Kevin Marshall's America
Please read the original news article:
Blog post on the Bethlehem Blog
Blog post on Teri Conroy’s “Farm Life” blog
The reaction to this has gotten out of hand. To those commenters:
1. Ding Dong Ditch is older than your grandparents. It actually dates as far back as the 19th Century and is still fairly common.
2. Madeo is going to punish his son. If you’d read the article, you’d all know that.
3. This is all still new and raw. We don’t know that these charges are going to be maintained or if/when the Madeos may decide to drop them.
4. A lot of you are crying “you don’t know what you’d do to protect your children!” while chastising Rob for looking at his bruised and visibly shaken son and deigning to press charges against the man who did it, regardless of the circumstances.
5. I’ll be attacked for saying it (again), but regardless of where it happened, Mr. Van Plew gave chase and was WRONG WRONG WRONG. Not from a moral standpoint, but from a safety one. Under absolutely NO circumstances should you do that, whether the people fleeing were playing ding dong ditch or trying to steal your stereo. That’s not just me saying that, that’s also any police officer. You all cry “you have no idea what they were up to!”, completely disregarding that if this kid did have evil intentions, Mr. Van Slew’s actions would have further put himself and his family in danger. Anybody who knows for certain they would react similarly needs, for their own sake, to re-examine their thought process when it comes to this sort of thing.
6. Every single one of you who suggested Rob’s son should have been beaten worse or shot – what the Hell is wrong with you?
7. As someone else pointed out, kids do dumb things. To suggest that parents – whether it be the Madeos or the hosts of the sleepover – maintain constant mental control over all actions their kids take shows a stunning lack of grasp on reality.
8. Every single one of you who suggested Rob was a bad father clearly don’t know Rob or his family. More importantly, you should be ashamed of yourself.
9. I sincerely regret my initial stance, which was nothing less than a full indictment of Mr. Van Plew’s actions. My reaction was raw and not well thought out, and I need to man up and apologize for it.
10. A kid who plays ding dong ditch isn’t a “hoodlum.” Get some perspective.
Share it!
126 Responses to 10 Important Points in Regard to the Delmar Ding Dong Ditch Dilemma
Leave a Reply
STALK ME
The only thoughts I’m willing to contribute to this whole fiasco (and it is now) is that they were both wrong. The kids for being on the property when they shouldn’t have and the adult for over reacting. Are kids going to do stupid things? Of course, it’s part of growing up…but so is dealing with the consequences of your actions. Did the guy over react? He sure did, but don’t we all sometimes?
A kid who plays ding dong ditch isn’t a “hoodlum” – agreed! Think where the hoodlum reference comes into play is perhaps the obscenity rant with sexual content the kid went on in front of the wife. And perhaps also the knocking / banging on the back door as well….
Kay – You don’t even know that happened, and even then the wording of the accusation itself is pretty vague.
Even still, swearing while somebody’s pinned on top of him doesn’t make the kid a hoodlum. Guilty of bad judgement, yes. But kids who sell s*** on the street and break into cars, THOSE are hoodlums.
1. Ding Dong Ditch is older than your grandparents.
— these kids didn’t ding, dong, ditch. it sounds like they were walking around the property and banging/knocking on front and back doors. maybe they were stealing something? maybe they were vandalizing the property? if he lets them go, he has no idea who is guilty of the crime. by catching the kid, he has direct proof of who was on his property illegally.
2. Madeo is going to punish his son. If you’d read the article, you’d all know that.
— not sure why the victim should be charged with two crimes and the kid gets off scot free. but nobody knows what the parents’ punishment is, but the criminal justice system should also be charging this kid and his friends with a crime. the fact that they are not guilty of anything is a failing of the system.
3. This is all still new and raw. We don’t know that these charges are going to be maintained or if/when the Madeos may decide to drop them.
— the parents shouldn’t have the right to press charges. the 4 kids are guilty (or at least should be) of a crime. i don’t think the father who caught this kid did anything wrong. as others have stated, the father of the kid should bring him over to apologize and make him mow his lawn for the rest of the summer or some reasonable punishment.
4. A lot of you are crying “you don’t know what you’d do to protect your children!” while chastising Rob for looking at his bruised and visibly shaken son and deigning to press charges against the man who did it, regardless of the circumstances.
— imho Rob doesn’t have the privilege of worrying about his son’s well-being. his son did a stupid thing and the victim responded in a reasonable manner. instead of coddling his son and pressing charges, he should be contrite and try to make it right.
5. I’ll be attacked for saying it (again), but regardless of where it happened, Mr. Van Slew gave chase and was WRONG WRONG WRONG. Not even from a moral standpoint, but from a safety one. Under absolutely NO circumstances should you do that, whether the people fleeing were playing ding dong ditch or trying to steal your stereo. That’s not just me saying that, that’s also any police officer. You all cry “you have no idea what they were up to!”, completely disregarding that if this kid did have evil intentions, Mr. Van Slew’s actions would have further put himself and his family in danger. Anybody who knows for certain they would react similarly needs, for their own sake, to re-examine their thought process when it comes to this sort of thing.
— Mr Van Slew is under no obligation to give up chase in this case. And whether or not it is bad judgment from a safety standpoint is his decision alone. if he calls the cops, the kids are long gone and nothing happens. the kids clearly and admittedly broke the law and he was caught. he wasn’t just doing a ding-dong-ditch, they were on multiple parts of the property. If he had stopped, the kids would have gotten away with it. Again, if items were stolen off his property, he would be out-of-luck.
6. Every single one of you who suggested Rob’s son should have been shot or worse – what the Hell is wrong with you?
— being shot is a potential consequence of roaming around on someone’s property. the kids are lucky that they weren’t shot.
7. As someone else pointed out, kids do dumb things. To suggest that parents – whether it be the Madeos or the hosts of the sleepover – maintain constant constant mental control over all actions their kids take shows a stunning lack of grasp on reality.
— i think it is reasonable to expect that the parents of the children who were involved know where their kids are after 10pm. consequently, not knowing is irresponsible.
8. Every single one of you who suggested Rob was a bad father clearly don’t know Rob or his family. More importantly, you should be ashamed of yourself.
— based on what I know about the case, i think pressing charges when his son victimized this man and his family makes him a bad citizen, and sets a bad example for his son.
9. I sincerely regret my initial stance, which was nothing less than a full indictment of Mr. Van Slew’s actions. My reaction was raw and not well thought out, and I need to man up and apologize for it.
— i didn’t see your initial stance, so a link or reference might be helpful, but my initial response, and my response now are unchanged. Mr Van Slew did nothing wrong, and now he is being charged with crimes because of the stupid behavior of a stupid kid — not a prank, a crime.
10. A kid who plays ding dong ditch isn’t a “hoodlum.” Get some perspective.
— again, there was no way of knowing at the time that this was ding-dong-ditch. and, as it turns out it wasn’t…they were on the side, back, and the front of the house. this guy may have thought he was being ambushed by multiple assailants. you have the benefit of hindsight. Mr. Van Slew did not.
I think Mr Van Slew was completely justified and it chills me to know that he may have a criminal record because of the actions of others upon him. These kids won’t learn anything from this. If you don’t want to be detained, don’t sneak around on other peoples property.
And the myth that the police are there to protect you and you can sit back in your home and wait for them to arrive is just that, a myth. The castle doctrine allows you to protect your private property. If he broke a law in doing that, we should be changing the laws, not allowing people to roam freely on your property in the middle of the night.
Kevin – I have not called this child a hoodlum at all – anywhere. I’m simply saying to you that PERHAPS the people that have were doing so because it’s being reported that this was a tad bit more than ding dong ditch!
I was simply stating that perhaps that’s why people are refering to the kid as a hoodlum!
AT no time did I personally refer to him as such.
Van Plew…unless you wrote “Slew” intentionally?
Someone on the radio this morning commented that this story is receiving a lot of play partially because of where it happened and the players involved (basically, a bunch of rich white families living in Suburban USA). I have to agree with that. I don’t think we would’ve heard a word about this if it occurred in Arbor Hill.
Bob - Well said. You are absolutely, 100% right on that.
Hopeful - Thanks (re: Fr. Matt)! I’m sure he would, and I’d encourage anyone with the inclination to do so also. It certainly couldn’t harm matters. And the thing is, peopel aren’t reacting to the story so much as blog posts mentioning the story and other comments.
Amanda - Thanks; fixed.
Kevin, glad you wrote from a different perspective. I like Rob’s blog and was really surprised he’s involved and now feel sorry for both families. I believe both parties wish they could take back their actions from Saturday night. But I also believe most of these posts (and they all same the same thing over and over and over – if it’s already been said, why say it again???) are reacting to what we’ve seen in the media and that often is not the entire story. I’m sure a lot more transpired Saturday night than we are aware of. We can all have our opinion, that’s one of the beauties of this country. But the only parties who know the truth and what really happened are Rob’s son and the homeowner. And if this is the course of action they chose to take, then so be it and we should leave them alone and get on with our lives.
Off topic – nice write up on Father Matt!! I would imagine he’s praying for all parties involved – that’s what we should all do.
Kay – I gotcha. Mis-read the tone.
Phil – Not gonna go through every point, but:
* It was ding dong ditch. Period. All exaggeration and hyperbole doesn’t change that.
* Your points about doing it to recover stolen items are a bit surprising considering your stance on the situation. Personal property isn’t worth the risk one takes for themselves and potentially others when they chase down someone they suspect of committing b&e and/or a violent crime, particularly for someone who’s just trying to protect their family.
* “imho Rob doesn’t have the privilege of worrying about his son’s well-being.” – Regardless of the situation, you’re out of your mind if you think a parent doesn’t have the “privilege”(!) of worrying about the safety and well-being of his or her child.
There are a bunch of emotions that come out when I find that people are reading about this story. It really isn’t black and white, and I implore both parties to look to the cliches to help arrive at a peaceful resolution to this.
1. Boys will be boys – unfortunately, that really only should get the kids so far. Lets say Mr Van Slew was not able to detain or otherwise identify the boy. They would have gotten away scott free, and also have gotten the impression that it’s ok to do stuff like that as long as you get away with it. Lets flip the coin and rather than look at it like that, lets say Mr Van Slew had a guard dog that tore the boy’s arm off. The dog would be put down, no question, but the kid would have a scar, and a rather big scar and would realize that his actions come with consequences. I show the two extremes there, but there has to be a middle ground. Unfortunately, none of us have an idea of the amount of force used by Mr. Van Slew except he and the boy. But at some point, Mr. Madeo should take a look at his kid, realize that the injuries are not major or life threatening, and find some way to consider dropping the charges on Mr. Van Slew. Something about keeping him completely on the hook doesn’t sit well with me in terms of finding that middle ground; it leans far toward the kid or Mr. Madeo (who is responsible for the actions of the underage kid)getting away scott free.
2. Two wrongs don’t make a right – In acting in the heat of the moment, Mr. Van Slew made a rash decision to detain the child. This involved force (all facts). Like I stated above, the amount of force is unknown. Knowing nothing about Mr. Van Slew, you can’t assume that he is an animal for chasing the kid down. Given split second, knee jerk situations like this, none of us know how we are going to react. Lets take an extreme: he shot the kid in the head instead of just tackling him. No doubt, he would be guilty of murder and would go to jail, no matter what the circumstances. Let’s take the other extreme: he let the kid escape. Then the above scenario of the kid having no consequences for his actions comes true. Again, the concept of a middle ground should be explored. Keeping charges on Mr. Van Slew brings charges on his personal character. If he is found guilty, then anybody who meets him can consider him an animal without knowing anything about him. Is this truly fair? I think the Madeo family should look at the extent of their son’s injuries and consider this.
The fact of the matter is, let’s face it, the boy is getting away with what he did. As far as we are all concerned, the boy can either be punished for years or not even spoken to. None of that is any of our business. The matter of the long term effect of this incident on Mr. Van Slew is at the heart of this, and I urge the Madeo family to take everything in and realize that as unjustifyable as Mr. Van Slew’s actions were, they may not be worth the long term effect of bringing charges against the man.
I do think that we have gone way beyond overkill in our characterizations of the son and his parents. (Besides the hoodlum part (which I’m not actually rejecting completely if we are focusing on the act and not the person) the “slow, fat” stuff is out of line. So, in that sense I agree with much of what you are saying. I also think that from a safety perspective – and only from a safety perspective – you are right about how much effort the victim should have put into the chase.
However, I still stay with my initial posts from yesterday, which were along the lines that it’s a horrendous injustice to charge (only) the victim. That’s not changed in knowing that Rob is the parent.
I can, after a day of reflection, empathize with both the victim and Rob in how they reacted. Not ever being in either end of this situation (thank Goodness) I don’t know what adrenalin would have made me reflexively do in response to unknown intruders with a wife and small children at home. Nor do I know how I would have reflexively responded when the police bring home an injured child and not having complete and calm knowledge of all the facts. I do know, that once knowing *everything* I would be more mortified about my son’s actions, apologetic to the homeowner, and giving really hard punishment to my kid. To be fair to Rob, I don’t know that he is not going to punish his son strongly. But, I don’t know that it won’t be a light slap on the hand either. I do agree that it’s unfair to say that what happens indicts Rob’s parenting skills. Perhaps that is only because, while I talk to my kids and pretend I trust them, there’s part of me that still hopes my kid’s name won’t be listed as one of the other three. I don’t think you ever truly know and sometimes there is a lot of hope and prayer involved when you loosen (as you eventually must) the strings on your children. I will say that when my children were 14 (or 15, 16) they had to be inside my house at 10:30 at night…every night. I think they still hate me for that.
I reject the “boys will be boys” argument about what they were doing. Fact is, a) we are not living in grandpa’s time. We are living in a time of home invasions (check out past Bethlehem news in the Spotlight; there is a story about two years ago where there was a home invasion that requiring a response by multiple police cars. I’m sure there were more. We live in a time where actual break-ins, violence occurs in homes and sometimes done by teens. b) Even in grandpa’s time wrong is wrong. There seems to be somewhat of a “sit back and take it” argument because we all did bad stuff when we were young and that it should be an acceptable rite of passage. And somehow, this puts the homeowner in the wrong? Not IMO.
I have a lot of sympathy for Rob and not just because I really enjoy his work. However, I do think that, now that time has passed, he should drop charges and have his son apologize and place the responsibility for everything back where it should be, which is on his son and his son’s friends. That’s the other thing that disturbs me. All the focus here is on the one child (and now his parent) when really it’s 4 equal co-conspirators.
I only know the little bit I read this morning, including a few tweets, but it seems like the whole thing is unfortunate and I’m sure everyone involved wishes it was handled differently.
Seems to me they were both a little right and a little wrong. The key is for adults to be adults and teach kids how to act responsibly.
I missed the comments that suggested the kids should be shot. That’s just awful. In (somewhat rare) agreement with Kevin – just what exactly is wrong with you?!
1)-it is older than all of us….I’m sure we’ve done worse
2)-I hope so
3)-hope he does drop them
4)-my first reaction would be to protect MY son too, and that means believing him, till proven otherwise
5)-agreed that IF this guy did chase the kid, it was kind of dumb…what if it wasn;t a kid at all, but a bad guy with a gun and he turned around and shot the homeowner, and then went in and took care of the family-I would have stayed with my family(heavily armed)to protect them. and then called 911
6)thank God he wasn’t shot…it is a real possibility that he could have been, he should be reminded of that.
7)-Kids know how to play their parents, you can only do your best. I snuck out when I was young.
8)-Don’t personally know Rob, but I am a parent, and we ALL make mistakes
9) I still don;t think any charges should be brought against the home owner…would I have chased and tackled someone,not knowing what the situation was…no, But I am a big believer in the “Castle doctrine”..but not a “shoot” first,ask questions later doctrine
10)-we called it ring and run….not a huge crime, but if there is vandalism going on, that is a crime. Hoodlum, no….dumb kid..maybe..I been there.
People seem to have over reacted, as I did initially. I would have a whole different opinion, if he actually broke into this guy’s house. Something tells me this kid may learn a lesson.
I may have gotten the man’s name wrong as a result of prior misspellings…
Sue – I should note (and that’s a bad on my part for not elaborating) that the comments didn’t say someone should shoot him. However, there is no shortage of comments where one person on Teri’s blog said Rob’s kid was lucky HE didn’t get ahold of him, if you’re on my property you get shot, etcetera. I think it’s one thing to say “thank God Van Plew didn’t have a gun and shoot him.” But to suggest Van Plew would be warranted in using further force, or wording it in such a way that suggests he should have had a gun, is super unsettling, even as a hypothetical.
While I am glad Rob’s kid wasnt “hurt”, I do support the homeowner for trying to stop the intruders/trespassers/ding dong ditchers.
I have had items stolen from outside my house before and when I hear things outside now, Im going prepared. Yes I am prepared to put a slug in your snooping butt, you have ZERO right to be on my property and if I let you run away with my stuff then where does that get me?
How can you charge the homeowner is a case like this? If he caught the kid on his lawn would it be different than if he caught him in the street?
I agree with Mr. Marshall. Well said, sir.
Paulie – I’m at least glad you qualify it with you’re glad Rob’s kid wasn’t hurt worse, because I’m not seeing a whole Hell of a lot of it in the commentary on this issue.
I still take issue with the idea that excessive and lethal force is or would be permissible in this or any circumstance. I guess we’d have to chalk it up to ideological or moral inequivalence, but I could never at any point put enough value on any or all personal belongings I have or could attain to justify the taking of a life.
rob madeo’s son is not a hoodlum or a thug for ding-dong ditching, just a mischievous, bored teenager.
rob madeo on the other hand is a horrendous parent. why? because not only is he refusing to take responsibility over his teenager’s actions (he blames his son, doesn’t publicly apologize to Van Plew for his actions, & presses charges) but he has thrust his son into the public limelight rather then let this situation just blow over (a situation in which his teen was lucky to not have been seriously hurt or had significant charges pressed against him). everyone in town who knows them or has heard of them will now have a negative opinion on them because rob was too stubborn and arrogant to simply have his son apologize and move on.
you say that anyone who criticizes his parenting does not know him and should be ashamed. do you know him? if so, are you just letting your personal feelings get in the way of your logic.
madeo’s son is a teenager and teenagers make mistakes because they don’t know any better. rob madeo is a full grown adult and should know better then this.
What’s with the “kids do dumb things” argument? Look, I understand kids will make mistakes. That’s a guarantee. But choosing to ring someone’s doorbell, and then bang on their windows in the middle of the night is a far cry from stupidity. I side with the homeowner on this one. I would’ve done the same thing. My home is my castle.
Kevin (#16) – Gotcha. You’re right, that’s still awful – and a little ignorant. People may want to consult their attorneys and/or insurance agents before they start using brute force, even on what they believe to be a “trespasser” or “vandal” in defense of their property. Not everything is as clear cut as some may think.
I too am interested in this 2010 version of ding-dong ditch in which the players use profanity and spew crude sexual remarks about the homeowner’s wife who is sleeping upstairs.
Tracy – Those are alleged by Mr. Van Plew to have occurred after he had the young man in custody.
http://www.timesunion.com/AspStories/story.asp?storyID=952723&TextPage=2 – Fourth paragraph on this page.
Kevin–due respect in that your defense is touching, but it doesn’t address the fact that Mr. Madeo’s kid had no right whatsoever to be be out late at night harrassing the neighbors no matter how “inncocently” you try to portray those actions; this neighborhood has, by the accounts of many bloggers on other sites, been subject to middle-of-the-night harrassment, as well as property damage all summer. None of that qualifies as a “prank”.
Additionally, while some may argue that the homeowner over-reacted (and who can say what one would do in the exact situation?) certainly Mr. Madeo, when faced with his child being brought home by the cops for causing problems in the neighborhood late at night, can be accused as well of over-reacting by insisting that charges be brought against the homeowner that his son and his friends were harrassing.
While many of the comments are certainly over-the-top as you point out, the majority also reflect a real frustration with the behavior of many juveniles today and many parents’ (such as Mr. Madeo) rush to defend them and portray them as victims regardless of the bad acts they have been caught committing.
Even if you remove the over-the-top comments, the rest of the crowd overwhelmingly supports the homeowner and not Mr. Madeo’s jump to defend his kid’s actions by blaming the homeowner.
The kid is not innocent here Kevin; he (and his friends) should apologize to the homeowner and in the interest of quelling the outrage, Mr. Madeo should just request that the charges be dropped and move on.
countrygirl - Point taken, I suppose, but I never said the kid didn’t do anything wrong. Certainly a lot of people are jumping the gun on either side (I know I certainly did), and it’s dangerous to assume that comments on a blog are the equivalent of public sentiment regarding the issue. Especially since the easiest thing to do is repeat what a previous person said knowing full well that you don’t have to defend yourself in like-minded company.
Rob admitted in a statement that the child was wrong, he was angry with what he did and that his son was going to be punished. The son is not being let off the hook by the parent. If there’s an issue to be taken with no charges being pressed, it’s with the police and not Rob.
More importantly, the level of the transgression after the fact is being exaggerated to make a point, and both Rob and his son (who again yes did something stupid and wrong) are being demonized so that people – mostly anonymous cowards and hypocrites – can put themselves over and get a cheer on the internet. That’s bulls***, and it’s wrong.
I agree with the fact that kids do dumb things and make bad decisions, but the Madeo’s should NOT press chanrges against Mr Van Plew. Their child was in the wrong and they should deal with it. End of story. They should not charge a man who was defending his own property.
prank or not…if you get caught, you do the crime as the perpetrator, and don’t deserve to be called the victim, the victim is THE HOMEOWNER, not the “mischievous” kid…..how do you know that this is the first mischievous thing these kids have done…..how do you know it will be their last…you don’t…..so pressing charges against the REAL VICTIM sends a HORRIBLE message and to me, doesn’t show taking any responsibility for actions..regardless if they were kids or not….and IF this “mischievous” kid did say he had a knife…then the homeowner had every right to use some force, IMO
Kevin, I take exception with point #7. Adults are responsible for what their children do at all times. The hosts of the sleepover damn well should have known where those kids were and what they were doing. I was a step-mother for 7 1/2 years and I kept close watch on all of the kids in my care, even when other parents thought sneaking out at night was cute and funny.
What if Mr. Van Plew had the “shoot first, ask questions later” mindset of many of the commenters? What if one of the boys was hit by a car while running away from the Van Plew house? Watchful, responsible parents hosting a slumber party would have nipped this in the bud with proper supervision.
I don’t know whether Rob Madeo was the host of the party, but if he wasn’t, I hope he reserves some of his anger for the people who let his son and the others run loose that night. These kids were only 14 and a lot worse could have happened to them. If Mr. Van Plew had not caught Rob’s son, how late would they have stayed out that night? With whom might they have met?
I’ve worked in many places, including a hospital, and I can tell you stories about people who thought their child was safe at a friend’s house only to get a call that their 16 year old daughter ran off with a 22 year old man, or that their son was killed in a rollover because he was riding with another drunken teen.
Ding-dong-ditch may be child’s play, but caring for children and teens is not.
Sorry I’m being so harsh, Kevin. You know I’m a fan. This is just a very personal thing with me.
Certainly not harsh, Roz. I see your point.
Kevin,
You do have some good points, I dont agree with all of them, but you were right about everyone intitial reactions. Some were quite harsh. What I want to know now though, is how about the other kids? Why is just one kid being punished? Are his “friends” getting away scott free? I would be so ticked off if I was this kid getting all the rap at home and in the public. Regardless of what the kid did, I dont think its fair that his family is now in the public eye because of this. Should be be punished? Absolutely! But we should all stop saying nasty things. I know I did say some stuff myself, but now that I have had time to think, he is only 14. How is our angry reaction and saying he is a hoodlum going to help him grow into a mature responsible adult? When most of us got in trouble when we were younger it wasnt publicized all over the internet.
It’s too bad it had to come to this. I am not saying it is their fault, or not their fault, but I wonder if the parents feel terrible now for insisting the homeowner was arrested and sparking the whole public outcry….just some things to think about.
Father should not be pressing charges, I was caught playing this same game as a teen around the same age around 10 years ago. My father gave me a boot in the butt and made me aplogize to the neighbor’s. I understand wanting to protect your child, and maybe Van Plew should not have gone out, but how about as a parent teaching your kids to stay away from the wrong crowd. I’m not saying Madeo is a bad father, but he sets a bad precedent by filing charges. Rob, your child is fine minus a few bruises, punish your child, make him apologize and get over it. Again I’m not condoning chasing these kids, but as others have stated this kid if not caught may not have learned his lesson. Now he’s embarrased himself and his family by all the publicity it has received. At 14 this boy is not yet a MAN, but if he was punished the way I was, hed learn his lesson. The society we live in today is too soft.
Although Roz, going back to your point – these kids are 14 and 15, and I certainly was out with friends on my own at 10 or 10:30pm on weekends. My curfew was probably around 11. If the kids said they were going to walk to the store or whatever, or perhaps snuck out, are the parents still accountable? Are we expecting them to be physically present with them at all times?
This is clearly not a case of ding dong ditch. Period. If you are going to do that, you go to the front door, ring the bell and watch/run away. When you have multiple co-conspirators running around the house banging the back door, ringing the front door (simultaneously?) and visible through windows on the side of the house, you are well beyond what a reasonable person would call ding dong ditch, moving into mental assault territory.
I’m not going to be a victim in my own home/property. It is important to remember that the advice of police and what is legal are two entirely different things. When a robber holds you up at gun point, police advice is to give up your wallet and possessions, but the law does not preclude you from using self-defense. And if I try to catch the guy on my property, am I supposed to ask for ID when I catch one of the criminals? Am I supposed to let him go once I suspect he might be under age? Am I supposed to have thoroughly researched what is legal when someone assaults you on your property?
If my son were involved in this and I heard the sequence of events, there is no way I am pressing charges when my son is the one that caused this man harm and brought mayhem upon his family. And I sure as hell won’t blindly believe my son when he tells me what happened and it disagrees with the victims recollection of events. And if my 14 year old son swears at a grown-up and call his wife names, I haven’t done a good job as a parent and my son will be in a lot of trouble for a very long time.
You are spot on with most of your points aside from points 4 and 5. The act was not that of a hoodlum. The bad-mouthing that apparently took place that’s just disrespectful if that’s the case.
I don’t think the issue would have blown out had the kids just stuck to the front door. I remember getting my a$$ chewed out for playing ring and run in the neighborhood. The issue comes about that they went to the backdoor which did not have any light. I know I’ve walked into my backyard to check to see what’s going on when I have heard something. That instinct to protect your family is heightened.
Point 11 should be that Mr. Van Plew should NOT be charged with sexual harrassment as a few misguided comments on the original post have stated. Much like if a fire takes place you are not going to stop in the middle and say “Hey wait I need to put my pajama pants back on.” For all we know, errr I won’t go there.
I think the failure of the police to hold both parties accountable is going to create a further sense of entitlement among the kids in that community and others. Both families just need to acknowledge their wrongs, shake hands, and go back to life as normal.
I am curious about one thing. Did any of his friends come back for him when this was going on? He may need to find some friends that are there for him through thick and thin.
Mick – “Point 11 should be that Mr. Van Plew should NOT be charged with sexual harrassment as a few misguided comments on the original post have stated.”
Yeah, that insinuation is perhaps the most ridiculous of any that’s come up yet.
Ain’t hindsight wonderful? “It was just ding-dong-ditch.” “They were just stupid kids.” “The homeowner overreacted.”
Well, here’s some other things teens have been up to in the past few days:
Home invasion and attempted murder in Georgia
http://chronicle.augusta.com/news/aiken/2010-07-21/third-teen-sought-home-invasion-case?v=1279762809
Home invasion, assault and robbery in Saskatchewan
http://www.cbc.ca/canada/saskatchewan/story/2010/07/21/home-invasion-teens-charged.html
Home invasion in Michigan
http://www.michigansthumb.com/articles/2010/07/21/news/local_news/doc4c46ccd49c6f9475608127.txt
Home invasion in Kentucky where the homeowner shot the teenage burglar in the head
http://www.whas11.com/news/local/Suspect-shot-in-early-morning-home-invasion-second-suspect-flees-98231449.html
Home invasion in Albany, GA, where the 14-year-old invader shot a man four times
http://www.walb.com/Global/story.asp?S=12849357
CJ – They banged on the back door, rang the front door. Mr. Van Plew found/saw them, and yelled. They ran away. At this point, Mr. Van Plew is obviously aware that it is not an active home invasion, as he gives chase to one of the teens (I doubt he’d give chase if he thought they were inside the house with his wife and children).
In the cases you described, these teens actually got insideof the house. So where exactly is the connection between the links you posted and what happened?
In my opinion, this reminds me of when criminals sue those they were robbing because they sprained their ankle while breaking into the house, or some such nonsense. I agree, look at it from the other perspective, be happy that the child wasn’t hurt worse, and move on. What’s the point of dragging all of this out? Oh yeah, publicity.
As I said, my own kids were expected to be present at home at that age. Maybe we were overly restrictive; I don’t know.
no you don’t have to be present but you are responsible if they somehow sneak out on you and it is on you, so be smart and be alert, even more alert when you are hosting other parents children
DS and Kari – Do they tuck their 14 and 15 year olds in at night and put a silent alarm at the front door to wake them up if it’s open? Do they have someone tail the kids if they leave the house without them?
I’m just struggling to understand how exactly these absolutes work in the real world.
Listen, I understand the eagerness to easily lay a blame at someone’s feet, because it makes sticky and complicated situations seem a lot easier to judge and accept. But that’s not how it works, and I I just don’t think the accusations of lapse in parental judgement holds up against any party here.
Personally, I don’t think the “boys will be boys” and “mischievous” are being thrown out to alleviate responsibility so much as, as I’ve mentioned time and again, to keep this in perspective. As far as their judgement of what the boy did, too many are treating it as a greater offense than it is for reasons I’ve already mentioned.
Sorry, Kevin, but forgot the #30 comment. Parents are accountable at ALL times. It is a parent’s responsibility to know what their children are doing, and when their child does something wrong, they too are held responsible. Look at all these kids that are being charged with crimes, ALONG with their parents. I think the term “boys will be boys” and “mischievous” are thrown around to take responsibility off youth. I stick by what I wrote several weeks ago about a curfew in Colonie. What is there for a young teen to do after dark that’s not “mischievous?” Not a lot. But dismissing the child for doing a “harmless prank” (as it’s been put several times by various people) is simply telling this kid that it’s ok. So, he’s getting punished by mom & dad, as well he should, but this wasn’t simply disobeying his parents, this was causing someone else harm. And in this aspect the harm is “mental anguish” or “terror” as the homeowner put it, though I wouldn’t go that far. I have been scared to death of people simply roaming around my home in the dark. I’m from Texas though, and will protect my life/property to any end. Which I too am glad something more did not happen. Had they chosen the wrong house, there may have been an awful end, with more than just “harassment” charges.
Kevin, it is more than just the ding dong ditch thing. That term makes me laugh every time. If you drive through Haswell Farms, you will see bungee cords holding mail boxes up from destruction. In our neighborhood, south of Haswell, we have a gang of kids too. A few weeks ago, a realty sign was ripped apart at an empty house. I’m sure Rob’s kid is decent. So are the ones in my neighborhood but you get a bunch together after dark… good can go bad. This is an ongoing problem and people are fed up. That is why the blogs are full. Keep in mind that Mr VanPlew didn’t know if this kid was going to break in. He lives in a really nice neighborhood. Nicer than mine. Would I run out in my undies? No. I would really scare off the kids. But this man panicked.
I think of my parents and yours. My mother would never ever believe my side of the story over an authority figure. If I was even around something bad happening, my mother would punish me. I had to apologize and do chores for my neighbor when I got caught mumbling under my breath to her. Not to mention..the story of walking my friend home drunk and my mother punished me. I was sober but in her view ….was there.
I hope you understand the anger down here. I don’t care for the beating remarks but I do hope that Rob considers having this kid apologize and actually gives him a punishment other than taking an electronic toy away. The kid needs to learn to respect others’ property. Mr. Van Plew has to live with it if these charges stick and that could mean his job or ramifications if he were to ever work with children.
Just putting my 2 cents in to my favorite blogger.
It was also only made by someone purporting to be a middle school student.
Sounds like the write knows the kid and / or his family. If both of my doors were being targeted, it kinda changes the entire fiasco. Maybe it wasnt wise to give chase – especially since the ‘other door’ could have been subjected to break in once the man ran after the kids – but he did, and it seems obvious that he was not thinking this was a harmless prank.
I know plenty of people who brandish guns in their home. Thankfully, one did not come into play here. But, lets be serious – the boys were misbehaving, and one of them got an old fashioned butt-whupping. Why is this news?
Pranks can (and do) sometimes go wrong. Be thankful that this is not the case this time.
I’ll quibble with #44 a little. I do think the host parents assume some responsibility when the agree to be hosts. What liability would they have if any of these kids were hit be a car while they were out? Or if they were caught underage drinking in the back yard (or elsewhere)?
Kevin, I couldn’t agree more with your stance on this (I didn’t read the initial stance). I don’t know any kid (especially, in suburbia) who didn’t play ding dong ditch, or throw snowballs at cars (much worse tha the DDD) or something stupid. I can not say that I wouldn’t have done the same as Mr. Van Plew, as I haven’t been in the situation (but surely will be someday). I believe that you should be able to guard your family from harm, and if that’s what Mr. Van Plew was doing then I commend him. Just as if there is an intruder in your home, I believe they should be handled accordingly (shot comes to mind), but I also think that you should face those consequences whatever they may be.
In a purely hypothetical case let’s just say that Mr. Madeo presses charges and Mr. Van Plew fights those charges in a trial. I find it hard that a jury would convict Mr. Van Plew of his crimes (maybe I’m wrong, but I can’t blame him for his supposed reaction). Basically, 2 wrongs don’t make a right here, but I think in this case the long arm of the law is just not needed.
All I know is that when I was caught doing dumbass things (hello Red Foreman) I was more scared of going home than ever having to deal with the authority.
Kevin, you sound to me, no disrespect, someone without kids…..that is a huge factor in giving an opinion, I have a 19 and 17 year old, and no, I don’t know what they are doing 24/7 away from home…but I try hard to find out, and whenever they have people over to the house,…….I DEF. know what is going on and my “job” as a parent is to make sure the other kids spending the night are in good hands so to speak..
BL (I assume you mean #45; which was #44 before another comment got approved)
In terms of liabilities, are we talking legally, ethically, morally? Because I don’t know the legal ramifications, but I do know that if a 14 or 15 year old kid was hit by a car that the parent’s not driving and/or while they’re in the house and the kid’s outside, I wouldn’t hold them responsible. It’s not like they’re letting toddlers wander around unattended, you know?
The alcohol/drinking thing – that’s sticky. Depends on the situation, and much different from this since it’s potentially a lot more involved than kids sneaking out next door for a moment or two.
and I want to piggy-back on of Mick’s comments…when a homeowner feels his home, family whatever, is in danger, they will do anything to protect it and them….and if you find fault with that, that is not rational to me
My point in the comments that I have made is there should not have been charges pressed against the homeowner to begin with.
Now if Rob Madeo didn’t know the whole story or whatever and just saw the state of his kid and went on emotion and pressed charges that’s fine, but they should obviously be dropped now as his child was where he shouldn’t of been.
No, I don’t wish any harm upon children, but if the kid wasn’t on someone elses property being an idiot then none of this would have happened in the first place.
Had my parents of found out I was on someone elses property that late at night, where I shouldn’t of been, doing not one constructive thing but to cause someone else trouble then I would have been made to go back to the house and apologize for what I did and caused.
There wouldn’t have been charges filed by my parents on the homeowner. It actually made me laugh (in disbelief) when I actually saw this story and read that the homeowner was actually being charged with a crime.
And as far as kids doing stupid things, I know that is true and I have done some pretty stupid things when I was younger. The difference between this situation and mine was I was made to be accountable for my actions, my parents didn’t turn to the person that called the cops in the first place and try to press charges on them because they gave me a fat lip.
And to add to the craziness of how out of control the whole story is, the Huffington Post posted it http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2010/07/22/ding-dong-ditch-attack-da_n_655606.html?ref=twitter. Good lord people.
ds – No disrespect taken, and I hope you don’t take any when I say that’s sort of a cop-out in a debate or disagreement. You can make observations, statements, and judgements based on personal observations that don’t have to do with direct experience.
I’d offer that you don’t know everything that’s going on with your kids. And you even concede that point yourself. And that’s exactly my point. Parents don’t ever – and can’t possibly – know everything their kid is up to no matter how hard they try. It’s impossible, and I don’t know anybody personally that this was the case with.
Maybe it’s because I’m only fourteen years or so removed from this kid, so it’s fresher in my mind. Maybe it’s a generational thing. But I think too many parents (and people) look at responsibility and the reasonable scope of parental oversight with rose-tinted glasses.
I just read on News Channel 13 that the Madeo’s have secured a lawyer for their son and are not dropping the charges. Also the homeowner is accused of endangering the welfare of a child and harassment and will be in court in August. No charges against the four kids. THIS IS RIDICULOUS. I feel sorry for the homeowner and now these kids are off the hook and laughing in this hardworking, family mans face! Good standards to set for your kids. They’ll probably sue him too.
Maybe Rob Madeo should use his position as a blogger to publicly apologize to the Van Plews, publicize his punishment for his son AND drop these charges. I’m sorry, but we can’t honestly call Mr. Madeo a good parent for pressing charges against the homeowner when the homeowner is the VICTIM! What does this teach his kid? That there are no consequences for wrongdoing.
Despite all the outrage raised on the TU blogs and elsewhere, the kid still lawyers up and the Madeos won’t drop the charges.
Until we have more information, the outrage will continue and people will continue to maintain that the Mr. Madeo is not a good parent.
not a cop-out…I referenced that because as a parent you are dealing with children and what they do or may do…you also always have to think differently when others kids are under your roof…because you are responsible if something happens
From all of your posts I guess I must assume that living in delmar is on par with living in the middle of South Central LA.. I didn’t realize the extreme violence you all face every day.. And I didn’t realize that the average age of the homeowners was 65 and above since 10pm is “the middle of the night”. Now that i see you do not feel safe in your neighborhood – that kids running across you yard is reasonable cause to assume they just vandalized your home or were ‘this close’ to breaking in to murder you.
Though I doubt that the boy feels like he has the right toehave anyway he wants or feels like he got away with it and is not rewponsible fo rhis actions. That is pure assumption on your part. The next time one of your underage kids is on facebook with beer in their hand – or a joint – or is out past curfew I will recommend PINS. Because if you have ever been on facebook, the 1000’s of kids with thse profiles some of them are your kids or friends of your kids. And you must be horrible parents. Because god knows teenagers always do as their parents say.
I am neither an anonymous coward nor a hypocrite. I wonder why you, and your buddy Rob, embrace the son’s version of the story with barely a question while what the homeowner says is “alleged?”
Kids lying is also older than our grandparents and is still fairly common.
1. Ding Dong Ditch is older than your grandparents. It actually dates as far back as the 19th Century and is still fairly common.
How does this matter? It’s an old prank so that makes it charming? Or are you suggesting not having heard of it before makes one ignorant? Kids don’t do it in my village as far as I know, and I didn’t know anyone who did it when I was a kid, either.
2. Madeo is going to punish his son. If you’d read the article, you’d all know that.
I have read every article, before you started wagging your finger, in fact. Frankly, if the TU wanted to out the parent’s identity, and Madeo jumped right in, then why not reveal what that supposed punishment is? I can already hear the cries of MYOB when essentially this story is being milked for all its worth.
It takes a village to raise a child, right? That shouldn’t just mean entitlements. It should also mean that families are accountable to communities, not that you could be sued or arrested for intervening when a kid is misbehaving.
3. This is all still new and raw. We don’t know that these charges are going to be maintained or if/when the Madeos may decide to drop them.
The fact is that they are currently pressing charges. If that’s met with silence it is doubtful they will make the right decision on their own. Perhaps with the community speaking out the Madeos will do the right thing and drop the charges. (They should also make the kid apologise, but I have a feeling that will never happen.)
4. A lot of you are crying “you don’t know what you’d do to protect your children!” while chastising Rob for looking at his bruised and visibly shaken son and deigning to press charges against the man who did it, regardless of the circumstances.
Regardless of the circumstances!! You have to be kidding me. Son was the catalyst, and actions have consequences. He wasn’t hit by a car while riding his bike.
5. I’ll be attacked for saying it (again), but regardless of where it happened, Mr. Van Plew gave chase and was WRONG WRONG WRONG. Not from a moral standpoint, but from a safety one. Under absolutely NO circumstances should you do that, whether the people fleeing were playing ding dong ditch or trying to steal your stereo. That’s not just me saying that, that’s also any police officer. You all cry “you have no idea what they were up to!”, completely disregarding that if this kid did have evil intentions, Mr. Van Slew’s actions would have further put himself and his family in danger. Anybody who knows for certain they would react similarly needs, for their own sake, to re-examine their thought process when it comes to this sort of thing.
Nice of you to throw away the moral angle. Yes, we all know for our own safety we shouldn’t walk alone at night, and we shouldn’t fight with an attacker over our purses. I would not chase someone who was lurking around my house, nor would I hold them for police, but I am a small woman deep in middle age. Wrongdoers depend on good people doing nothing. Where do you draw the line on blaming the victim? If I do walk alone and someone assaults me, is it so much my fault that the attacker should walk?
6. Every single one of you who suggested Rob’s son should have been beaten worse or shot – what the Hell is wrong with you?
No argument there.
7. As someone else pointed out, kids do dumb things. To suggest that parents – whether it be the Madeos or the hosts of the sleepover – maintain constant mental control over all actions their kids take shows a stunning lack of grasp on reality.
I don’t believe parents can do this, and I also know that even good kids do stupid things. But Madeo is responsible for his own actions, and pressing charges is sending the wrong message to his kid.
8. Every single one of you who suggested Rob was a bad father clearly don’t know Rob or his family. More importantly, you should be ashamed of yourself.
You know what? I deal with young people all the time. Most are wonderful, but a handful are unethical and amoral. They would cheat, lie or low level steal if it served their ends. They are used to having their parents intervene and defend every mistake they make. I suspect it is one reason we see so much professional misconduct in the news – everything from Enron to Jayson Blair to Blagojevich. Often I am the first person whose path they cross that does not let them off the hook lightly after catching them. I do blame poor parenting, and frankly, that is more of a stretch than this case because the young people I reference are young adults, not teenagers. I am most sincerely not ashamed of my attitude – I feel I am doing them, and the world, a service by being the wake up call, and holding them accountable.
9. I sincerely regret my initial stance, which was nothing less than a full indictment of Mr. Van Plew’s actions. My reaction was raw and not well thought out, and I need to man up and apologize for it.
Again, no argument.
10. A kid who plays ding dong ditch isn’t a “hoodlum.” Get some perspective.
Maybe not, but based on Madeo’s reaction of placing blame, I am not convinced it is not a pattern, and that his kid isn’t starting down a bad path. Will the next article or blog in the TU go to great lengths to show junior is an honor student, loved by all, and is kind to babies, puppies and kittens?
Kevin, I am a little confused here. I understand both side of this debate. But what confuses me is Rob Modeo had every right to NOT press charges. So, if this is some harmless game, why press charges? His son was wrong home owner was/was not wrong depending on who you talk to. Kind of like no harm no foul. Now if the home owner physically hurt him to a point of medical treatment being required then we have a different story. But Rob, in his interview sounded very upset at his son. He could have said I do not want to press charges in this matter. My son got what he deserves and end it right there (lesson learned). But NO, now we have a media frenzy, which by the way you and Mr. Modeo are part of, involved in this matter. No sure if you or Mr. Modeo are being completely honest here. Maybe a little media sensationalism?
sandkey – Not sure what you’re implying re: my involvement, but it’s not at a level more than me writing about it. The only details I know if are what’s being reported.
On that matter, what’s being reported is that the police reported several lacerations, a bruise above the eye, a swollen lip, and according to their lawyer it’s said he could end up permanently removing teeth.
I can’t speak on what caused that, and I haven’t really taken a stance on the charges (I’ll let the courts play that out). But it’s understandable to me how Madeo would react badly to seeing his son in that state.
Disgusted – The sad truth is in this day and age everyone lawyers up. Certainly living in Delmar does not mean one is necessarily doing it because they need the money. It’s a sad display of the society we have become.
10 points on writing a blog
1) you have your opinion and others have theirs
2) most people are idiots
3) people will always attack each other on the internet because it is anonymous
4) facts don’t matter, ask the USDA
5) the internet is like alcohol in that it is the cause of and solution to most of life’s problems
6) advertising doesn’t work (Drink Coke)
7) most people are idiots (I feel the need to repeat this because by the time idiots get to point seven they have forgotten point two)
8) grammer and spelling are not imprtant
9) letting what people post on the internet get to you was the main plot point behind jay and silent bob strike back (do you really want to follow in those footsteps?)
10) it doesn’t matter what the response is to these points because i will not check back to see what people have written in response
regards
Kevin, by pressing charges against Mr. Van Plew, Rob is condoning his son’s actions. I think that is what is probably upsetting a lot of people. However, if there was that much physical pain, Rob has every right to be upset. I guess we will have to see where this goes in court. But you gotta admit your blog count must be off the charts today! Right?
Roz – YOU’RE NOT THE BOSS OF ME
sandkey – I’m sure mine is nothing compared to the Bethlehem blog. But that’s not why I wrote this. I wrote this because, yes people, I do know Rob. I don’t know him super well, but more importantly I know others that know him better than I that would never say he’s a bad father.
I got on this, Amanda, not just because it’s Rob. I got on this because hundreds of comments were already posted at that point demonizing Rob and his child for a situation people didn’t even have a grasp of and not even regarding the facts that were being reported in the article. And I can absolutely call people out on the “bad parenting” angle, because I’ve always had a problem with it even if I haven’t had the opportunity to write about it before. Otherwise, what’s the logic? That I can’t bring up any opinion on something pre-existing? Isn’t that sort of like saying I can’t write a blog saying “I support gay marriage” now just because I didn’t write it last week.
Okay everybody, let me put this out there: If I were in that situation, I’d be hard pressed to say that I wouldn’t press charges. I see my son basically looking like he’s beat up, and I’d be out for (metaphorical) blood,
The more I learn about this case, if I’m in that situation I might say that regardless of how I feel about the level of force used by Van Plew, I might think it best for all parties involved to try to work things out with Van Plew and get the charges dropped. Though I’m having trouble reconciling the image of a grown man yelling at the kids in his underwear, seeing them take off, and deciding to target one of them by giving chase and tackling a 120-pound kid on the edge of his property.
Kevin, if the kids snuck out, the slumber party hosts can and should be held accountable. When you have children, you’re responsible for what they do. That’s the law. When you have a child, it’s YOUR job to keep track of them and protect them, even if it’s from themselves. As I said before, when I was a stepmom, I DID STAY UP AND KEEP TRACK OF THEM. I was like a prison warden because I knew what they were up to, having been a teen myself once. I wasn’t like the other parents (including my ex-husband) who thought that things like sneaking out, stealing beer from the fridge and liquor from the cabinet were just rites of passage. I swear to God, I put a lock on our liquor cabinet so that I could have peace of mind when I was at work. (In fact, I believe there are “Social Host” laws that hold parents responsible when they allow their underage kids to have drinking parties because too many kids walk or drive away from these parties and end up dead.)
Kevin, don’t make me come over there and make you behave! ;)
Kevin, I think sandkey could be referring to the fact that in your point #8, you seem to take a more personal stance on it, suggesting you do know Rob and his family. But every single day, news stories are reported where people say, “What a bad parent” or, “How could a parent let that happen?” You can’t go after people for saying those types of things now just because this happens to involve someone you know personally. Chances are, you might not have even have blogged about it.
Interesting how, when it comes to the accusations against your friend’s kid, you take such great pains to point out that “you don’t even know what happened” and the “accusations” are “vague” and “exaggeration” and hyperbole.” Yet when it comes to the homeowner you accept all accusations made by the kid at face value (“somebody’s pinned on top of him”).
Don’t try to pretend that you’re providing some objective viewpoint (“get some perspective”) when you’re really just advocating for your friend and his kid.
The truth as always lies somewhere in between.
Unless the homeowner intentionally injured the kid, as opposed to the kid being injured as the homeowner tackled him, the parents should go to the police and insist that the charges against the homeowner be dropped. (And yes they can do that by saying they do not want their son to testify at a trial.)
The kid owes the homeowner an apology. The homeowner owes the kid an apology for hurting him. The punishment the parents give to the kid is nobody’s business but theirs.
Unfortunately, the parents now have a lawyer involved so a reasonable resolution is now all but impossible.
jt – I think I’ve been more than fair to the homeowner here. I offer a possible reasoning for the swearing because, hey, if we’re going to concede we don’t know what emotions may have been going through the homeowner, what about the kid in question (re: the swearing)? And I say “pinned” because that’s what happened – he was tackled and pinned to the ground. Even the Homeowner admits that much.
Kevin, thanks for your post. I wanted to see your response, especially after reading some of the comments you’ve posted on other blogs. I’m torn on whether or not I should respond, but I think by the time I’m done, I’m going to hit the “submit comment” button. I’m happy to see you change your position, mostly because it’s pretty much the same place I’ve decided to stand on the issue. Everyone in the situation is wrong. You haven’t directly pointed at Madeo’s child. I’m curious if it’s for the same reasons I don’t either: Because it’s so mind-numbingly obvious he shouldn’t have been doing that. Everyone has said it. It’s like responding to a blog post with simply “Me too!”. I think it’s obvious that he did wrong – pointing it out further just makes you Captain Obvious. We’re all focused on Madeo’s kid because he’s the one who got arrested, but what if he wasn’t even doing anything? What if he was that one friend all the troublemakers seem to have – the one who says, “This probably isn’t a good idea….” or the “pansy” who needs to be talked into doing anything that his parents might object to? That friend is usually the one who gets caught. I get guilt by association, but this is a prank, not a murder charge.
I can understand and appreciate your desire to “fight back” upon seeing so many people having such strong opinions backing the homeowner. He’s just a kid, we’ve all done stupid things and while folks may be fed up with the way people are, that does not give them the right to shoot or otherwise harm them. This kid seems to have become a representative for MANY folks on exactly what “kids today” are like. I don’t live in Delmar, I don’t spend a whole lot of time there. But what I *do* know now, based on the opinions of many, is that the kids there are out of control little hellions straight out of “Children of the Corn”. Perhaps we should just starting shooting everyone under the age of 25 in that area, they all seem to be infected.
Overreaching a bit? I hope so, because that’s a downright ridiculous statement. But read the comments on that blog and try to take it from a third party perspective. Perhaps someone in another state who’s looking to move to the Albany area because of relative economic stability, affordable housing and the attractive idea of just how many family owned businesses are still in existence. Madeo’s kid affects the opinion on kids in the community. The commenters’ written responses reflect on Delmar as a whole to the entire world. While folks may want to quell anyone who wants to defend this kid because he did wrong, I think it’s probably important to also note in writing that we don’t think The Death Penalty is an appropriate response to teenagers acting like a bunch of idiots, no matter how fed up we are with kids today.
Another thing I’ve noted is that Our Heoric Homeowner did not give Madeo a chance to punish his child. I’m going to go ahead and give myself a fictional child now and think about what that might be like. I can imagine probably being pretty plssed off at first. It’s MY JOB to punish my kid and no matter what I’ve decided “my job” is, I take it very seriously…whether I’m a cashier at Stewart’s or responsible for paying thousands of people employed in a generic Corporation (both are positions I’ve held within the past 5 years). Was there an overreaction by pressing charges? In my opinion, absolutely. Just because someone else did your job, it doesn’t mean you get to punish them for it. It just means (pardon the pun) they beat you to the punch.
I’m amazed that he is lawyering up and continuing with the charges. It tells me that he wants to get some money out of this. Van Plew lives in a bigger house and has a big job, and Madeo sees a cash windfall coming his way. He wants to cash in so much that he will ignore the fact that his entire Community disgarees with him, and that his son will not glean the proper outcome in light of his dumb actions. Too Bad. An opportunity missed to make the world a better place. Enjoy the $$. You will probably need it to bail him out in the future.
I think the bottom line is why is this turning into the crime of the century IF it was such a harmless game (prank). The players involved here could have controlled this to a point of not even reaching the media. Just another police report. Instead, we have this circus when we could have been discussing the opening day at the track tomorrow, the lightning show and/or power outages last night.
In my opinion, one metric for how good a parent performs is in the message he or she sends to the child. In this scenario, given that the child is not currently dealing with life threatening injuries and that the initial instigation by the child (and his friends), was not in any way expected nor invited by Mr. Van Plew, the Madeo family should seek to send the right message to their child and drop the assault charges. The child should stand to learn a positive message from this situation, and learning that it’s ok to run around and ring people’s doorbells as long as you can get away with it is not a positive lesson.
I refrain from calling Mr. Van Plew a victim because the situation has transcended that. Both parties have been victimized in different ways.
This situation should just end behind a closed door where Mr. Madeo and Mr. Van Plew give each other a simple handshake and mutual apology.
Let the kid learn something. He’s already getting away with what he did.
Because, Kevin, you’re assuming an awful lot based on what you’ve read. You ask us not to believe out-of-hand Van Plew’s accusations of the boy’s behavior, but you have no problem saying “Mr. Van Plew is obviously aware that it is not an active home invasion.” How do you know? Again, this is according to Van Plew, he didn’t know it was a teenager at first. And he didn’t know it was a “harmless prank.” Chasing them might have been a questionable choice, but how was he to know that the other three wouldn’t turn around and surround him? Or that they wouldn’t go back to the house that he was now not guarding. I don’t deny that the cases I listed were different in that they were actual home invasions. What I object to is people assuming what was going through Van Plew’s head or belittling him for not living in the land of nostalgia where no one would dare escalate from ringing doorbells and banging on doors to something worse.
Hi Kevin,
I agree with you on many levels. The people talking about shooting the kid or having their dogs attack him… those people need to move out of family communities because they are sick. I also don’t have a problem with childish prank. As a kid I did them more times than I can count (though based on interviews I’ve watched, it sounds like this neighborhood has more than the average, and lots of vandalism too).
What I do have a problem with is 1) The kid insulting the man’s wife once he was brought inside (as a kid, if you had been caught, would you have done that?) and 2) Rob’s decision to press charges.
Chasing after the kid might not be the best idea, but it’s not illegal to defend your home or chase someone you think stole from you. In the dark, it might be hard to tell how old someone is (it can be hard in the light too). Should you have to ID someone before you defend yourself? If the kid had been 18 or was actually robbing someone, the homeowner would be praised for stopping this person.
I’m sure that when the cops brought his son home the conversation was more than “some guy beat up your kid, want to press charges?”. The cops probably explained that his son had been harassing a homeowner and the homeowner stopped him from running away. His son has a few scratches. You get more beat up playing basketball or riding a bike. Heck, my worst injury ever was from a game of ultimate Frisbee (don’t let the cute name fool it…it can be deadly)
To make it all worse, the full story is out and we haven’t heard anything about Rob dropping the charges. If Rob wanted to do the right thing, he should have dropped the charges already. By not dropping them, he is only making himself look worse. What sort of lesson is this kid going to learn if the homeowner faces jail time and he faces his parent’s “punishment”? Kids are becoming more and more disrespectful and it’s because of situations like this that, that happens.
Just for full disclosure, I do know the Madeos and I don’t think this is their finest hour. They need to teach their kids a thing or two about personal responsibility.
PS. I do find it funny that this news is on 3 or 4 different TU blogs. Ride that gravy train as long as you can!
CJ is on the mark. How many of those who call this innocent Ding Dong childs play, have stopped to imagine themselves at night, in the dark, seeing someone outside their home. This is not a normal site, and it is SCARY. You don’t know what is going on and you are SCARED for yourself and your family, who expect you to protect them. If you don’t stop to internalize those feelings in your analysis of this mess, you are just not aware enough of the real world to comment with any basis. When you know the feeling of a gun to your head, your thinking changes a might. Yes, it’s a good thing that many of us haven’t had that experience, but I have and I know fear better than those who haven’t. Oversimplification of the circumstances is something Lawyers will do at the trial, we don’t need it here.
Kevin – do you agree with Madeo “lawyering up” and not dropping the charges? Just curious
This story is a sad, life-altering one for the parties directly involved in it, and I certainly hope that there is an amicable, private solution reached that holds all parties appropriately accountable for their actions and reactions.
Things like this happen, unfortunately. It’s hard to be a kid. It’s hard to be a parent. It’s sad that this case happened, and that it went public and viral this way. I wish both families well as they try to work through the escalating ramifications of that unfortunate evening.
Personally, though, I find the online reaction on the various TU blogs to be as dismaying as the case itself . . . reminding me, once again, of the most important underlying tenet of contemporary web communications: The Greater Internet F**kwad Theory (LANGUAGE WARNING AT LINK)
Give it a rest, people. The days ahead are going to be challenging enough for the families involved without all of you yammering away like howler monkeys about it . . .
I think it is important to say that both parties made poor (or extremely poor) decisions. Ding-Dong-Ditch? Not cool, especially on a week night, especially if you are at both doors. But, chasing down and tackling the kids, then dragging them back to his houes to wait for the police? SUPER NOT COOL. Yes, Van Plew was mad; yes, he had small children in bed; yes, the initial incident freaked him out. But if he was scared for his childrens safety, then why did he bring the kid INTO his home? That makes no sense. Especially if the kid was threatening violence against him and his family. I don’t know what the answers to this issue should be, but I hope that all parties (even the boys that were not caught and dragged into this media circus) learn an important lesson on how to be a better member of the community and how to interact nicely with the neighbors.
kay – see comment #68
J. Eric – Thank you.
Your defense is evolving to ginning up sympathy for a dad wanting to pursue justice for his poor battered baby.
Since you have admonished us to read the articles, I’m having trouble reconciling this from the 7/22 story “The police report said the Madeo boy suffered a cut on his elbow, bruise over his eye and a bloody lip after being tackled by Van Plew, but the boy refused medical attention” with your statement in the comments above “what’s being reported is that the police reported several lacerations, a bruise above the eye, a swollen lip, and according to their lawyer it’s said he could end up permanently removing teeth.”
Although he refused medical treatment at the scene, his injuries were such that he may lose teeth? And there multiple lacerations in addition to the cut on his elbow? This is in the police report, or the lawyer asserted it? Where is this being reported?
Yeah, I was working from memory, and that was my bad. So one cut, if lacerations is too strong a word.
The police reported the elbow, eye, and lip stuff. The lawyer (as I stated and you quoted) is saying he might lose teeth.
http://wnyt.com/article/stories/S1663852.shtml?cat=300
Maisie, Van Plew brought the kid into the house to hold him for the Police, since he believed that he committed a crime. He knew AT THAT POINT that the kid was young and not a serious threat to his family. What should he have done at that point? Let him go with a stern warning. Get real.
WOW Kevin! Just read this article. FINALLY someone who sees it the way I do, I couldn’t agree with you more on all your points.
You have not been fair to the homeowner. As a blogger, there is no reason you have to be fair – but you should not pretend you are. I don’t see any reference in the news stories to the homeowner admitting to pinning the kid to ground. He admits tackling him. There is a difference.
More importantly, the tone of the reporting by the TU has been slanted in favor of Madeo and his kid’s version.
Are you seriously justifying the kid’s alleged foul-mouthed tirade to his “emotions”? I have 2 teenage sons. If they were in this situation they would have been scared to death – afraid of getting in trouble with the police and with me. There is no way they would swear at the guy. They would sit there quaking in their boots and/or crying. If the kid did in fact respond as described by the homeowner that provides all the insight you need into the kid’s character.
“I don’t see any reference in the news stories to the homeowner admitting to pinning the kid to ground. He admits tackling him. There is a difference.”
So what, he just tackled him to the ground, then immediately got off him and said “get in my house” and the kid just got up and walked into the house?
And yes, I am saying to consider emotions were running high to see why he might have used questionable language. I didn’t say it was right.
Wow so I understand that Rob is your friend/idol.. but PLEASE.. how hypocritical are both you and him. I have no doubt in my mind if Rob Madeo’s kid was not involved both of you would be all over this writing how INCREDIBLY WRONG this is along with the 600+ other people who think so. I now have lost all respect for you as person and will add you to the list of blogs that I WONT READ anymore.
Here’s how ding dong ditch has been played since the dawn of time:
1. One kids dares another kid to ding dong ditch
2. the second kid doesn’t want to do it but says ok
3. second kid walks up to front door and rings door bell (note: second kid is so scared when he rings the door bell that he nearly pees himself)
4. second kid runs like wind so as not to be seen
5. first and second kid hide in a location where they can see the front door but can’t be seen by person who opens door (generally in bushes across the street)
6. door opens and person looks around and wonders why there is no one standing there (note: person at door is not scared for their safety or feeling threatened in anyway.)
7. both kids silently giggle and marvel at how clever they are
8. person goes back inside and door closes
9. kids wait for what feels like an eternity (probably 5 minutes) and leave bushes and go on with their day
The game as it has AlWAYS been played:
never involved surrounding a home with multiple individuals at night;
never involved banging; and
never involved simultaneous banging from the front and the back of one’s home.
Calling what happened the other night ding dong ditch is an insult to the history and essence of the game.
Kate – …well you’ve got me curious. What are the other blogs on the list?
And I actually conceded I’d most likely drop the charges if I were in his situation (see comment #68), and as time goes on I’m swaying more towards that opinion.
11. If you are going to play ding dong ditch, be smart enough to make sure you are not the slowest of your friends in the bunch.
From the WNYT article that Kevin linked to:
“The lawyer describes herself as a family friend and says she wanted to help the Madeos tell their side of the story.”
So the family fried says the boy might loose a tooth, but the police report didn’t mention it and the boy (and I assume his parents) refused medical treatment? Sounds like they are doing some damage control to get people on their side.
Dude, are you friends with Madeo? Or is it only on Facebook. You really should divulge that if you are going to take a strong position in his favor, and against a rather HUGE majority. Don’t you think so
I know and have met Rob on a couple occasions, but am not super close with him.
And I did, earlier in the comments.
Though honestly, I’d rather people try to debate this story than think I’m defending it because it’s Rob.
Because I’m not. If I thought he was in the wrong, I would probably just not post about it at all. But I saw a lot of comments that were jumping guns and going way over the line, which is why I put those points up.
If I had to do it again, I probably wouldn’t. I find myself arguing for people to try to see it from his point of view despite the fact that people simply want to demonize because it’s easier.
Listen, I gain absolutely nothing by taking a position in his favor (which really is more just anti those who are demonizing him since I don’t think I agree with him not dropping the charges). Someone had mentioned blog hits, but whether my blog is read by 50 or 50,000 I still don’t get paid anything particularly since I probably lost more readers than I gained. And it’s not like I gain something from Rob, since my correspondence with virtually every other bloggers here in the Lifestyles section is far more regular and frequent.
Oh, so he DIDN’T admit it – you made that up. Or does your idea of “fairness” consist of drawing inferences and making assumptions about what happened and those inferences just happen to favor the kid’s version? That’s fair.
And yes, I would absolutely assume he tackled the kid, got up without “pinning him to the ground”, took him by the arm and pulled him back to his house. The kid got hurt as they fell to the ground. You, Madeo and now his lawyer want to spin it as an assault on the kid.
Your (and the kid’s) version assumes that this kid had some justification in running away, fighting back or spewing profanity at the guy. You completely ignore the fact that the kid was fleeing from having done something wrong. You and the TU can minimize it all you want. (Its “Ding Dong Ditch” – its harmless – it even has a funny name!) But this guy had two little girls in the house. According to his account – which I’m sure you think is hyperbole and exaggeration -these kids were not just, as the TU describes it, “ringing the doorbell” (maybe they were early trick or treaters!). They were banging on the door and yelling. Stuff like that scares little kids.
As a parent, I absolutely would have gone out there and grabbed them and brought them back in my house and called the police. I would not have pressed charges against the kid but I would want him to think twice before doing stuff like that in the future.
I also love the way the TU portrays it that Madeo “assented” to pressing charges, as if it was the Bethlehem’s PD’s idea and he just went along with it.
There may be other facts that we don’t know about – but based on a “fair” reading of the evidence available, it is an absolute travesty that the homeowner now has to pay a lawyer to defend against these charges.
I have to say, this blog can get pretty preachy sometimes, but it’s rare that a post is this lacking in the credibility and objectivity department.
Speaking of which, I think it is interesting that since the revelation that the kid is Rob Madeo’s son the TU articles have taken on a more slanted tone in their favor. Let’s hope they do drop the charges, because if not I could see the DA trying to railroad Van Plew. Nothing like having the local paper in bed with the district attorney. Unfortunately, it doesn’t seem like the charges are going away though from the latest developments.
Sorry. I said two little girls – the story just says two children – my bad.
@88 – A brilliant post. Thank you.
I feel like I’m on crazy pills. I can’t believe some of the comments I’ve read about this entire situation. No, I take that back – I can’t believe that this is an issue that deserves comments to begin with.
I couldn’t agree more with J. Eric (#78) – it’s unfortunate that this is playing out the way it is. Neither side is right and neither side is wrong; both made mistakes and that’s what people do. The fact that this is being played out publicly is just going to make things THAT much worse and harder for everyone involved, particularly with some of the vicious and personal attacks I’ve seen towards Mr. Madeo.
I think anyone not personally and directly involved in the situation should just step back and relax; take a nap, have some tea, perhaps have a Valium (in the case of a number of malicious comments I’ve seen). A little perspective into how this, exactly, affects your life may go along way (spoiler alert: chances are that it doesn’t at all).
Oh, and coming from a guy who nary a decade ago was a 14-year-old boy: if you’re a parent and don’t think your kids are up to ANYTHING mischievous at all and you don’t have them under surveillance 24 hours a day, you’re either woefully ignorant or irretrievably stupid. Maybe both.
*throws gasoline on fire*
I dont know of many teenage boys that have “sleepovers”. girls hell yes, but boys? Just an old excuse for kids to go out and raise some hell, or sit in and play video games and george michael records.
Kevin, props for the apology however I highly dought it would have been written if it wasnt for Madeo
“Kevin, props for the apology however I highly dought it would have been written if it wasnt for Madeo”
Well of course not. But, on that same token, the comments I was responding to with this post wouldn’t have been written if it wasn’t him either. Chicken or the egg, etcetera.
More importantly: say you have someone you know well enough to like, and have people who have in the past vouched for his character. This story breaks, and he’s being called a terrible parent by hundreds of commenters with many inferring they would have beaten or shot his child in the same situation. What would you do? Not write anything at all (which is what I very nearly did), write this and try to at least defend him from the galley, or jump on the hate train?
Honestly, I only wrote this at all because I thought it was the right thing to do, and because although I don’t know Rob well enough to call him a close friend, I know that he (as well as a lot of others who write the volunteer blogs like J. Eric Smith and others) would do the same for me.
You can say what you want about Rob not dropping the charges. Rob probably should drop the charges. But he’s not a bad parent, that kid’s not a hoodlum, and it’s not as black and white as people are making it out to be. And I have a feeling that there are a lot of people who are just jumping on this train so late in the game because they see so many other people already voicing the same opinion. Like I said earlier, it’s people trying to score points on the internet (WHY?) at the expense of Rob and his kid. And I think that’s wrong.
That said, I think most people are in agreement on here. The details about who’s right, wrong, good, bad, are not that important. It is the unfairness of the outcomes that drives most people wild. If he were to drop the charges, this would all go away very quickly. A few apologies later, and all would be healed.
It’s my hope, DS, that we can still get to that point.
This is getting to be more than it should be. Yes those kids were wrong and should be punished and yes the homeowner has a right to defend his home, but the only people in the wrong are the kids and their parents. How did the homeowner know it was just a kid until he caught him?? AND the kid was threatening him as well Leave the homeowner alone and take care of your kids…if you can
@98 – What you and your fellow “get some perspective” commenters are completely ignoring is the fact that there is a real person facing actual criminal charges as a result of this fiasco. He has endured having his photo and name all over the media, having to explain to his employer what happened, and having to pay a lawyer to respond to these charges.
Not only is the on-line reaction NOT dismaying – it is awesome. The community is rising to the defense of another member of the community who is being unfairly prosecuted. They are also calling out this newspaper on its slanted coverage both in the news reports and on the blogs.
I hope it keeps up until this thing is resolved in Mr. Van Plew’s favor.
As for your final comment, I have 2 teenage sons and I am sure they get up to mischief from time to time. But in this situation, as soon as I satisfied myself that Mr. Van Plew did not intentionally harm my kid but just hurt him in the course of “apprehending” him, I would tell my kid to apologize to Mr. Van Plew for scaring him and his family and insist that the Albany DA drop the charges.
You’re 24 years old. Some day you will have a real life, with a real job, a house, maybe a family. You will then understand that us grownups truly live in fear of people like Mr. Madeo and his lawyer. People who will abuse the legal system and can actually ruin lives in the process. That’s what we’re so upset about. We all know we are one goofy incident with a d*****bag neighbor away from serious problems.
Just a couple of points (and I know I’m probably contributing to what JES is decrying)…
First, I think that the charge that Rob is readying himself to make money off of the victim is likely specious. Given so much emotion and wide-range interest (including, apparently, national attention), I think Rob has little choice but to get a lawyer. Just by virtue of publicity, no matter how this plays out, he will likely need one, even if it is to help him deal with fall-out. At this point, I wouldn’t read more into it than he and his family need a spokesman.
Second, I also wouldn’t read too much into Rob being a TU blogger and the tenor of posts and stories. My read of it is that Rob is not an employee; just a volunteer. I don’t see how the TU has any vested interest in him. (Caveat: Rob has been in the media world for a long time and I don’t know who his friends might be at the TU). I’m always skeptical of TU perspective, but I don’t see how that would apply in this case. I also think that the tenor change is predictable. There is a perceive injustice (yesterday), tons of people pile on, emotions run high and over-the-top verbiage, including insults, becomes common, people then begin to feel bad about all the piling on and have sympathy for the piled on person, support builds and pendulum swings back. That’s a common pattern. Then, the likely outcome tends to be that it all works out or turns out to be less than we originally thought and everyone feels bad mostly about their wasted emotion and time spent.
Having said all that, I’m still thinking of being at the Town Hall at 4PM on Aug 3 to show support for the victim.
looks like there is a second DS….oh boy….
Kevin, thanks for the response.
I understand the bandwagon response and condemnation since it is a fellow blogger who in particular has called out injustices etc… in his past.
However, I would and have done the same, if not worse as the homeowner and had it done to me as a kid. No police, punished by parents some yard work done and end of story. My father never thought twice about pressing charges and fully accepted the consequenses of my actions.
The problem is parents and aparantly Rob do not do that these days. The excuses are endless, bored, teachers, school, bad crowd etc…
Theres no excuse on the parents part, admit it, punish the kid (more than facebook banning) drop the charges and get on with your job as parents.
The reason why so many people are outraged about this is that it touches on several things that annoy people. 1) Right to defend your property was violated (homeowner, who was minding his business not asking to get harassed in the middle of the night) 2) trend of some parents who will believe ANYTHING their children say over other adults such as teachers and then blame the teachers, setting a horrible example for their kids 3) People that are sue happy.. the kid only had minor injuries but wouldn’t be surprised at all if Madeo sues homeowner which is why he may have insisted on pressing charges 4) Bethlehem- this is not politically correct to say but yes there are many rich kids there who feel very entitled and have no fear of getting in trouble because their parents can get them out of it and always do!(I went to school there so I have experienced it).
BOTTOM LINE: Madeo made probably one of the biggest mistakes of his life in pressing charges.. he, his son and his family will feel the backlash in this community for years to come. Karma will probably work itself out..
I actually can understand why you are writing about it, because you quite clearly are friendly with him. And I recall reading a post you made several weeks ago about your desire for fatherhood and fondness for infants. I think that instinct is sparking you to identify with your friend’s situation, and think he is admirably protecting his son.
Babies eventually grow into 14 year olds. They can be a lot more challenging at that age.
DL writes “I don’t see how the TU has any vested interest in him.”
I do. He may not be an employee, but his blog hits, and the traffic generated by this fiasco are revenue generators. Selling newspapers is getting more and more difficult. Plenty of media outlets have folded.
Kevin writes “…it’s people trying to score points on the internet (WHY?) at the expense of Rob and his kid. And I think that’s wrong.”
Just on the internet? The Times Union isn’t capitalizing on the situation? Yesterday’s print story was low on the front page and didn’t include Madeo’s name, but did include this:
Gerstenzang denied that Van Plew threatened the teenager with violence if he tried to escape before police arrived, as the teen allegedly told police in a statement, according to an e-mail from a town insider who calls himself “the Delmar tipster.”
Is the Delmar tipster Madeo?
The story is all “allegedly” about the kid’s behavior, but not the homeowner’s. What happened to innocent until proven guilty? Madeo’s son is not the one facing charges. It also included TMI on the homeowner’s life.
Today’s story was on the front page, above the fold! In fact, it was the top story. Madeo is extensively quoted. The last is “…it’s a very sensitive issue that I’d rather not be discussing.” Than why was he discussing it? Why was he identified in the paper at all?
Madeo may deny it, but he is a public figure. The controversies he has generated are bound to spark discussion and criticism. (He may even be enjoying the attention in a conflicted kind of way.) What I think is wrong is that it is being presented as poor him and his kid, boo hoo, it’s all at his expense, you people are mean.
This is exactly why much of the community is outraged. I am tired of the sense of entitlement, ethical relativism, and lawyering up. This is what I see in his behavior and the justifications for it.
I could not care less about scoring points on the internet – I write for myself, have done so for years, and note this incident to keep track of ethical failings in media, politics and elsewhere because it is a particular interest of mine.
Understood… teenage kids do stupid stuff. I had four who did stupid stuff, but not like this. Nice you should defend the fellow blogger. His kid was at someone else’s house… for a sleepover. Madeo parents are not aware of what their kid is up to. Neither is the host party. Answer me this… what legitimate business did this kid have on Van Plew’s property at 10:30 at night? Do you know anything about the Fourth Amendment? Do you remember that this town has already seen a murder of parents by a son only slightly beyond his teens.
The Madeo kid was lucky. He’s underage and he will get off because he is young.. and stupid… and slow… He could be dead. His parents should think about that. Mr. Van Plew, in his UNDERWEAR, goes after an intruder. But he didn’t shoot the kid or beat him to a pulp. He offered to treat his minor scrapes and bruises, but he wasn’t going to let his only evidence walk off. Bravo, homeowner!
What about the other three delinquents? The real problem in this town is that there are too many kids who have been led to believe that they are privileged, and above the law.
Call it off. Dismiss the charges. Discipline your children, and make it mean something beyond “no texting for the weekend”. Teach them to be respectful and considerate. Find out what they’re doing. Be a responsible parent and you might wind up with responsible progeny.
By the way, Kevin… how old are you?
I am not impressed by the drama of the “bruised and visibly shaken son”. They all look like that when caught red-handed. Tough darts, kid. Suck it up.
ggiuliano and KLK, you guys “get” it, thanks for your insightful comments. Kevin, I have to say your comments on this blog make it seem like you were standing there during this incident. Even the police report discusses the incident differently than you. Last I read in any article, you weren’t present. How can you make a value judgement? Wait, I know…you think the guilty 14 year old is telling the whole truth. Dream on.
And FYI, the correct form of the idiom use is “by the same token,” meaning that there is a flip side.
People are upset because people are sick of dealing with this BS. Kevin, if you had young children that you had to take care of, you would be responding differently. When my kids are fearful to sleep because they don’t understand the difference between pranks and burglars, I have a right to try and stop this whatever way I have to. People don’t think about their actions because most of the time no one gets hurt. But sometimes they do, and I am glad that there is a platform now where our complaints can be heard and understood.
Also, ding dong ditch is sneaking up to the doorbell, ringing, and running. Surrounding a house, banging on the doors, and ringing the doorbell is meant to scare the occupants, and since the occupants included young children, the homeowner had every right to stop it. All you remember is playing pranks yourself. Take a second and remember all the people that had to put up with it and may have been harmed by it.
Way to teach the kid about consequences for his actions, press charges on the victim. A real teachable moment!
People,
Kevin is only addressing this issue to drum up traffic on his otherwise meaningless blog. That’s how these “bloggers” are assessed and rewarded. I would suggest going back to the BETHLEHEM blog and let Kevin answer over there.
I am so goddamned sick of seeing Rob Madeo bashed over this. Kids do stupid things; it’s part of growing up. I never played this particular game, but I’m sure I did other stuff, back in the day. It’s no indication of how Rob raises his kid, and this one incident should not haunt his son for his entire life. I feel bad for the guy, but chasing a fleeing teen and tackling him does nothing- if the kid was running away, he posed no threat.
Don’t ANY of you people have kids that did something stupid? Or done something stupid yourself? Us parents can’t be everywhere all the time. Yes Rob should hold his son accountable, but let’s be real..let’s not go calling CPS on Rob because he didn’t lock his kid up at night.
Funny how all the news reports are quick to assume it was just a prank and now it seems to have turned into a fact. Four kids on someone’s property at 10 PM, at multiple entrances, at the same time sure sounds like attempted robbery or attempted vandalism to me. Calling it ding-dong-ditch is just the easy way for the teen to cover his butt when he got caught. “The homeowner beat him up, he used excessive force”. Cut lip turns into two broken teeth. Yeah right, and a 14 year old doesn’t lie to get out of trouble. The kid getting hurt, while unfortunate, is deserved. Ultimately it was a result of HIS actions.
All you saying “it’s just kids being kids, he’s only 14 years old”. As if the homeowner knew that at the time. Get over yourselves. Sure, 20 years ago life was a lot simpler wasn’t it? Kids actually respected adults and parents weren’t sue happy looking to get a quick buck. Then again, you also didn’t hear nightly news stories about 12 and 14 year olds carrying guns and shooting people either.
As a child, I never would think of going on some stranger’s property, day or night, to harass them by ringing door bells. Why?
Because I was raised with respect and I knew the parent consequences would be more SEVERE than the legal consequences.
My..how times have changed.
It was the damn Nazi shirts that the kid had to wear at soccer that made him do it
http://blog.timesunion.com/madeo/the-eagle-has-landed/94/
@98 – “You’re 24 years old. Some day you will have a real life, with a real job, a house, maybe a family. You will then understand that us grownups truly live in fear of people like Mr. Madeo and his lawyer.”
Yes, because at the age of 24 it’s completely far-fetched that I would have a “real job,” as you put it.
Being in an incident not completely unlike this one as a young teenager I can speak a bit from experience. I was fortunate enough to be able to resolve that situation in a private manner, out of the public spotlight. Unfortunately the families in this case haven’t been afforded the same luxury, but the mob mentality and blood lust that I’ve seen here on the internet is only going to make this harder and more taxing on both sides.
Should the charges be dropped? Probably; then again, I don’t know every detail of the situation. I think it’s that bit of perspective that a lot of people who have taken up their pitchforks in this case are missing. All I’m trying to say is that maybe everyone should calm down with the personal attacks and let these families deal with what is already a terrible situation on their own and not exacerbate the situation.
Although I don’t agree with you on almost every issue.I have to give u props for sticking up for Rob. Who would’nt take a friends side? You have every right to express your opinon on your blog. This is’nt a news article and if you agree with Rob because you know him a little, thats your right.
All I can say is that when I was a kid and we snuck out, you didn’t go banging on peoples doors/windows etc. unless you wanted to see them answer it with a shotgun. My issue is that none of this would have happened had the kids not been stupid. It all goes back to them being responsible for every act that took place after the initial instigation on their part. These kids should be glad no one got really hurt and apologize, take whatever punishment is given, and be done with the whole episode. What we’ll probably see is some type of Hatfield v. McCoy issue tearing up the neighborhood instead. Well done kids!
Phil’s 10-point rebuttal covered most of the cons to this blog, but he missed the glaring meaninglessness that is Marshall’s first bullet point:
What is the relevance of “Ding Dong Ditch’s” lengthy history? Homicide has been around since our grandparents’ time too. How does that excuse it?
DX F – It was in response to all the comments claiming they’d never heard of the game, not to excuse it.
Very well said, Kevin.