Court-approved paddling?

[gc70]

Justice of peace told to stop paddling in court

Judge rules parents can't be given choice of paddling kids or paying fines

McALLEN, Texas - A justice of the peace can no longer give parents the choice of paying a fine or paddling their children in open court for now, a judge ruled Wednesday.

Los Fresnos Justice of the Peace Gustavo Garza was sued by three families who say Garza left them with no real option when he told them they must pay a fine for their children's transgressions or paddle them in open court.

Until District Judge Abel Limas can resolve that case, he ordered Garza to halt the paddling. A trial date has not been set.

The lawsuit was initially brought by the parents of a 15-year-old Los Fresnos girl who appeared in Garza's court in April for skipping school.

Daniel Zurita paddled his stepdaughter with one of the two wooden paddles Garza displays in his courtroom after the justice said it was either that or pay a $500 fine.

Paddling defended
Last week, Garza said offering paddling as an option was lawful and that 98 percent of parents took that choice.

Garza was represented by Cameron County attorney Richard Burst at a hearing Wednesday. A woman in the county attorney's office who did not identify herself declined comment and hung up.

A message left for Garza at his office was not immediately returned.

Plaintiff attorney Mark Rossi said Burst rejected his offer to stop the case if Garza would halt the paddling in his courtroom and apologize.

Garza is "basically turning the courtroom into something more resembling the Jerry Springer Show than a court of law," Rossi said.

Paddling sounds like a reasonable punishment option to me. And it imposes punishment directly on the offender rather than on the offender's parents.

Note that the plaintiff in the lawsuit chose to paddle his stepdaughter rather than pay a fine.

 

[jrfoxx]

Note that the plaintiff in the lawsuit chose to paddle his stepdaughter rather than pay a fine.

Agreed.I dont see how they have a suit here.If the paddling option, which they CHOSE was never offered, they would have been stuck with the standard options of fine and/or incarceration andyway, which was still an option, so whats the problem?

Also, judges get away with some creative "alternative" sentences for people, especially juviniles (like standing on the corner wearing a sign, for example) all the time, and its been ruled ok, so why is this different? they still had a choice...


Oh, I know the problem, somebody wanted to save money by not paying the fine, so they picked the paddling, then figured they could even MAKE money on the deal with alaw suit. Ah, the modern American way.

 

[Derius_T]

If people were allowed to discipline their kids to start with without having to get a court order to do it, then over half of these problems would never surface in the first place.....

 

[Csspecs]

So they chose to beat their kids to save money.... Hmm I would not admit to that in public.