes
62 - John M
It is only a hate crime if there is a crime being committed imo. What crime did they commit? Oh disorderly conduct? So they have a disorderly conduct hate crime?
Some people believe homosexuality is criminal whether the law says so or not. While I don't agree with this it should be their right to voice their displeasure of such, even in hand-out flyers.
Again in my opinion an individual should have the right to call a gay man a "fag", a black man a "nigger", or a white person a "cracka". Those things are not right, but the government should not tell us how we should think or talk in those circumstances. Let the people decide. Government in this country was not created to take care of the people.
63 - David
And its happening under George Bush.
If it was Clinton you'd blame him(or her) but why aren't you blaming Republican George Bush?
This injustice is happening under a conservative Christian leadership.
64 - godhatesfags!
i don't care about god but i hate fagots. and this is bullshit! FREEDOM OF SPEECH!
get the fuck out of the USA fags!!!
65 - Bill Clinton
John M
Extending your logic, where does government involvement begin?
If I beat you up, is that something the government should get involved in?
How about if I keep you from getting a job?
How about if I burn a cross on your front lawn? (Nobody got hurt did they?)
Think about it.
66 - Heather
The hate crime bills that are currently being discussed don't cover this type of action. They are supposed to allow the federal government to prosecute VIOLENT crimes that can be tied directly to hate or prejudice as hate crimes. Although what these two girls did was ridiculous and insensitive the girls should have been suspended from school and that should have been the end of it. This is only giving bad publicity to a law that was meant to protect targeted groups of people from violent crimes. From everything that I have read, this is an unprecedented use of hate crimes legislation and makes me question our right to free speech. I think these girls are despicable, but they should have never been arrested in the first place...so denying them bail etc. makes a mockery of the justice system.
67 - Crempole Stalwart
God hates. Think on that.
68 - Mike
John M-
Well, let's see...
Beating someone up is assault.
We have laws to protect people from discrimination in the workplace.
Burning a cross in my front lawn is at the very least trespassing.
I disagree with what they said, but let's not toss out the idea of free speech.
Oh, and I'll exercise some free speech here... stop being a pussy and grow a pair. If you really care what people say, then try to change their minds, or ignore them. If something someone says bothers you that much, see a shrink about your insecurities and work on that instead.
Have a nice day.
69 - Ian
blah, blah, blah, blah.
70 - Mike
Woops, meant to address that to Bill Clinton :p
71 - John Bambenek
It's not under George Bush because this girl is being charged under *State* laws, which mean George Bush has precisely 0 influence.
This is being done under Rod Blagojevich, and he's a Chicago Democrat.
And surprise, he's also apparently corrupt.
72 - Daniel
You stupid fucking Americans, we are living in the Twentieth Century, and those girls should go to jail. You backward country of hicks.
73 - Chris
Unfortunately this girl learned her hatred somewhere. More than likely her church and her family. Using Religion as an excuse for hatred is pathetic. If she actually read her bible, she would realize that Jesus hung out prostitutes, tax collectors... So is her religion/church saying that HER savior LOVES WHORES but hates "fags"
Sad that this girl will be growing up to hate more and more people who arent like her, and claim its her religion
74 - Anonymous
1 Corinthians 6:9-11 says ,"What! Do YOU not know that unrighteous persons will not inherit God’s kingdom? Do not be misled. Neither fornicators, nor idolaters, nor adulterers, nor men kept for unnatural purposes, nor men who lie with men, nor thieves, nor greedy persons, nor drunkards, nor revilers, nor extortioners will inherit God’s kingdom."
So I guess he kinda does hate them? So is God a felon to??
:)
75 - SethGecko13
Here's the important part:
"Officials say the fliers targeted a male classmate, who is also a neighbor of the girls. The two girls had apparently been feuding with the boy."
LIBEL IS NOT PROTECTED FREE SPEECH. There is NOTHING about what these girls did that is okay. If they didn't target a specific person with an anti-gay message, that would be one thing - but they were trying to defame a specific person which is flat-out illegal.