Jackson Free Press

When she got up the morning of July 10, 2003, Leslie Berryhill did not know she was going to face the "scariest thing" of her short life. Leslie, who was seven months from her 18th birthday, spent the evening of July 10 watching a movie at her boyfriend's house in Madison. She had a summer-school exam in the morning, so when the movie was over, she called her mom to let her know she was returning to their home on Ridgewood Drive. "That's our rule with cell phones, you always call," says Leslie's mother, Lisa, who always kept close tabs on her kids, which is easy in the age of cell phones. "Twenty minutes later, she wasn't here, and that's how it all started."

'Something Was Wrong'

When Leslie did not arrive within 15 minutes, Lisa wandered why the short trip was taking longer than usual. "I called her cell phone and got her voicemail," she says. "That was odd, because my girls are very good about checking in."

"We knew something was wrong because teenagers never go far from their cell phones," Leslie's father, Bobby Berryhill, adds. Leslie was a national honors student who later graduated near the top of her class. She had never been in any trouble. It was very unlike her to be late or ignore her phone, so the Berryhills began to worry.

As the minutes passed, Bobby got in his car and started driving toward Madison, along the path Leslie would have taken. He picked up her boyfriend and for 30 minutes, the two traveled back and forth every way they could to see if she was broken down by the side of the road.

"I looked in ditches, I looked for trails in the grass where someone might have gone off the road. I stopped anywhere that might be open to see if she had stopped," Bobby says.

Meanwhile, Lisa called Leslie's cell phone over and over again. "She had 31 missed phone calls from me over a two-hour period," Lisa recalls.

With no sign of Leslie or her car at 1 a.m., the Berryhills became frantic. "The only thing I could think of," Lisa begins, her voice breaking and tears welling up in her eyes, "is that she's real tiny, and I said somebody has jumped in the back of her Jeep and kidnapped her and has her behind a building somewhere, because her car was just gone."

"I just had this panicky feeling," Bobby says. "How can I find my baby?" The Berryhills called emergency rooms and various police departments, including Jackson's 4th Precinct, which has jurisdiction over their area. "They acted like I had a delinquent who just wasn't returning my phone calls," Lisa says. "They said they had no information." It was not until after 2 a.m. that the Berryhills finally discovered what had happened to their daughter. She was at the Henley-Brown Juvenile Detention Center in downtown Jackson, where she had been taken for violation of the city's youth curfew because she was out after 10 p.m.

A 4th Precinct officer had arrested her two hours earlier.

'I Was Bawling'

Less than a mile from her home, Leslie was pulled over on Old Canton Road for speeding. "I didn't realize it slows down to 40 there, so I still had my cruise control set to 45," Leslie explains.

It was a routine traffic stop until Jackson Police Officer Wesley Flynt saw that Leslie was only 17. Since it was 12:20 a.m., she was in violation of Jackson's youth curfew ordinance. "He asked me if I knew I was in violation of youth curfew," Leslie remembers. "He said I could go to jail, my parents could go to jail. I asked him if I could just have a warning, and he said there had been enough warnings."

Like many Jackson youths, Leslie had never heard of the curfew, which has been in effect since 1994. "I personally didn't know that at 17 she wasn't allowed to drive home," Lisa says. "We have a friend who's with the highway patrol, and he didn't know there was a curfew."

Flynt ordered Leslie to exit her car and stand at the back of the vehicle. He then frisked her, cuffed her hands behind her back, put her in his police cruiser, and had a tow truck come to take away her car. It had already been towed away when Bobby passed the scene of the arrest a little after 12:30 a.m.

"He put the cuffs on me so hard there were still marks on my wrists the next day," Leslie says. "I was scared out of my mind. I was bawling. I didn't know what to do. I knew my parents would be worried. I was begging him to let me call my parents."

Indeed, Flynt admitted in deposition that he knew Leslie had a cell phone, which Leslie says rang throughout her arrest. Flynt never allowed her to use it nor did he answer it himself to tell her parents she was under arrest.

Leslie was detained at the Henley-Brown Juvenile Detention Center. "They made me strip and take a shower, then put on a blue prison jumper and orange Keds. They locked me into a cell at 1 a.m., and they still hadn't called my parents," Leslie says.

Officers at the detention center mocked Leslie for crying and referred to her as a "baby" and "Britney Spears." More than an hour passed before a call was placed to her parents. "I wasn't mad, I just wanted to go home," Leslie says. "There was a 12-year-old in the next cell. One of the cops told her to stop crying or they would beat her. I was so scared."

At first, the officer from the detention center who told the Berryhills that Leslie was in custody insisted that she would have to spend the night. Bobby, who admits that he was enraged that Leslie had been in custody the whole time they had searched for her, told the officer that keeping her all night was "unacceptable." Eventually, the detention center relented.

At 4 a.m., the Berryhills arrived at the detention center to retrieve their daughter. "Leslie was bawling, hysterical, petrified," Lisa says. "It probably took 10 years off our lives."

A Bunch of Excuses

The following morning, Leslie took her scheduled exam. "She made a 100 on it," Lisa says with pride. Bobby took the day off work and went down to the 4th Precinct to ask why he hadn't been contacted as soon as his daughter was arrested.

"They made a bunch of excuses," Bobby says. "They said they cuffed her because they have to protect their officers. They said they didn't call us sooner because they don't want drama at the precinct! I told them there was a lot of drama at my house last night. It would have been a big thing for us to have known she was alive."

The curfew ordinance itself is quite explicit in how first offenders like Leslie should be handled, which is that the officer is to issue a written warning and direct the youth to go home. It does not allow youths to be arrested on a first offense unless they are being delinquent. The ordinance stresses that parents are to be informed of any detention immediately.

"We tried to talk to people in internal affairs, but they never returned our phone calls," Lisa says. The Berryhills then talked to City Councilman Ben Allen, who represents their ward. He suggested that they come before the council and tell their story.

"Going to city council was a big mistake," Bobby says. "I went there expecting an apology."

"They made her feel like a criminal," Lisa interjects. "They said she got what she deserved since she was speeding!"

City Council President Marshand Crisler disputes that characterization. "They got me wrong," Crisler insists. "I would be remiss if I believed everything anyone who came into a city council meeting said. We didn't have all the facts, so I wasn't going to apologize. Still, I would hate for them to think I was callous."

The city had not yet provided a requested audio tape of the meeting as this story went to press.

Two years after the arrest, and after the Berryhills had brought a lawsuit against the city, Crisler still has basic facts wrong. After taking time to check his notes, Crisler said: "The judge found that the cop did try to contact the parents several times." However, Wesley Flynt admitted in deposition that he never tried to contact Leslie's parents.

After the council meeting, the Berryhills decided to sue. "We never even thought about doing a lawsuit until they acted the way they did," Lisa says. "All we ever wanted was an apology. I want Flynt to apologize to Leslie, to tell her that he was wrong, and she ought to trust the police again. I want the city council to say, 'the police did it wrong, the city didn't follow the procedures we set up.' But the buck doesn't stop anywhere."

Enter Dale Danks

The law moves slowly once it is out of officers' hands, and the Berryhills have never previously discussed in public what happened to Leslie on the advice of their attorney, former Jackson Mayor Dale Danks, who Lisa had known since she was a child. Danks has made a second career out of suing the city, as well as in personal lawsuits, and it was Danks who arrived at the figure of $3 million in damages, which soon ballooned to $8 million for reasons the Berryhills have never understood.

The Berryhills insist that they have no interest in the city's money but that a lawsuit was the only way to get the city's attention. Lisa says they would give any award to charity simply to prove that this is a matter of principle rather than money. In January of this year, federal Judge William H. Barbour Jr. threw out parts of their suit, although several counts remain.

In particular, Barbour determined that Leslie was not falsely arrested because she was speeding. This means that even if her arrest for curfew violation was illegal, she still cannot claim false arrest. Flynt testified that he clocked Leslie going 62 mph in a 40-mph zone, though Leslie says she was only going 45.

"If she was going to lie, why not just lie and say she wasn't speeding at all?" Lisa asks.

The speed at which Leslie was traveling is important, because Flynt has submitted sworn testimony that he arrested Leslie because she was recklessly endangering pedestrians on Old Canton Road by going more than 20 mph over the limit. It is worth noting that Leslie was arrested at 12:20 a.m., when it's likely that there are few pedestrians on Old Canton. More importantly, Flynt never charged Leslie with reckless endangerment.

In other places in Flynt's testimony, he says that he arrested Leslie because she was "delinquent," which would allow her to be detained under the curfew law even if it was her first offense. Yet, that argument has weaknesses: She was a juvenile without any arrest record who was driving home with her parents' permission.

Local attorney Sam Begley, who represented both Flynt and the city in this matter, cited a number of cases from other jurisdictions that found that speeding alone constitutes delinquent conduct. He maintains that the Berryhills' case is without legal merit.

'He Never Even Gave Me a Ticket'

Officer Flynt has been investigated eight times by JPD Internal Affairs and has been disciplined twice, according to depositions he gave in the Berryhill case..

When he worked for the Reservoir Patrol, Flynt submitted sworn testimony that he had once altered a police report minutes before trial in a case before Madison and Rankin County Judge Kent McDaniel. In February 2002, Flynt pulled over Hinds County Circuit Judge Tomie Green, who told the Clarion-Ledger that police treated her rudely. Flynt was accused of providing a false name, telling Green his name was "Officer Hinkle."

During the Internal Affairs investigation of this incident, Flynt failed a polygraph test. He accused the polygrapher of making a racial slur and being biased against him. At his request, Flynt was given a second polygraph. That polygraph found that he was untruthful about the racial slur and giving a false name. In his deposition, Flynt maintained that the polygraphers had conspired against him. Flynt did not respond to a written request for comment.

"He never even gave me a ticket," Leslie says. "When I left (the detention center), there was no paperwork showing what I'd done. It was only later that they started talking about a speeding ticket."

Without a speeding ticket, the Berryhills' lawsuit might have had much higher potential for success, and the Berryhills wonder whether the speeding ticket was added on after the fact to protect the city from the lawsuit. Municipal Judge David Rozier quickly remanded the speeding ticket after her release; Rozier did not respond to requests for comment. The ticket never came to trial, and the Berryhills never even saw a copy of it. Flynt still works for the JPD, on the same patrol he had when he pulled over Leslie.

Begley says Flynt's record is irrelevant. "He was never disciplined over this,"he said. "I absolutely believe that the Berryhills are trying to malign his character because they can't believe (Leslie's) civil rights weren't violated. In the end, the courts and the statutes afford law enforcement officers broad discretion over whether to arrest someone."

'Youth Running Wild'?

Even council members who concur on little else agree on the need for a youth curfew. The council voted this summer to re-authorize the curfew for another year. After the Berryhill incident, the law was rewritten to make it more explicit that officers should call in to their supervisors so that the parents can be contacted immediately. It also makes clear youths should be taken home whenever possible.

"We were trying to keep young people safe and out of harm's way. It wasn't a tool to try to hurt anybody, it was a tool to try to save lives," Councilman Kenneth Stokes says of the youth curfew.

Crisler calls the curfew a noble idea. "All a young person can do at night is get into trouble," he says. "Youth are running rampant out on the street." His only criticism of the youth curfew is that it is not enforced enough. "There needs to be more emphasis on vigilant enforcement. I'm not being critical of the police, you understand, but it has to be a top priority."

In 2003, Councilman Ben Allen was the only member who voted against the curfew. "I don't support it," said Allen in a 2004 Jackson Free Press interview. "The best thing about this curfew is that it is applied equally on all instances, and the worst thing about this law is that it is applied equally on all instances."

Now Allen supports the curfew, in part because provisions protecting home-schoolers have been inserted. "Philosophically, I'm against the curfew," Allen says, "but we have a problem with youth crime. I wish we didn't have to have a curfew, but we have youth running wild on the streets."

Neither Allen nor Crisler offer any evidence to support their claim that youth are running wild, and it is unclear how an ordinance that is applied so inconsistently can reduce crime. Only 25 youths have been arrested this year as of Sept. 22, according to Sgt. Perry Martin of the JPD, down from 124 in 2002.

Stokes, who originally proposed the youth curfew during the height of the crime spate of the early 1990s, is the councilmember who makes the most compelling arguments for support due to problems in his ward. "It's hard to envision now because things have changed, but they used to have open drug markets, where you would have about seven or eight people just standing out here in the open selling crack cocaine. These were children! You had these children at 2 or 3 in the morning selling crack and not going to school. So the curfew was a way to solve a lot of that."

The laws against selling drugs were insufficient because many of the youth involved were not violating the law, he argues. "The way the recruiting would work is that a lot of these kids would start out being lookouts," Stokes says. "They wouldn't be selling drugs or doing anything illegal, but it was a way for them to get involved in the drug trade. I was trying to create an avenue to make young people safe. We didn't want a young person in the wrong place and be endangered."

Stokes seems sincere in his desire to protect Jackson's youth. When it comes to the youth curfew reducing crime, however, he may be misguided.

Curfews Don't Work

Mike Males, a professor of sociology at The University of California-Santa Cruz who specializes in youth issues and author of "Kids and Guns:How Politicians, Experts and the Press Fabricate Fear of Youth," has conducted extensive studies of youth curfews. He says curfews fail to reduce crime. "City administrations and police departments claim that youth curfews reduce crime, but every time we go in and look at their numbers, we see that they're wrong," he says. "For instance, Monrovia, Calif., claimed a big drop in crime due to their youth curfew, but the crime rate fell faster for daylight hours, when their curfew wasn't in effect, than it did at night."

In fact, Males believes that youth curfews may actually increase crime. "Crime has been dropping all over the country," he says, "but the cities that don't have youth curfews have greater reductions in crime than those that do. This seems counterintuitive, but what we've found is that the vast majority of youths are law-abiding. The more law-abiding people, whether they're youths or not, that you have on the street, the safer it is. What youth curfew does is get all kids off the street, which makes the street more dangerous."

Apart from crime itself, Males is deeply concerned about how youth curfews are applied. "It can't help but be arbitrary," he says. "In every city we've examined, there's been vastly disproportionate use against blacks and Latinos, whether you look at their percentage of the population or the percentage of crime. My fear is that people feel safer with curfews because it gets minorities off the streets and into jails."

Some people might argue that the curfew's use against Leslie Berryhill shows that it is not discriminatory—however, such policies often come about as a way to target minority youth, and then cause outrage when applied "equally" against a "good" (often meaning "white") child. A bad policy is a bad policy no matter who it is used against, Males argues.

Even curfew supporters like Stokes have concerns about how it is applied. "I think the discretion that the officers could have used is one element that hurt," Stokes says. "The way we wrote it, you were supposed to take the kid home so you could see what the home life was about. Then you could know whether picking them up was a mistake or not."

Stokes says he is unfamiliar with the details of the Berryhill case, but he does agree that Flynt failed to enforce the law properly. "See, that's a training issue. There should be training going on, and I hope there is," he says.

Even Begley agrees on the need for more discretion for officers. "You can look at (Flynt) individually, or you can look at this sympathetically. ... Officers need to show good discretion, but officers also need discretion from command."

He still maintains, though, that Flynt did nothing illegal.

Sgt. Martin says there is no need to train JPD officers on the youth curfew. "Every officer is given a copy of the curfew ordinance. You don't need to be trained," he says. Unfortunately, this only begs the question, because JPD officers are not required to read the laws they enforce. Flynt admitted in deposition that he had never read the ordinance when he stopped Leslie. In fact, he had not still read the ordinance one year after he stopped her.

A Matter of Trust

The city refuses to release complaints or details of disciplinary action against police officers on the grounds that these are "personnel" matters, despite the clear public interest in having knowledge of and responding to police abuse and misconduct. JPD's Internal Affairs office failed to return calls from the Berryhills regarding Officer Flynt until after they filed their lawsuit.

"I frequently see him going down Old Canton Road at night. It really makes me angry that my tax dollars go to someone who has done these things," Lisa says of Flynt.

Since Melton took office in July, the Berryhills say they have had less response on their suit from their attorney, Danks, who did not want them to tell their story to the Jackson Free Press. In fact, Danks refused to turn over files related to this case to his clients. Danks is both representing the city and suing it in different lawsuits, as well as representing Melton in personal lawsuits. He actively campaigned for Melton's election.

Neither Danks nor Melton's office responded to requests for comment.

Professor Males believes that the curfew is both ineffective and wrong. "Arrest people who are actually committing crimes," he says. "Cut out this prejudice against young people. We're the only country in the world that puts our kids under house arrest at night. … I think it should be sobering to us that we're the only country that does this."

"The youth curfew is an indirect way of dealing with these problems,"Begley says, "and it has an over-inclusiveness that doesn't make any sense. Laws directed at children should be designed to protect children, not to punish children."

Lisa and Bobby Berryhill worry about the lasting effect of Leslie's arrest on her relationship with the police. "If she had car trouble, I really think she would hide in the woods before she'd let a policeman help her," Lisa says. "Any time one's behind her, she gets right on her cell phone and talks to me until he's gone."

Perhaps the best way to measure the impact of the youth curfew is to listen to young people like Leslie. "To this day, I just want Flynt to say that what he did was wrong and apologize," she continues. "Whenever I see a police car now, I always think of the worst."

Previous Comments

ID

78974

Comment

The officer in this instance should have been reprimanded. I am somewhat conflicted regarding the curfew, because I do not believe it is consistently enforced. With that said whenever I observe individuals, both minors and adults alike, loitering, I think the city would be better served if there were an ordinance against the aforementioned!

Author

K RHODES

Date

2005-10-12T19:23:01-06:00

ID

78975

Comment

when he was at the reservoir he pulled me over when i was 17 at 1:30am. Gave no mention of a curfew and even I knew about it.

Author

*SuperStar*

Date

2005-10-13T07:31:51-06:00

ID

78976

Comment

Well I really do appreciate everyone giving me a chance and reading this article. This article represents my family and I alot better than the last article that was written in the Jackson Free Press. In a way I am embarrassed about everything re-surfacing again since it has been forgotten since last year. I don't want people to think I am being a brat and only want money - because I know that I am a well rounded girl, I work hard and go to school - honestly the money is not my main interest. After everything that has happened all I really want and need the most is an apology from everyone who has wrongfully treated me, and also to see some one get what he deserves. This is all I have for tonight - Microeconomics test in the morning - but please everyone post something I would LOVE to read what everyone thinks - nasty or nice - please tell me! Thank you - Leslie Berryhill

Author

LABerryhill

Date

2005-10-14T00:48:22-06:00

ID

78977

Comment

Leslie, You won't hear anything nasty from me. Lawsuits are a wonderful incentive to keep the government and corporations in line; they enforce justice in a way that words can't. So, please, keep on keepin' on. I hope you folks win. Cheers, TH

Author

Tom Head

Date

2005-10-14T01:56:16-06:00

ID

78978

Comment

I will never understand what this incompetent cop was thinking when he did this to this girl and her family. There is a fine line between doing your job properly and being assertive and being absurd. Wes Flynt should be extremely humiliated, as well as JPD for not having enough common sense to know not to hire a person with either such low intelligence regarding his occupation, or just being an asshole, but then again I really would not expect anything better from Jackson's finest. I have to wonder how many people were being murdered, homes were being broken into, and drug deals taking place in the hours that this "chicken" was arresting Leslie, he is obviously too afraid to go after the real criminals, so he violates young people, who are trying to follow the rules, if Mr. Flynt is such a rule follower why was Leslie never issued a ticket? I think if he would have followed procedure and told Leslie about the curfew, and given her a warning, she would never make this mistake again, . I have to also categorize our favorite newly appointed city attorney Dale Danks, great job Dale, drop a case in the middle with no regard or loyalty to a family that has trusted you for the past year....could you and Wes Flynt be related sounds like the both of you have the same morales. I am ashamed to say I am from Jackson Mississippi, no wonder people in other states think such little of us, we have an awful political system, if we can not trust our city officials and police officers who can we trust? Keep up the good work Leslie ! As for officer Flynt it pains me to call you an officer, you should really brush up on your manners, and I hope to God you never have children, and if you ever do, I can only pray that your daughter gets the same wonderful treatment that you gave Leslie!! Best of Luck to the family!

Author

FancyPants

Date

2005-10-14T08:21:29-06:00

ID

78979

Comment

Welcome to the site, Leslie. Your input is more than welcome. I dug out links to the past stories we have done about the curfew, which were more cut-and-dried news discussion, not an in-depth and human story as I've wanted to do in the paper for a long time. Cheers to Brian for doing a stellar job on this story. I'm also posting links to interviews with both Councilman Allen and Stokes, which mention their take (as of then) on the youth curfew. I will easily admit my personal bias on the youth curfew, based on my own past research: They're bad ideas, and they hurt all kids, no matter what your level of affluence, your race, etc. I express this in my editor's note this week as well. And they tend to be used as public-relations ploys by public officials. I do think families should sue in response to them; Tom is right that expensive lawsuits are often the only way to effect needed change; sad, but true. They're vital to our democracy, unfortunately. Here are the links: No Discernible Effect - Sept. 4, 2003 I Was A Teenage Curfew Violator - Jan. 6, 2005 (Note Councilman Ben Allen's comments posted below this story in January of this year. He has since reversed his decision on support of the curfew. It's also worth noting on this one that TC Stein was a nasty troll who has since been ejected from the JFP site.) Interview with Councilman Ben Allen ñ August 2004 Interview with Councilman Kenneth Stokes - August 2004

Author

DonnaLadd

Date

2005-10-14T09:48:09-06:00

ID

78980

Comment

Where is this Larry Flint officer during commute hours when that stretch of Old Canton is transformed into a Mad-Max raceway? I have been flipped off, honked at, and cut off numerous time on that road for traveling AT the speed limit, but never have I seen anyone issued a speeding ticket! 62 mph is closer to the median speed I have observed for Old Canton than 40, so it would not surprise me that a 17 yo driving home at midnight could be clocked at 62. But if that were the case, and the story provides more than enough reason for me doubt Flint, I think a speeding ticket and curfew warning would provided more than enough of a wake up call to give pause to the girls alleged slide into delinquency. Letting her off on the speeding ticket was inexcusable (unless the clock showing 62 was a fabrication.) Any way you spin it, not disciplining Flint (or better yet firing the man. How many strikes?) is simply inexcusable.

Author

pjiv

Date

2005-10-14T09:53:16-06:00

ID

78981

Comment

This story and Kate's photo of Leslie are featured right now on Altweeklies: http://www.altweeklies.com/gyrobase/AltWeeklies/Section?Section=oid%3A134454 (Caution: This will change at some point, so if Leslie's pic doesn't pop up right away, it's changed.)

Author

DonnaLadd

Date

2005-10-14T12:12:06-06:00

ID

78982

Comment

People wonder why young people do not respect police officers and are afraid of them. This is why. They may be young but i believe that they do deserve respevt just like any other person. young people do nto respect police officers because police officers do not respect them. Police officers act like they are all knowing gods when they are around young people. I believe what happened to this young girl is absolutely unacceptable

Author

Ginniep

Date

2005-10-14T12:24:25-06:00

ID

78983

Comment

Major Dad kudos to Bobby Berryhill. The hardest part of reading the story for me was knowing exactly how he felt during those two hours, not to mention learning how his daughter was treated. There is not a step mentioned in the article that I would not have taken (though I may well have have ended up sharing a cell with my daughter well before 4am). People, do not mess with parents! And yes Leslie, you definitely disserve an apology!

Author

pjiv

Date

2005-10-14T12:58:23-06:00

ID

78984

Comment

Agreed, pjiv. This was my favorite quote in the whole thing: I told them there was a lot of drama at my house last night. It would have been a big thing for us to have known she was alive.î Go, dad, go.

Author

DonnaLadd

Date

2005-10-14T13:23:03-06:00

ID

78985

Comment

After reading this article I am glad that I don't live in Jackson Mississippi. It is pathetic that hard working, honest tax paying citizens money goes to pay this guy. This sorry excuse for a cop completely abused his authority as a policeman. I'm sure that Jackson slept alot better knowing that big BAD Leslie had been carted off to jail. And to think that the southern hospitality doesn't end there. She had the privledge of showering on the other side of the city, then wear criminal clothing. It is bad cops like this guy that give Jackson a bad image. Why in the world would corporations want to invest their money in this city. They may think that no one outside the area will read about it, well I did. The Jackson police dept. owes this family a huge apoligy!

Author

KB

Date

2005-10-14T17:41:24-06:00

ID

78986

Comment

Unfortunately, KB, these attacks on youth are not limited to Jackson, Miss. Neither is over-zealous policing. We have immense problems in the suburbs of Jackson with these issues, and towns and cities around the country have institute nonsensical curfews, zero-tolerance policies and drug-testing for kids. Rankin County here recently started a drug-testing program. In fact, suburbs tend to be some of the worst places for these kinds of attacks on children -- especially since the spate of suburban school shootings of the late 1990s. We had HUGE issues with zero-tolerance problems along the Front Range of Colorado when I was there, for instance. That's where my personal reporting about attacks on children first began. However, a big problem we have in Mississippi on child-related issues is that we have had such terrible media coverage of these issues that the state has fallen behind on reversing some of these PR-type decisions that hurt children, and frankly our civic climate in the U.S., in the long run. The media in the state, for the most part, are young people's worst enemies because they don't educate their own reporting staffs on these issues and the larger context and because they do not challenge these ridiculous policies enough. For instance, I couldn't find one decent story in Nexis written by a Mississippi media outlet about the state's zero-tolerance legislation for schools that passed before I came back. I wish I had been here then; I would have raised holy hell. So the answer for not for you, corporations or anyone else NOT to invest in the city (or the suburbs); that would mean that you are just ignoring the people who need the investment to become all they can be. The answer is for good people TO INVEST in the city, and in more ways than with just money. We need to invest in the idea that children are our future, and we to start treating them as such, rather than as criminals until they live up to some mythical standards that many adults themselves did not live up to when they were younger (or even now). Some of the loudest moralists I know who support these kinds of policies themselves smoke weed on the weekends with their buddies and cheat on their wives any chance they get. This hypocrisy is disgusting, and it should not be turned against children, thus teaching them to grow up and be the same kinds of people who don't call for double standards as long as they are not affected. We can do better.

Author

DonnaLadd

Date

2005-10-14T17:57:54-06:00

ID

78987

Comment

This sorry excuse for a cop completely abused his authority as a policeman. One other point. Not to excuse Mr. Flynt's actions, but it is important to realize that he was acting within the law as he saw it (and Judge Barbour agreed with that). It is the LAW that is the problem. It is the people who passed it. And, right now, the entire city council and the mayor supported the recent curfew law as I understand it. When you pass laws that give too much discretion, police officers take advantage of it and mess up. So be mad at the cop if you want -- I can see that -- but don't miss the big picture on this. As I talk about in my editor's note this issue, when "everyone" thinks it's great that wide-net laws are passed so that "bad" kids can be swept up (too often meaning kids of color), then young people like Leslie will get caught up, too. It doesn't really make sense to be outraged that her rights are violated and not to be outraged that young black boys' rights get violated, too. My heart aches for Leslie, and every other child who is caught up in these bad policiesóand their families. They're treated like criminals before any of them become criminals -- and we're real dumbasses to think that such treatment does not, and cannot, contribute to the delinquency of a minor.

Author

DonnaLadd

Date

2005-10-14T18:09:38-06:00

ID

78988

Comment

In response to LADD I can appreciate most of what you said in your response to my post. However there is one incident that stands out in this unfortunate ordeal. That is the simple question of WHY were the parents not notified of what was happening to Leslie. I reread the article again to make sure of the statements that were made. Officer Flynt appears to be less clear on this issue than the Berryhills. I know from experience when my teenage son was stopped for speeding we were called immediately. We were not home to answer the phone so the officer left a message on our machine. With todays availability of phones this should have been one of the first actions taken by the officer. In additions to officer Flynt I think the officers at the station appeared to be neglegent as well. They also took way to much time in contacting the parents. I agree with the bad laws but this ordeal appears to be filled with extremely poor actions from the police officers involved.

Author

KB

Date

2005-10-15T11:23:32-06:00

ID

78989

Comment

Agreed, KB, that the cops took too long to notify the parents. But, understand, that the law allowed them to, as do many vague wide-net laws like this across the country. This is where the real problem lies. Yes, demand that cops be held accountable, but understand that if you do nothing to get these kinds of laws and rules appealed, then at some point they may be used against your kid. That's where the room for abuse (which is too often called "discretion"). Blaming the cop is simply not good enough; you need to get at the root of the problem, which are these too-general laws that target youth, and ultimately a society that has an irrational fear of young people, and "thugs," that makes them go along with these kinds of ridiculous laws and rules ... until the point that their kid is caught up in them. In my research, I've seen it across the country, city and suburbs, with some of the worst abuses in the 'burbs. Middle- and upper-class parents who never worried about these kinds of laws and rules until the point that their family was targeted -- then they got extremely upset about them, as they should be. However, they should have been concerned about young people's rights before then. The sad part is that once these parents have their eyes opened about youth injustice, the usual thing for others to do then is demonize the parents, too. Public officials and school administrators and even other parents will disparage them for thinking their kid is "too good" for the rules that other families go along with. And so on. See the problem? If you want to keep this from happening, go to the root of it and change attitudes of the people around you. ANY TIME you hear someone stereotype kids, no matter what race, correct them. If not, your family can easily end up victim of bad laws designed to entrap "bad" kids as happened with the Berryhills. Bad law is bad for everybody. This is a vicious cycle, it is widespread, and education about it is the first step to changing it.

Author

DonnaLadd

Date

2005-10-15T11:40:02-06:00

ID

78990

Comment

Thanks LADD for responding I just have one last question and you seem to be the right person to ask. If the police officers acted within the law then why did former mayer Dale Danks agree to take this case and keep it for 2 years? For officers acting within the law there were some extremely high numbers mentioned in the article as damages to the family. Wouldn't a seasoned lawyer like Danks have known from the very beginning of the merit of this case. It's worth mentioning that from the article that money was never the familys goal. Lisa is quoted as stating all they wanted was an apoligy. The Jackson police dept. has recieved alot of bad pubicity over this when a simple I'M SORRY could have ended this years ago. I agree that laws are laws but common courtesy can avoid alot of needless frustraton for everyone involved.

Author

KB

Date

2005-10-15T12:36:59-06:00

ID

78991

Comment

KB, I'm truly not disagreeing with anything you're saying, certainly about the common sense and common courtesy point! I'm not the expert on this case; Brian knows more than I do on this one and will likely weigh in. However, to your question in a general way, if a law itself or the way it's enforced is thought to be unconstitutional or otherwise illegal, people can (and should) sue, in order to get it changed, bring awareness, etc. Unfortunately, lawsuits are often the ONLY way to get justice, especially when communities aren't paying close enough attention to the laws that are passed. It's not as if an unconstitutional (or, frankly, stupid) law never gets passed because it might be shown to be bad law later. And high monetary damages are often the only way to bring justice; that's a major reason I believe that most tort reform efforts (to legally limit damages, anyway) are unconscionable. Those decisions should be up to judges and juries, not legislators and the corporations that fund them. But I digress. (Tort reform is another area, however, where people don't understand how wrong it can be until they're the ones who are vicitms, just like with zero-tolerance policies, curfews and the like.) I certainly can't speak for Mr. Danks, but I suspect he did believe in the merits of the case, and it sounds like there were merits -- even if it was tough based on bad law. And, without specifically addressing this case, it is very possible to sue the city for bad law that allowed an officer too much discretion to make bad decisions, as well as for not training the cops on how to deal with the curfew, and so on, EVEN IF the cop did everything within the law. Is that making sense? My point is not to defend the cop here, but I do believe completely blaming the cop, or even JPD, is missing the big picture -- even if they did stupid things. City Council should not get off the hook easily here; neither should members of the public who demonize youth at every turn, thus leading elected officials to pass dumba$$ laws such as these. And, personally I don't think an apology is enough, although I see why the Berryhills and other families would want one, certainly. Dumping curfews is the only acceptable outcome to me. Also, I want to challenge everyone reading this to picture, in Leslie's place, a black minor whose parents aren't being called, either. That situation is just as abhorrent as Leslie's. This case is an opportunity to remember that. Remember the scene in Grisham's "A Time to Kill" when the attorney tells the jury to close their eyes and imagine the scene of the little girl getting raped by grown men, and then tells them to imagine she was white. That was a thought-provoking scene, and the same principles apply here. Leslie's case is a perfect way for examining one's own hypocrisies. The truth is, Leslie should be treated the same as a 17-year-old black boy who is pulled over for speeding and found to be below age. He should not have been treated this way, either, for doing the same thing she was doing. The law shouldn't discriminate; therefore, if you can't imagine it being used in such a way against Leslie, then it's bad law.

Author

DonnaLadd

Date

2005-10-15T15:04:18-06:00

ID

78992

Comment

Thank you LADD for bringing to my attention the bigger picture. I never considered the child or young adult having to deal with unfair judgement of them on a daily bases. This case is a huge example of good old boy policeman mentality. The law in this situaton is loose enough to enable an officer to make poor choices. Officer Flynt all by himself decided that Leslie was delinquent. That statement is the most confusing to me. If the article is correct then not one officer offered any explanation of delinquent behavior that night verbally or on paper. I find it hard to trust officer Flynt comments on the speeding charge the next day, how convenient. After reading about officer Flynts less than stellar history with any police department. I wonder what will become of this case with the obvious conflict of interest with their lawyer of two years Dale Danks. Hopefully someone reading this with the know how and ability to make a difference will want to do something about this issue. Not just for Leslie but for everyone who is mistreated by an over zealous policeman acting within the law. Maybe two years of frustration could be erased if good laws were put in place as a result of this and other similar cases. Thanks again for opening my eyes to unjustice that probaly has gone on way to long.

Author

KB

Date

2005-10-15T18:27:10-06:00

ID

78993

Comment

This is Brian Johnson. Regarding Flynt and calling the parents, he never made any effort to have the parents contacted. I talked to him after this story went to press, and he pointed out that it was against procedure for him to do so, that the detention center was supposed to call. It is worth nothing that after the Berryhill incident, the curfew law was rewritten to require officers to call communications, and they would then call the parents. This still leaves open the question of training, however, since Flynt had only the most general understanding of the ordinance. Everything he knew about it came from roll call briefings, which were obviously not very thorough, since he did, in my opinion, misapply the law. That's an important consideration to keep in mind. Sam Begley (attorney for Flynt and the city) may have made a good legal argument when he maintained that speeding alone constitutes delinquent activity, but it's certainly counter-intuitive. If Leslie had been throwing rocks through windows, taking her to juvenile detention might have made some sense, although you don't need a curfew law to take someone in for vandalism. That's the gratuitous nature of the curfew. If a juvenile is really being delinquent, if they're vandalizing property or selling drugs, those activities are already illegal. I remain utterly unconvinced that these laws are insufficient.

Author

Brian C Johnson

Date

2005-10-16T14:17:30-06:00

ID

78994

Comment

As for Danks, I cannot guess at his motivations, but he clearly thought he had a case or he wouldn't have invested so much time and money in it. It remains to be seen if there will be further outcry over his conflicts of interest. (See "Danks, Danks Everywhere") Regarding apologies, I do think a genuine apology from either the police department or the city council would have averted a law suit in this case. That's speculation, but there's no question that the city handled this recklessly, at least until the suit began. The city seemed reflexively defensive. See the conversation Bobby Berryhill had with precint four and the city council meeting for the most prominent examples. What I think is wrong about that attitude is that anyone can see that the curfew law failed here. Why was the city so slow to respond? Why was the city council dismissive (the JFP is still awaiting a requested audio tape of the meeting in question) when Leslie came to tell her story? After all, they passed the curfew law, which makes it incumbent on them to be sure it works properly. However, the larger point remains is that the curfew law is just wrong. Mike Males has pointed out that adopting Department of Justice guidelines on youth curfews would ban children from public space for all but a small number of hours a week. (Many curfews, including Jackson's, apply during school hours as well.) Why is this necessary? Both Ben Allen and Marshand Crisler assert that our youth are running wild. Why do they think so? After all, it is adults who commit the vast majority of crimes. When youth do get into trouble, it usually comes in the late afternoon, which is about the only time the curfew does not apply. The evidence shows that curfews don't work. Ultimately, the question remains a moral one, because even if curfews did reduce crime, I still think they would be a mistake. Why are adults so indifferent to the rights of children? Is their memory so poor? I think that children should be treated with respect, even when they do make mistakes. This does not mean lax discipline, but it does mean according them trust. The vast majority of kids deserve it, and we are nothing but bullies when we steal it from them.

Author

Brian C Johnson

Date

2005-10-16T14:47:12-06:00

ID

78995

Comment

Good post, dude. I'm enjoying your articles, too, by the way... The $64,000 question, for me, is how we get the curfew laws off the books, or make them completely unenforceable rather than mostly unenforceable. Is this something that falls under the mayor's purview, or can he be overruled by the City Council? If the latter is the case, then how many members already oppose the curfew? And who among the pro-curfew folks might be persuaded to switch sides? Berryhill's story can be HUGE in terms of getting the curfew laws revoked. But we'll need more stories like hers to really get the ball rolling. Cheers, TH

Author

Tom Head

Date

2005-10-16T18:39:17-06:00

ID

78996

Comment

I FEEL THE NEED TO RESPOND TO THIS ARTICLE... I AM ROBERT BERRYHILL, LESLIES FATHER. I LIVED THROUGH THIS ORDEAL, AND IT WAS AN ORDEAL. ANYONE WHO HAS CHILDREN BLACK OR WHITE OR ANY OTHER RACE WOULD REACT THE SAME WAY I THINK. THE HOURS MY DAUGHTER WAS MISSING WERE THE HARDEST OF MY LIFE. I AM OUTRAGED THAT THIS WHOLE EVENT HAPPENED THE WAY IT DID. WHEN AND IF YOU READ THE CURFEW AS IT WAS WRITTEN, MANY LOOPHOLES WERE DISIGNED INTO IT SO THIS VERY THING WOULD NOT HAPPEN. THE CURFEW LAW IS VERY SPECIFIC ON WHAT TO DO FOR THE FIRST OFENSE, THE SECOND OFFENSE AND THE THIRD OFFENSE. THE PART ABOUT JUVENILE DELINQUENCIES WAS NEVER INTENEDE TO INCLUDE SPEEDING, ESPEICALLY 5 MILES OVER THE SEPEED LIMIT. MY DAUGHTER HAS NEVER BEEN IN TROUBLE WITH THE POLICE OR ANY OTHER STATE OR FEDERAL AGENCY. WHEN THIS INCIDENT HAPPENED, I WAS AT FIRST CONCERNED WHEN SHE WAS ONLY 15 MINUTES LATE BUT BY THE TIME WE WERE NOTIFIED BY HE DETENTION CENTER I WAS FRANTIC, I FELT COMPLETELY HELPLESS, I DID NOT KNOW WHAT TO DO OR WHERE TO LOOK. I THOUGHT MY BABY WAS GONE, KIDNAPPED, CARJACKED, RAPED OR DEAD. I COULD NOT BREATHE ALL I WANATED TO DO WAS FIND HER ALIVE AND HEALTHY. I WAS RELIEVED WHEN THE DETENTION CENTER "FINALLY" CALLED I FELT LIKE CRYING I WAS SO RELIEVED. THEN I WAS TOLD THAT I COULD NOT HAVE HER BACK UNTIL THE NEXT MORNING. I THINK I MIGHT HAVE LOST TOTAL CONTROL OF MY TEMPER, IT HAD BEEN A VERY STRESSFUL NIGHT. ANY PARENT WOULD HAVE FELT THE SAME WAY. THEN THE CITY COUNCIL MEETING.... WELL WHAT CAN I SAY I WENT THERE WITH LESLIE THINKING SURELY THEY WOULD SAY SORRY WE HANDLED THIS IMPROPERLY, WELL I WAS IN FOR A SUPRISE WHEN I WATCHED LESLIE WITH TEARS PORING FROM HER EYES RECANT HER STORY, AND THEN TO BE TOLD BY THE COUNCIL PRESIDENT THAT YOUR WERE SPEEDING AND THE OFFICER HAD EVERY RIGHT TO DO WHAT HE DID. THEY TREATED LESLIE LIKE SHE WAS A CRACK DEALER..... I HAD HAD ENOUGH OF THE BS.....WE LEFT THE CITY COUNCIL MEETING EVEN MORE ANGRY AND FRUSTRATED THAN BEFORE. THE REST IS ALREADY BEEN TALKED ABOUT AT LENGHT(THE LAWSUIT). THE MORNING AFTER THIS HAPPENED I WENT TO PR. 4 AND TALKED THE OFFICER IN CHARGE THERE, I ASKED HIM "WHY" DID THEY NOT CALL ME AND TELL ME WHAT HAPPENED AND WHERE LESLIE WAS. AND HE SAID " WE DON,T CALL PARENETS BECAUSE WE DON'T WANT ANY DRAMA AT HE POLICE STATION. HE OBVIOUSLY DOES NOT HAVE ANY CHILDREN OR HE WOULD HAVE KNOWN WHAT KIND OF DRAMA WAS AT MY HOUS STARTING ABOUT 12:30 WHEN LESLIE DID NOT COME HOME.. I HOPE THAT OFFICER OR OFFICER FLYNT NEVER HAS TO ENDURE THE SHEAR TERROR THAT WAS IN MY MIND, THINKING LESLIE WAS BEING HURT AND CRYING "PLEASE DADDY HELP ME !!!!!!!!!!!!" AND I COULD NOT DO A THING TOTALLY HELPLESS. I APPRECIATE ALL THE SUPPORT WE HAVE RECEIVED FROM THIS ARTICLE AND I DO HOPE THAT THIS INCIDENT WILL NOT BE REPEATED WITH ANOTHER INNOCENT FAMILY...THANK YOU FOR YOUR SUPPORT,BOBBY BERRYHILL

Author

Lisa & Robert Berryhill

Date

2005-10-16T23:45:10-06:00

ID

78997

Comment

As someone who works with the juvenile detention center A LOT I have a little different opinion of this law. I work with mentally ill children. Most of them have detention records. I could go into how the curfew law is about keeping children SAFE and is usually a last recourse we have to keeping a CHILD safe. (I just wanted to repeat that to make sure my point was understood. ;) I have had children that wander the streets and this was the only reason we could get them picked up and off the street. Do you know how hard it is to keep a sixteen year old mentally ill child off the streets? HARD. They aren't necessarily doing anything to get themselves hurt, but if they suffer from a conduct disorder or an impulse control disorder it isn't going to be LONG before they are involved in something. It was about keeping them SAFE when they are unwilling to keep themselves safe. For that reason, I believe the law works for certain kids at certain times. But, it must be applied with that meaning in mind. There are certain police who are trained to work with juveniles. They usually have a different mindset about the kids than other police officers. I just wanted to make a point that when I have used the curfew law it has been from a different mind set than "the kid is a criminal". I could go into the huge problem we have with parents using the detention system to PARENT rather than themselves, but I'm sure you don't want to hear that. I don't agree with the police officer in question and how he handled the case. That is absolutely out of control. The curfew law should be about informing parents where their children are and getting them back home. In Hind's County, we have a juvenile detention center and system that is known all over the country as being one of the most advanced. People come from other parts of the country to TOUR our facility and hear about the program. In this case I don't believe it worked. But, I have a tendency to think that has more to do with poor training with regard the the police than anything else. Just wanted to throw my .02 cents in...

Author

Lori G

Date

2005-10-17T07:07:57-06:00

ID

78998

Comment

My co-author on the criminal justice book I'm doing, David Wolcott, specializes in the history of juvenile justice. He recently wrote Cops and Kids, a history of law enforcement affecting juveniles, for OSU Press. I suspect that if I mentioned this to him, he would have told me that curfew laws generally serve this purpose. What we really need, of course, is clear written guidelines that make the implicit purpose of the policy more explicit. Whether or not police would actually do this to kids at random (as Flint did), the fact remains that both this officer and the Jackson City Council felt that the law entitles the city to arrest kids pretty much at random, just because the officer feels like it. I'm sure that was not the purpose of this law. I'd like to think that Melton, who has worked with at-risk youth in Jackson for over 20 years, would be more in sympathy with the rationale for the curfew you've presented here. Bottom line: The city administrators need to wake up, educate officers (and councilpersons, apparently) on the policies that already exist, and see if they need to be narrowed further. Maybe the Berryhill lawsuit will make them do that. Cheers, TH

Author

Tom Head

Date

2005-10-17T10:19:58-06:00

ID

78999

Comment

Mr. Berryhill: Thank you so much for responding here. I completely sympathize with your pain over this, and don't blame you for being very angry at everyone involved -- from the cops to the police to the attorneys. Please feel free to keep posting here about it in order to help facilitate discussion. (One techie hint: when you post again, try not to use all-capital letters; then it's easier to read your comments!) Good luck. Ali, a couple comments, but on deadline here so not much: You wrote: I could go into how the curfew law is about keeping children SAFE and is usually a last recourse we have to keeping a CHILD safe. I can see this to a pointóthat is, that the curfew is useful in SOME casesóbut my questions would be: 1. How often is the curfew law only being used to keep children safe and as a "last recourse" to keeping a child safe? What are the safeguards to ensure that this is happening correctly? 2. How can you call it a "youth CURFEW" for all children if the point is to only use it as a "last recourse" for certain children? That is counter-intuitive to me, and I believe shows the inherent logical problem with the policy. That is, it is a blanket law that allows (and perhaps demands) discretion for the authories to only deal with certain cases. There's a lot of potential for abuse hiding in there, even if the police are trained properly in how to use it, which clearly they haven't been. 3. What is an alternative to a "curfew" for all children under a certain age that would still fill your needs? Yes, it would probably force elected officials to admit that they are picking and choosing with the application of the law, but they clearly are anyhow -- and should be held accountable for how they pick and choose. A general curfew practically begs for abuse.

Author

DonnaLadd

Date

2005-10-17T10:35:51-06:00

ID

79000

Comment

Also, Tom, you mention Mr. Melton. Remember that this is the man who had a minor held down on a car hood in one of his early midnight PR raids and questioned him with a bunch of TV cameras in his face. I'm not thinking Mr. Melton is very concerned about children's rights, or the potential effect of such policing largesse. If he is, he needs to find a way to communicate it. Isn't it true, Brian, that the entire council and Melton supported re-upping the curfew this year with little research to show its benefits -- at least that they would share with the public?

Author

DonnaLadd

Date

2005-10-17T10:37:46-06:00

ID

79001

Comment

Well, yeah. The comparison to sodomy laws is applicable here: In practice, the laws were almost never used except to bolster cases of sexual assault or molestation (where jail sentences tend to be laughably light except when the feds get involved). But should there be blanket laws on the books that criminalize sodomy just because the law was generally used only to punish folks who deserved it? My point to Ali is that it sounds like the law is applied in a good way about 90% of the time, and the issue is how to codify that into law so that it isn't up to the discretion of the arresting officer. Melton did support re-upping the curfew this year. I have mixed feelings about the guy; he has a great history with at-risk youth in this area, but as mayor he does not seem to be terribly sensitive to their needs. I don't know what to tell you, but I think this ties into a larger problem with aspects of his administration and leadership style that he needs to solve. And I think it's entirely within his capacity to do that, but clearly he hasn't done it yet. Cheers, TH

Author

Tom Head

Date

2005-10-17T15:13:14-06:00

ID

79002

Comment

Ali Greggs ñ î I could go into the huge problem we have with parents using the detention system to PARENT rather than themselvesî Yes, Jackson definitely has problems regarding some parents and the lack of accountability toward their kids. î In Hind's County, we have a juvenile detention center and system that is known all over the country as being one of the most advanced. People come from other parts of the country to TOUR our facility and hear about the program." This is very surprising!

Author

K RHODES

Date

2005-10-17T15:52:29-06:00

ID

79003

Comment

K, most people find that surprising about our detention center. Go tour it. They've got a great program over there. Ladd and Tom, as per your comments, I understand what you are saying about blanket laws that seem to have no value against specific circumstances where the law works (that wasn't well said, but I'm tired as hell right now) . Its a hard line to toe. I don't dispute that. I've also never really thought about what they could do to improve it. This is mainly because, when I have used it, it has served its purpose. While dealing with adolescents in Jackson for the past seven years, I have never heard of a case where it was misused in this way. Now, that ain't saying they don't exist. In fact, I bet tons of them exist...they just didn't happen to families with the knowledge or means (such as the Berryhills) to take the city up on it. I've lost a sibling. I understand what goes thru someone's head when a child doesn't come home. A parent shouldn't have to go thru that. I think that should be the main point here. Yes, the cop acted wrongly when he took her in, but the real abuse to me in this case is denying a child a phone call with her parents, or a call to her parents telling them that she is safe and how they can get her back. That is inexcusable. But, its also my own personal reaction to the cop's behavior. (This is where I get in trouble...;)) I believe Begley is right when he says she was being delinquent by speeding. Now, that doesn't go along with rules of "first offense" or "second offense", or whatever...but when it comes down to it...She was out after curfew and was breaking a "law". That's delinquency. Now, its ridiculous, but its the way it breaks down. But essentially, that's a personnel education issue that needs to be handled by the police department. (Just think what other laws they DON'T know.) Its kind of a complicated case that way...;) Basically, I just know the law has been at my disposal as a social worker and it has helped, at times, in solving safety issues with children that had no pending charges but still needed supervision for some reason. Different experiences lead to different opinions...;) Now, I haven't thought about a way to make it better and more effective. This basically because I know very little about the actual "law" itself. So, that might take a while while I read. Let me think on it.

Author

Lori G

Date

2005-10-17T16:36:58-06:00

ID

79004

Comment

Yes, Jackson definitely has problems regarding some parents and the lack of accountability toward their kids. Don't get me started. After a hard day at work, I can get Republican about this. ;)

Author

Lori G

Date

2005-10-17T16:39:21-06:00

ID

79005

Comment

While dealing with adolescents in Jackson for the past seven years, I have never heard of a case where it was misused in this way. Now, that ain't saying they don't exist. I should actually qualify this entire argument with this disclaimer. I work with the population of children that are the ones who are usually up to something. That could color my judgement about the law. I also would like to qualify that statement with saying the children aren't BAD, they have major environmental issues they are dealing with that sometimes pushes them towards the streets for salvation. When I use this law, I use it to save my kids.

Author

Lori G

Date

2005-10-17T16:42:39-06:00

ID

79006

Comment

Damnit. And, I'll explain the "using" the law statement. I've called to have a child picked up for breaking this law. Basically because the kid wouldn't have "stayed" in a facility without trying to run away. If they haven't broken a law we can't get them into somewhere safe (the DC as a last resort) without saying they are "out after curfew".

Author

Lori G

Date

2005-10-17T16:45:46-06:00

ID

79007

Comment

I think Ali has an interesting perspective on this. I would second the questions Donna put to you. My overall comment would be that there is something turned-around about your logic. We need to get some adults with mental illness off the streets and into treatment, but you would never suggest (I hope) imposing an adult curfew to round up those few who need help. Once again, blanket laws like curfews are supposed to eliminate the need for discretion on the part of the authorities by including everyone, but the way they actually work is that they give authorities more discretion. Anyone can be picked up, but picking up everyone is impossible. (There were only 25 arrests for youth curfew violation as of September.) In the case of someone like you, Ali, your discretion might be trustworthy, unless you've been hitting the whiskey. In the case of Flynt, clearly less so. I think the answer is to replace the curfew with something that addresses your needs directly, rather than using a bad law selectively. And yes, the curfew had no opponents on the City Council this time around. Mayor Melton is a vocal proponent.

Author

Brian C Johnson

Date

2005-10-17T19:23:25-06:00

ID

79008

Comment

Brian I agree with you. I think I use the law in a very specific way. In actuality...a way which just happens to benefit my circumstances, but for which the law was not (I would assume) was intended. But, like I said...I'll have to read and think on it. I almost feel like I'm talking out of my ass on this one because I was just recounting my own situations using it....not out of any real knowledge of it other than this article. I just love playing Devil's Advocate. It was beaten into me as a child by a mother who ALWAYS sided with the other person just to see how I could "back my position". She shoulda been a lawyer. ;) That and I don't mind making an ass of myself.

Author

Lori G

Date

2005-10-17T19:38:04-06:00

ID

79009

Comment

I think Ali has an interesting perspective on this. This is like the message board debate equivolent of "She has a GREAT personality..." ;) I like debate for the sake of debate. With that being said, we can round most of those kids up on runaway charges anyway. There are other applicable laws in place that also help pick certain kids up off the street. In essence, I could never argue KEEPING this law because of my reason. But, I do feel the need to interject some dissent every once and a while just to fulfill my hard-headedness quota of the day.

Author

Lori G

Date

2005-10-17T19:50:53-06:00

ID

79010

Comment

I have a question for Brian Johnson in your interview with officer Flynt you spoke with him about why he never contacted the parents. He pointed out to you that it was against PROCEDURE for him to call. The detention center was suppossed to make the call. If you look under Curfews DON'T WORK section of the article the last paragraph, officer Flynt admitted in his deposition that he never read the curfew ordinance. Well how can he comment on the proper PROCEDURE of curfew laws if he never has read them?

Author

KB

Date

2005-10-17T19:58:05-06:00

ID

79011

Comment

May I take a minute to say that I L-O-V-E love Ali's posts in this thread. There are few threads less worthwhile than ones where we know in advance that we're right on every detail, and have nothing to learn. She's given me something to chew on here. Keep on keepin' on. Cheers, TH

Author

Tom Head

Date

2005-10-17T20:19:45-06:00

ID

79012

Comment

First I want to thank Brian Johnson and the Jackson Free press for giving our family, finally a voice and a face.My name is Lisa Berryhill and I am Leslies mom.Up until now we have been advised not to talk to any press or reporters? we did what we were told and it just left the community asking-what and why are these people doing this to our city.well,here is why, I am 48 years old, I was born in jackson,went to school here,attended college in mississippi,married someone from batesville,ms. and made him move back to MY community to practice pharmacy. his father had a store in water valley,but I wanted to raise my family here.I have been blessed,and was able to be a stay at home mom the entire time Our oldest daughter is 27,went to a ms.college and is in hattiesburg,middle daughter did the same and has a great job in downtown jackson.(bonnie,the oldest also has a wonderful job!) leslie attended school in jackson,and is now a sophmore at The university of Mississippi,hoping to do something in medicine.So do you see where I am going here-jackson is my home,my community,where I go to church,shop for groceries,spend my money-where I would love to see my children want to live and raise their families. with that said, let me back up a bit and tell you about my career as a mom.I take my job very seriously. It was not for an easy way out of working. I was the mom at the schools helping with what ever they needed.we had after school activities that lasted until supper,we did sports,cheering you name it- I was ready to be available. I know where my children go, who they are with,what kind of kids they spent their time around.24-7. you can ask around, mrs.B knows everything. our relationships with our girls is honest and open,they are not angels, I do even know the bad things they do too!! our rule was,when you leave this house,we know where you are going-if you change places,fine,just let me know,when you are ready to come home,let me know you are on the road.I parent my children I do not and did not need any outside political do gooders trying to imProve on my technique.so on the night this all happened,we all, know the story, I knew something had to be terribly wrong. we called all the precincts all over town when she was 30 minutes late-no information,but she at this time had already been arrested,they just did not want DRAMA, we called all the emergency rooms,no leslie.My husband and leslies boyfriend were going over every inch she could have traveled,when they walked back in the house at 1:00a.m,There is a panic you get that in indiscribable. I wanted the world to stop so I could find her-I needed daylight so I could see everywhere,I made bargins with God,anything he wanted of me, except my child. Someone had over powered her ,and jumped in her back seat, i thought,taken her somewhere and was torturing her,killing her,she had to be scared and wondering why we could not find her.She is small, and I just prayed ,let her get away, I will fix her and make it o.k..........NEVER did it cross my mind that my community police that I had supported my entire life had any knowledge of this and could put our heats to rest with one phone call. I made 31 calls to leslies cell in hopes that someone would pick up, and tell us where they left her.2:00A.M. NO LESLIE...YOU JUST PACE AND GO NUMB- Finally at 3:00 the detention center called and said"we have your daughter,you can pick her up after lunch tomorrow,when she sees a judge,to see if she is fit to be on the streets! we know how that turned out,with much determination,lots of phone calls we picked our child up in the wee hours of the morning.It was the worst night of our lives,and we will never feel the sense of community we had before again.

Author

Lisa & Robert Berryhill

Date

2005-10-17T21:01:02-06:00

ID

79013

Comment

Sorry I went over the 5000 character limit. I am finally rapping this up! The SYSTEM failed us. Curfew to me ,is like if 10 kids in elementary school are allergic to milk,drink it any way,puke after lunch,so because of those 10 kids,NOONE gets milk-problem solved! this law is sterotyping every young adult into one category,bad and guilty if caught.there has to be a better way of controlling crime. we need help, I do not know what to do. Mr. Danks was so all about the injustice that wasdone to leslie-and now he works for the city?He quit in the middle,must have gotten a better offer,or more press time with mayor melton. I can not figure out this "good ole boy system" jackson has working for them now. no one wants to take the blame for an obvious mistake of judgement. leslie was breaking curfew,go by your own city council rules,and give her the warning. It would have never happened again.the speeding issue,she set her cruise on 45 when she left matthews house,never has lied about it.she was not going 62 or what ever flynt said-we never saw a ticket,but if she needed one issue it and send her home,not detention center for a shower,change of clothes and a test to see if she was mentally stable? that was overkill I BELIEVE. anyway thats my story,I will answer anything anyone wants to know ,or take any good advice anyone has.jackson let my family down,they have put us through Hell,then changed teams and dropped us....what would you do if this happend to your child? thank you for listening to my story,it just feels better finally telling the whole truth. lisa

Author

Lisa & Robert Berryhill

Date

2005-10-17T21:02:10-06:00

ID

79014

Comment

After reading the commentaries on this website it is clear that the curfew laws need to be changed in order to protect the innocent teenagers. As for Flint, I would hope that he would be a man and appologize to Leslie and her family for his treatment towards her that night. Quite honestly, Flint, from the looks of the posts most people think that you were out of line, therefore do the right thing and appologize.

Author

mad

Date

2005-10-17T21:41:59-06:00

ID

79015

Comment

My name is Jenny Berryhill and I am one of Leslie's older sisters. First and foremost I would love to thank everyone for giving the support and respect that my family needed and deserved. I would like to start by saying I am a "fairly" recent graduate of the University of Mississippi. Living in Jackson all of my life I have constantly had to defend it to other people. After graduation, everyone would ask me why would you want to go back to a town that you have lived in all of your life. I would simply tell them that I love it! As my mother mentioned earlier this is the only place we know. This is where we go to church, went to school, and lived our lives. However, after this happened to my family I have a completely different oulook on Jackson. I know it is early in my life to begin thinking about raising a family however, nothing would frighten me more than experiencing with my family what my parents and sister had to go through. I can not fathom how a trained police officer would actually think that this was "standard procedure" or that he would actually get a way with this. I have always had an unquestioned respect for police officers. As a child they are "Heroes" and as teenagers you respect them because they are older and you have to. Respect is a 2-way street. The night that this happened Officer Flynt not only disrespected my sister he humiliated her and insulted her intelligence. Out of the 3 daughters in the family, Leslie by far has the most self-discipline and intelligence in her life. I know that she would never do anything disrespectful to Officer Flynt, and the fact that he FRISKED her and handcuffed her for a curfew violation is merely an insult. I am at the point in my life where I am deciding where to "settle-down" and I can honestly say that I feel much more safe in Ridgeland, Madison, and Brandon. It is sad that when you use the term safe you think safe from criminals, burglary, not from Police officers. I do hope that after all of this is over I will have changed my views on Jackson. Until then the verdict is still out.

Author

JennyB

Date

2005-10-17T21:45:19-06:00

ID

79016

Comment

But Ali, you DO have a great personality. And by saying that, I am not implying that you're ugly. :) To answer your question, KB, the article didn't say Flynt never read the curfew ordinance, only that he still hadn't read it a year after Leslie's arrest. He actually read it right before his first deposition in the lawsuit, according to his sworn testimony. This means he first read it in the summer of 2004. Regarding contacting the parents, he said that if he had contacted the parents, they might have come down and caused a scene while he was arresting her. I can understand his concern, but it mirrors Precint 4's statement that they don't want drama down at the precinct. In other words, any inconvenience to the police far outweighs any inconvenience to parents. This default attitude on the part of the police is precisely why we limit their authority and discretion through well-crafted laws. The curfew is not well-crafted, and so it falls back on the discretion of officers, with disastrous results in this case. I'll leave others to comment on the posts by Lisa and Jenny, since I've talked to Lisa at length, except for one thing. It is certainly not for me to tell you how you should feel about Jackson after an experience like this, but I hope you'll help us fix the city instead of leaving it. It is easier, in many ways, to leave for the suburbs, but that's the reason why so many of our cities have problems, because engaged, middle-class people leave. I have only lived in this city for six months. In a story like this one, it is not hard to see the bad, particularly the insular, butt-covering attitude of city officials. However, I genuinely like Jackson precisely because it is such a potent mix of progressive and boneheaded. Here, idealism is tempered by constant exposure to the know-nothing traditions and petty corruptions of a state with the most troubled history of any in the country. Maybe it's just me, but I find that both invigorating and interesting. You just don't get that in a place like Brandon.

Author

Brian C Johnson

Date

2005-10-17T22:25:39-06:00

ID

79017

Comment

Seems that the outrage here is directed to the fact that a curfew law even exists. The curfew law is not the problem...the problem (real outrage) is that Jackson has cops on the street with such a "who gives a s**t" attitude (sorry---I just can not fathom that this guy is so totally brain dead that simple logic could evade him in this case). This Flynt guy is no community treasure. He is scary---has a little power over Joe Citizen and is willing to use it to entertain himself. If he gave half a durn about his job/the profession/the community he would not have had this girl taken to the detention center. Instead he decided to use his power to have a little fun hassling a cute girl from north Jackson. Unfortunately, these types of police shenanigans do not typically go on without others (in the department) tolerating it (shame on Precinct 4 ?). Guys like Flynt ---as well as the others in the department that tolerate this nonesense---are a disservice to the community and a black eye on JPD. Flynt is a rouge and should be purged before his next shenanigan really costs the Jackson taxpayers some money. Perhaps Melton will require a bit more in the future of the men and women he allows to patrol Jackson streets in blue. We will see. As for Mr. Danks bowing out---perhaps it is time for the Berryhills to find another attorney...at least to get another assessment of their case. Good luck to them.

Author

B Chan

Date

2005-10-18T16:58:30-06:00

ID

79018

Comment

Truth is, B, it's not either-or. Curfew laws are too general and practically beg for abuse such as in this case. That does not mean they are never useful, as Ali points out (and great comments, Ali). And it doesn't mean that people who abuse them should not be criticized, either. The problem is that in America we live (supposedly) by principles that say that you do not case a wide net in order to capture a few bad eggs. That is at the heart of the U.S. Constitution -- that's why it does not apply to the will of the man, but to the individual. The one individual, for instance, who does not want to hear a prayer over the loud speaker in a public school. The one individual who has unpopular views but still has the right to say them. And so on. Certainly, having more stringent constitutional rights would catch, or prevent, some crimes along the way -- but it would violate all those others' individual rights along the way. To me, this anti-wide-net approach to our society is at the heart of being an American. We don't operate that way. And we should not operate that way against our young people. To me, that part is quite simple. Beyond the civics implications, however, research simply does not show that youth curfews help prevent crime. That does not mean that they are not useful in any cases, as Ali points out. But my argument is that there must be a better way -- if we bother to look for it, instead of casting the wide net that hurts innocent kids' rights along the way. Has our city taken the time to research what cities that do not not use youth curfews do, for instance, to help kids that you speak of? Are they thoroughly researching the use of our own curfew to see what the effects are? (No, from what we've seen.) Are they tracking all the times when crimes are committed by young people here, and how that stacks up against the use and enforcement of the curfew? (I doubt it seriously.) In essence, I think the community discussion of how to replace youth curfews with something better that do not allow such wide (and legal) discretion is vital. And, Ali, comments such as yours -- from someone on the inside of these problems -- are absolutely necessary to make that happen. Also, to the Berryhills, I'm glad this forum is helping you share your story. Please feel free to continue doing that, and helping lead a very needed community discussion. Cheers to all.

Author

DonnaLadd

Date

2005-10-18T17:12:59-06:00

ID

79019

Comment

B Chan writes: Perhaps Melton will require a bit more in the future of the men and women he allows to patrol Jackson streets in blue. We will see. But we need to remember that this happened in 2003, almost two years before Melton took office. I agree that the police officer is the problem, but the fact that the law can be so easily abused like this shows us that it's a bad law. Maybe the key is to see how we can make a good law out of it. Let's use the sodomy law example. The way it was usually enforced, it was a good law in practice--a way of tacking on a little extra jail time for sexual predators. This was particularly useful 5-10 years ago, when--according to a friend who volunteered with rape victims--suspects could be charged with rape only in cases that involved "standard" penetration; everything else was classified under the very broad heading of sexual assault, which carried a much lighter penalty. So someone could be convicted of sexual assault plus sodomy and spend a little more time in prison than, say, the old colonel in Beetle Bailey. Sometime between then and now--I'm guessing when it became clear that sodomy laws might one day be struck down--the definition of rape was expanded to include forcible "unnatural sexual acts" that once fell under the sodomy law statute, so that by the time Lawrence v. Texas came around, there was no real need for the sodomy statute. So we now get all the benefits of having a selectively enforced sodomy law, but we're also rid of an overly broad law that can be applied in all sorts of situations where it shouldn't be. I suspect a similar solution can be found for the curfew law, but before I can say anything intelligent about that I'd really need to know: (a) Exactly how the law is written now ; (b) Exactly what the law needs accomplish, from a social services standpoint ; (c) The difference between (a) and (b). What's clear from Ali's post is that there are some really good people who support the curfew law, and who have really good reasons for doing so. So if we can alleviate their concerns and take a draconian law off the books, then it seems to me that would be preferable to choosing one option over the other. Cheers, TH

Author

Tom Head

Date

2005-10-18T17:48:30-06:00

ID

79020

Comment

RE: ìBut we need to remember that this happened in 2003, almost two years before Melton took office.î Absolutely. I am hopeful Melton will have far less tolerance of BS from rouge cops than his predecessor did. RE:î I agree that the police officer is the problem, but the fact that the law can be so easily abused like this shows us that it's a bad law. Maybe the key is to see how we can make a good law out of it.î Tom, even if the curfew did not exist, a non-professional cop like Flynt would fabricate a means to send the cute girl from north Jackson to the detention center if he needed to entertain himself. Had there been no curfew---I feel confident he would have found another reason/way---perhaps just a bogus/trumped up moving violation ---to hassle this girl that night. The key is having professionals on the ground to interact with the publicñnot a bozo ìBilly Bad A**î/îPete Power Mongerî. This Flynt cop did not abuse the law (the current law has steps for 1st, 2nd 3rd offenses that were not followed by this guy, right?)óhe just cited the curfew as the pretense for his inappropriate actions and then claimed ìI did not knowî (ìtesti-lyingî is what the rouge cops call it, I believe) when he was called on it. Speaking from personal experience---kids out late at night and unsupervised by adults are generally up to no goodÖperiod. And the no good they do often costs law abiding citizens money out of their own pocket due to the damage done by the kids. A curfew is a reasonable and necessary means of dealing with kids whose parents refuse to assume their parental responsibilities --- and these days there are ever so many more such parents than years before. This does not mean that throwing all kids in jail the first time they are out past curfew is an appropriate way to enforce the curfew (nor is it the way I understand the current curfew is supposed to be enforced, correct?). This does mean that professionals (not bozos) are needed to carry out the role of cop ---to evaluate the situation, make sure they understand the applicable rules and procedures and then, see that the right thing is done to address it.

Author

B Chan

Date

2005-10-18T21:27:14-06:00

ID

79021

Comment

I'm a bit tipsy after being buried in a big story for days ... but these two thoughts reading this made me laugh, with no disrespect intended, B. You wrote: "kids out late at night and unsupervised by adults are generally up to no goodÖperiod." My thought: "adults out late at night and unsupervised by kids are generally up to no goodÖperiod." And, it tickles me that you keep talking about "rouge cops"; I keep picturing bright-red cops, instead of the "rogues" you intend. Thanks for the giggle. Now, I really must lay my head down to sleep ...

Author

DonnaLadd

Date

2005-10-18T22:32:21-06:00

ID

79022

Comment

thanks to everyone for all of your support and responses to our story.I feel that most everyone that commented agrees that our childrens safety,security and well being is what our city should be aiming for. curfew,as it stands now ,needs some work.In a perfect world every parent would be aware of their childs whereabouts,but this is not the case obviously.some children do have to much unsupervised time and that is an opportunity for trouble. I will never depend on anyone other than my husband an I to disipline our children,as they are for the most part adults,We could not be any prouder of the outstanding young ladies they have become.but I feel it has been our responsibility to teach them to be respectful,kind,law abiding people. I never needed city council,the mayor,or curfew to give me "guidelines" to raise our girls. If every parent,would take the time each day to listen to their child,you would be amazed how much information you can find out about their life,without even asking! the defination for Parent is-"A guardian:protector".If we each took our job as parent seriously,thERE would be no need for curfews, or other outer interferences.I know some parents have special needs for behavioral problems,and there needs to be a support system for them,but this random stopping of one at the time curfew breakers,just can not see how that is even worth their man power time.with that said,its like a huge weight is off our shoulders,not being able to talk about it has been a huge burden,not alot of berryhills in jackson so we were pretty easy for people to figure out who we were,and we never really knew how the general public felt, until now-thank you my new friends,your kind words have made it all worthwhile. stay in touch with us and the jackson free press ROCKS!! lisa,bobby and leslie

Author

Lisa & Robert Berryhill

Date

2005-10-18T23:20:41-06:00

ID

79023

Comment

Thanks, Lisa, that means a lot (the part about us rocking). ;-) Here's what you can do in return: Tell people to read the JFP, watch for good spots we should be distributing and then let us know ([email protected]) and, most importantly, tell people you know to let us know about story ideas we need to hear about ó that are about THE PEOPLE, not dueling and meaningless quotes from talking heads and politicians. They can write me directly at [email][email protected][/email] or my assistant editor at casey@jacksonfreepress or [email][email protected][/email] if it's a breaking news story. And if it's related to young people, of course, write Brian at [email][email protected][/email] Or, call 362-6121 to reach us directly. Best to you. Donna Ladd

Author

DonnaLadd

Date

2005-10-19T09:27:04-06:00

ID

79024

Comment

Oh, I should add, everyone who reads the JFP should also thank our advertisers on a regular basisóand shop with them as you can afford to. They enable us to do this for the community every week and, in turn, the community supports them! It's all very synergistic and all. ;-) Truly, each of you please pick at least one advertiser a week and just thank them for supporting locally owned independent journalism that is about the people of Jackson and Mississippi.

Author

DonnaLadd

Date

2005-10-19T09:32:17-06:00

ID

79025

Comment

Donna writes: And, it tickles me that you keep talking about "rouge cops"; I keep picturing bright-red cops, instead of the "rogues" you intend. Thanks for the giggle. [Bright red police officers in bright blue uniforms assemble and begin walking in formation...] "Oompa, loompa, doompety doo I've got a perfect problem for you Oompa, loompa, doompety dee If you are wise you'll listen to me..." Cheers, TH

Author

Tom Head

Date

2005-10-19T11:59:49-06:00

ID

79026

Comment

I would like to say that I'm a single parent of 2 teenagers. And I have to agree 150% with the Curfew law. First of all why would a 17yr old be out after 12am ?? I would never let my 17yr old daughter be at her boyfriends house at that time of night, much less let her drive home. I honestly think that articles and law suits like this is what's wrong with our kids today. Parents are suppose to be parents,but as we all know most kids rule the home. As it seems in this case. If you want the truth, the parents should be fined or charged with the curfew violation. And therefor the child should be held in custody until going in front of a judge. And at that point the judge should have a logical reason why the child was out after curfew. They made her feel like a criminal,î Lisa interjects. ìThey said she got what she deserved since she was speeding!î I'm sorry for being the one to tell you this, but if she was speeding and was out after curfew then she was a criminal. Or do the parents need to be the criminal in this case? I might be wrong but I thought Speeding and breaking the curfew law was a crime? But then again I'm just a citizen. But Leslie might be right that she was done wrong. It should have been the parents that should have been punished for this crime. But she did deserve to go the Youth detention center because of her parents neglect to the law. Officer Flynt did do his job and therefor why does he owe an apology for doing his job? Flynt testified that he clocked Leslie going 62 mph in a 40-mph zone, though Leslie says she was only going 45. Once again I might be wrong about this but Leslie said she was going 45 in a 40-mph zone. But I think that is speeding. Therefor Officer Flynt had every right to pull her over for speeding. And that point I'm sure he seen that Leslie was underage and out after curfew. You people are making it look like Officer Flynt just randomly picked her out to pull her over. And at this point I'm going to close. But I would love to know if Leslie doesn't Break the law, why does she have a radar detector in her SUV?? (note in the picture in the ad she took at Oxford). And No Leslie I don't think you are a brat for out for money. I think your a spoiled Brat looking for money. God Bless, Susan

Author

SMaGuire

Date

2005-10-22T02:23:24-06:00

ID

79027

Comment

I would like to say that I'm a single parent of 2 teenagers. And I have to agree 150% with the Curfew law. First of all why would a 17yr old be out after 12am ?? I would never let my 17yr old daughter be at her boyfriends house at that time of night, much less let her drive home. I honestly think that articles and law suits like this is what's wrong with our kids today. Parents are suppose to be parents,but as we all know most kids rule the home. As it seems in this case. If you want the truth, the parents should be fined or charged with the curfew violation. And therefor the child should be held in custody until going in front of a judge. And at that point the judge should have a logical reason why the child was out after curfew. They made her feel like a criminal,î Lisa interjects. ìThey said she got what she deserved since she was speeding!î I'm sorry for being the one to tell you this, but if she was speeding and was out after curfew then she was a criminal. Or do the parents need to be the criminal in this case? I might be wrong but I thought Speeding and breaking the curfew law was a crime? But then again I'm just a citizen. But Leslie might be right that she was done wrong. It should have been the parents that should have been punished for this crime. But she did deserve to go the Youth detention center because of her parents neglect to the law. Officer Flynt did do his job and therefor why does he owe an apology for doing his job? Flynt testified that he clocked Leslie going 62 mph in a 40-mph zone, though Leslie says she was only going 45. Once again I might be wrong about this but Leslie said she was going 45 in a 40-mph zone. But I think that is speeding. Therefor Officer Flynt had every right to pull her over for speeding. And that point I'm sure he seen that Leslie was underage and out after curfew. You people are making it look like Officer Flynt just randomly picked her out to pull her over. And at this point I'm going to close. But I would love to know if Leslie doesn't Break the law, why does she have a radar detector in her SUV?? (note in the picture in the ad she took at Oxford). And No Leslie I don't think you are a brat for out for money. I think your a spoiled Brat looking for money. God Bless, Susan

Author

SMaGuire

Date

2005-10-22T02:25:12-06:00

ID

79028

Comment

(1) You know, if I'd been pulled over by a police officer and thrown in the jail incommunicado all night for driving 5 miles per hour over the speed limit, I think I'd have a radar detector, too. (2) The curfew laws are not supposed to mandate imprisonment on a first offense. Offenders get two warnings. No matter how you slice it, the law was abused. (3) Folks who commit misdemeanor offenses are not generally described as "criminals." (4) If you're comfortable with the idea of your daughters being arrested by the police and jailed overnight with no way of contacting you if they're out later than you tell them to be, then... Well, jeez. There is no "then." I have no idea how to respond to that. Cheers, TH

Author

Tom Head

Date

2005-10-22T02:36:52-06:00

ID

79029

Comment

If you know the law of the curfew in Jackson, you are right about calling the parents. But if the officer has another charge they can take them straight to Youth Dentetion center. And at that point the dentetion center calls the parents. It's not the Police Officers job to call the parents. And yes I would be very comfortable knowning my daughter was arrested and in jail and not out being raped or murdered.

Author

SMaGuire

Date

2005-10-22T02:56:11-06:00

ID

79030

Comment

Susan, I can't speak for Leslie, but one reason for a radar detector could be to make sure she's not pulled over by stupid police again after what she went through. Frankly, I've been pulled over for speeding and have never been taken to jail. And it's going to be a sad world if we start calling for everyone pulled over five miles over the speed limit to be taken to jail ... not to mention children whose parents aren't called. And with due respect, I think the parents were punished for Leslie's "crime" of speeding ... in the hours that they thought she was dead on the side of the road. I respect your opinion, but frankly I find nothing convincing about it. And just because you don't mind that your children be treated that way in no way helps justify a blanket curfew. A violation of individual constitutional rights requires an overwhelming showing of the benefit to society in the only way that it can be done -- that burden just isn't met with youth curfews, even if some people don't mind them and if they are useful in some cases. This is a great time to insert a Civics 101 lesson. lesson.

Author

DonnaLadd

Date

2005-10-22T10:32:33-06:00

ID

79031

Comment

Susan after reading your post I have a few comments. 1. The ticket issue--- if officer Flynt were such a fine Law ABIDING citizen, you may want to reread the part about where officer Flynt altered a police report minutes before a trial and where he gave a FAKE name to a judge that he pulled over, why then did he just forget to mention to Leslie that she was speeding. How does a such a fine officer in your opinion just forget to give her a ticket for speeding. When she is on the other side of town how do ALL the officers that night that are involved in this case forget to mention to the parents that she was speeding. Susan I'm not an expert on the law but it would be my quess that in order to be charged with speeding I would have to have a ticket that was given to me when I was stopped. Susan you give the impresion that you can be given a speeding ticket days AFTER being stopped. I would be interested in what most readers of this post agree with. What is the proper time frame on a ticket. Should you be given a complete ticket on what you are being charged with when you are pulled over or should the police department have days to decide what to charge you with. 2. You mentioned that you would never LET your teenagers be out at such a late hour. I have a very good friend who travels the world speeking for Proverbs 31 christian ministry. She is a retired school teacher of 20 plus years teaching highschool. In her opinion when a teenager is a senior in highschool they should have the opportunity to make their own decisions. In her experience the time that your teenager chooses to come home is probally close to the time they will choose to come home when they are away at college. This gives the parent a heads up and gives you an opportunity to discuss their choices while they are still at home instead of sending them off to college and not have a clue of what time they will come home. James Dobson just this week spoke about rearing independent teenagers. He stated that if a parent had done their job right then by age 17 or 18 the teenager should be ready to make their own choices. He mentioned that if parents CONTROL their teenagers every move then their decision coping skills are poorly developed. Leslie was coming home at 12:00 am with her parents knowledge. Do you realize that the average time that many young adults of this age leave to go out is around 10-11 pm and they don't return back to their dorm,apartment...until about 3:00 am or after. . I know families that have college students in Florida, TENN., NORTH CAROLINA, GEORGIA, SOUTH CAROLINA, AND MISSISSIPPI. They all are aware of these extreme late hours that college students keep. I am not saying that every student chooses these hours but the majority of them do. I would suspect that every parent in America would love to know that their teenager was in by 12:00 am. From the article Leslie contacted her parents to let them know she was on her way home. Her parents had no clue that there was a curfew law for her age. In what they knew to be true the parents and Leslie acted responsibly. My last comment to you would be concerning your last sentence. I have to wonder do you know Leslie and have a personal grudge against her. You used some very harsh judgement of her about "...LOOKING FOR MONEY." The family mentioned in the article that they would give any money recieved to charity. I realize it is a long article but Susan you seem to have missed alot of important facts. Maybe the extreme wee hours of the morning of 3:56 am fogged your comprehension of all of this article. Susan you sure keep some late hours for such a strict mama.

Author

KB

Date

2005-10-22T10:41:45-06:00

ID

79032

Comment

And yes I would be very comfortable knowning my daughter was arrested and in jail and not out being raped or murdered. Well then, what if she were being raped in jail??

Author

allred

Date

2005-10-22T10:45:58-06:00

ID

79033

Comment

It's also important to note here that no one, including the Berryhills, is saying that Leslie shouldn't have gotten a ticket for speeding, if she was speeding. I personally wish more people got stopped in Jackson for traffic violation, including for not coming to full stops at stop signs. And I think we can all agree that if such a curfew is on the books, simply call the parents or even follow her home after getting the ticket to make sure she gets home OK. I do wonder what, beyond paying for Leslie's speeding tickets, that our latest night owl would to do to the Berryhills for this horrendous crime that their daughter committed? All of this speaks directly to the idea of demonizing kids. As a society, we continually criminalize them more and more, helped along by the media and idiot politicians, and we demonize and take away their parents' rights along the way. In my research on "zero tolerance" for young people, I cannot tell you how many wonderful parents I've interviewed who have been downright screwed by a society out to turn their kids into criminals. This used to happen most often to families of color, but it's being expanded to include more white, middle and upper-class parents, in a twisted effort not to "discriminate," rather than doing what needs to be done -- and stop treating kids like their criminals until they prove themselves innocent (if then). It's backward, and we as a society, and of all races, need to ban together to stop this. If not, we'll continue turning kids into criminals, and many of them will not know how to shed those stereotypes.

Author

DonnaLadd

Date

2005-10-22T11:10:01-06:00

ID

79034

Comment

You know, I always think I had a really tame social life, and even I was out past midnight a few times when I was 18-19, which could have just as easily been 17-18. How someone can think a 17-year-old should be arrested at 12:01am and hauled off to prison if driving a few miles over the speed limit--e.g., not driving discernibly slower than the other cars--is beyond me. I also find this whole explanation very dubious, because if memory serves I used to know a 16-17 year old girl who bragged about doing 90 down McDowell at 2am. She was never once arrested. Pulled over once or twice for speeding, but never arrested. I don't think this Flynt guy was doing this just to follow orders; it sounds to me like he was having him a little fun. And officers like that should be, ahem, transferred to other lines of work. As far as curfews go: I don't know if the U.S. Supreme Court has ruled on this lately, but it strikes me as the kind of thing they might rule on. Depending on how Bush's appointees feel about all this (they may protect mandatory burqas and laws banning women from driving for all I know), that might determine the future of Jackson's blanket curfew more than anything else. Schleifler v. Charlottesville indicates that if there's no explicit exception for First Amendment rights to free speech, religion, and assembly, then the law may not be constitutional. And it seems to me that any social behavior would be protected by the First Amendment's right to freedom of assembly. Or someone could say "I'm out past curfew in protest of the curfew." Or someone could say "I wanted to pray at this intersection; I always feel closer to God here." That's a loophole you can drive a truck through (be it at 40mph or 45)--which means it's one more law that doesn't apply to rich people with lawyers on retainer. Cheers, TH

Author

Tom Head

Date

2005-10-22T12:45:49-06:00

ID

79035

Comment

Concerning Ms Susan - Well I just read what you had to say about my whole situation. I wish you really knew who my family and I are really like. Some of the media does not portray my family an myself very well. So I understand you have two children of your own? When you say teenagers how old - early or late teen, because like KB said you really need to give them a little lee-way or in college they will go buck wild - I promise I have seen it happen - I was fortunate enough to have understanding parents who let me learn who I really am - what I REALLY want in life and how to achieve it. On the note of me being out at 11:45 I had dinner with my boyfriends family and then as a whole we watched a movie together - At the time I went to summer school and worked. That night I was off of work and I had done all of my studying and homework since I was done my parents let me hang out with my then boyfriend and his family that night. I had responsiblities then and I was able to finish them by the time my boyfriend got off work also - letting me have a nice night. Honestly I did not want any of this to be in the public eye ever again, because people such as yourself tend to think I am doing it for the money - I could not care less about the money - I have VET school in my future and Ms Susan I only want to get to that point in my life by my own two hard working hands. I am a full time student at the University of Mississippi as you can see from my picture and I will soon be classified as a Junior because of the many hours I have taken, even though I am really a sophomore. I work full time at a Vet's office in Oxford and my parents did NOT even want me to work there, but they know it makes me happy and they do not mind. As for the radar dector in my SUV - that was a gift a year later - and when I'm coming home on the weekends from school it helps to remind me if my cruise control goes a little over - and also my SUV - my parents gave it to me my junior year and I will keep it until well after I graduate from college - I believe that is nothing to extravagent - I love my suv and wouldn't trade it for the world - and I love the way my parents have raised me - you can ask anyone I am so far from being a spoiled brat - I do have my head on straight and I am not a bad kid - Honestly I am at a loss of words as of right now - I will get back to you Ms Susan sometime soon - God Bless everyone I know including you Ms Susan I hope you and your teenagers can have HALF the relationship my parents and I have - it's a wonderful way of life - thank you for your time and your opinion - I would love to hear more of your thoughts! Respectfully submitted - Leslie Berryhill

Author

LABerryhill

Date

2005-10-22T20:33:14-06:00

ID

79036

Comment

FOR SUSAN I WANT TO KNOW WHAT GIVES YOU THE RIGHT TO MAKE THE STATEMENT (MONEY GRUBBING SPOILED BRAT). YOU HAVE NEVER MET MY CHILD, YOU DO NOT KNOW HER, YOU KNOW ABSOLUTELY NOTHING ABOUT HER OR OUR FAMILY. WHEN YOU ENDED YOUR LETTER WITH GOD BLESS, THAT WAS A REAL JOKE, I GUESS YOUR GOD CONDONES BEING JUDGEMENTAL, MY GOD DOES NOT (JUDGE NOT LES YOU BE JUDGED). YOU PASSED JUDGEMENT ON MY CHILD AND MY FAMILY WITH LITTLE OR NO INFORMATION...I DO NOT NEED YOUR HELP , ADVICE OR YOU OPINIONS REGUARDING CHILD REARING. I HAVE TO OLDER DAUGHTERS THAT WE GAVE THE SAME RIGHTS AND PRIVILEGES TO, BOTH ARE COLLEGE GRADUATES, EMPLOYED AND SELF SUFFICIENT. I THINK MY WIFE AND I HAVE DONE A EXCELLENT JOB REARING OUR CHILDREN, THEY ARE KIND CAREING CHRISTIAN GIRLS. WE HAVE NOT HAD AND DRUG OR ALCOHOL RELATED PROBLEMS, NO TEENAGE PREGNACIES, AND, OUTSIDE OF THIS UNCALLED FOR EVENT, NO ARREST. I AM SURE YOU WOULD RATHER YOUR CHILD BE IN JAIL RATHER THAN RAPED OR MURDERED. WHO WOULDN'T? SADLEY THAT WAS NOT MY TO OPTIONS. IF THE POLICE WOULD HAVE FOLLOWED PROCEDURE I WOULD NOT HAVE SPENT 3 HOURS THINKING MY DAUGHTER WAS BEING RAPED OR MURRDED. YOU WERE SO FAR OFF BASE ON THAT STATEMENT THAT I ALMOST DIDN'T RESPOND. YOU WOULD NOT LET YOUR CHILDREN OUT AT 12 AM, THAT IS YOUR CHOICE, ALTHOUGH THEY MUST NOT BE PLANNING ON GOING TO COLLEGE, BECAUSE YOU WILL NOT BE THERE TO SEEE WHAT TIME THEY COME HOME OR IF THEY DO. I HAVE ROCK-SOLID TRUST IN ALL OF MY DAUGHTERS, I KNEW WHERE SHE WAS AND WHAT SHE WAS DOING. I KNEW WHAT TIME SHE ARRIVED AT HIS HOUSE( WITH THE BOYFRIENDS PARENTS AND HIS LITTLE SISTER THEIR WITH THEM). AND I KNEW EXACTLY WHAT TIME SHE LEFT TO RETURN HOME. THIS WAS WHAT SHE ALWAYS DID OUT OF COURTSEY, WE LIVE IN SCARY WORLD. SHE IS A VERY RESPONSIBLE ADULT. I GUESS YOU HAVE NEVER BROKEN THE LAW, I'LL BET YOU HAVE (CROSSED A STREET WITH OUT USING THE CROSS WALK, THROWN A PIECE OF PAPER OUT OF THE CAR WINDOW, OR GOD FORBID SPEEDING) ANY OF THESE OFFENCES MAKE YOU A CRIMINAL, DID YOU GO TO JAIL? SO IF YOU DID ANY OF THESE THINGS YOU DID NOT "GET WHAT YOU DESERVED" IF A TICKET HAD BEEN ISSUED, (ALTHOUGH IT WOULD BE HER FIRST AND ONLY TICKET) I WOULD HAVE PAID IT AND NOT SAID WORD EXCEPT TO MY DAUGHTER. FOR THE RECORD THE LAW READS DELIQUENT BEHAVIOR, I THINK WE WOULD ALL AGREE SPEEDING 5 MILES OVER THE LIMIT IS NOT DELIQUENT BEHAVIOR.BE THAT AS IT MAY IF HE WOULD HAVE FOLLWED THE WRITTEN PROCEDURE ALL OF THIS WOULD HAVE BEEN AVOIDED. I AM OUT OF ROOM TO SAY ANYMORE. WHEN YOUR BOOK ON PARENTING COMES OUT LET ME KNOW SO THAT I CAN BE SURE NOT TO BUY IT. WHAT EVER MADE YOU THIS BITTER AND JUDGEMENTAL, I HOPE YOU GET OVER IT,BEFORE YOU PASS THIS POISON THINKING DOWN TO YOU CHILDREN ROBERT BERRYHILL ( LESLIE"S FATHER)

Author

Lisa & Robert Berryhill

Date

2005-10-22T20:58:41-06:00

ID

79037

Comment

I think it's clear that Susan didn't read the article very carefully, as she got several details wrong. It's unfortunate that we live in a culture that rewards people for confident displays of lazy thinking. Cheers, TH

Author

Tom Head

Date

2005-10-22T21:44:48-06:00

ID

79038

Comment

+++RE: That's a loophole you can drive a truck through (be it at 40mph or 45)--which means it's one more law that doesn't apply to rich people with lawyers on retainer.+++ Tom, keep in mind that even ìrich peopleî will be put thru all of the initial hassles inflicted by a stupid lawónot just poor people. In Miss Berryhills situation, any ìrichî person would have been just as inconvenienced as a poor person (and perhaps even more so, if the cop and other authorities in charge were resentful/envious of what they perceived to be the persons ìwealthî---after all, you gotta stick it to ëem when you can). Ultimately, the ìrich people with their lawyers on retainerî may in fact be better able to challenge the charges against them as well as the lawÖand their challenge of the lawóif successful---will benefit everyone, including poor people. Perhaps we should be thankful for rich people with lawyers on retainer? FWIW, I have a feeling that officer Flynt, the staff at the juvenile detention center as well as others at precinct 4, viewed/view Miss Berryhill as one of the îrich peopleî and had no problem ìsticking itî to her and her family that night (after all, she is from north Jackson). Being viewed as ìpoorî probably would have been in her favor that night. Regards,

Author

B Chan

Date

2005-10-23T08:08:18-06:00

ID

79039

Comment

Thanks, again, to the Berryhills for weighing in. You are leading a vital community discussion, and we are grateful to you for that. Also, all, the expert on child criminalization that Brian interview, Dr. Males, has an extensive Web site of info and links on related issues, and has published several books you all might find interesting. His "myths" book has been a bible of sorts for me during my research. He is an extensive researcher. Visit his site here.

Author

DonnaLadd

Date

2005-10-23T12:56:06-06:00

ID

79040

Comment

B Chan, I think you misunderstood my point. I was talking about the Charlottesville law and similar curfew laws modeled on it (with exemptions for "First Amendment" behavior); rich people would be able to fight the charges on the basis that what they did fell under the exemption, while poor people would not. Broad laws of that nature tend to always have a Jim Crow aspect to them, IMHO. I'm in total agreement on the value of what the Berryhills are doing, and in fact I think if you scroll up you'll find that my very first post in this thread was almost identical in meaning to your third paragraph. No resentment towards people who have lawyers on retainer; I know a few. Heck, I know a few lawyers. But loopholes only benefit people who can use them. Good point on possible motivations; I also wonder if Flynt was trying to make an example of Leslie, as it were. And if that's the case he did make an example of her, but probably not the kind of example he had in mind--his ridiculous behavior towards her demonstrated clearly to all of us why laws like this should not be on the books. Of course, were it not for JFP, how many people would know the Berryhills' story? Cheers, TH

Author

Tom Head

Date

2005-10-23T15:17:55-06:00

ID

79041

Comment

Still confused on one point. Maybe a question for Brian Johnson: Without a speeding ticket, the Berryhillsí lawsuit might have had much higher potential for success, and the Berryhills wonder whether the speeding ticket was added on after the fact to protect the city from the lawsuit. Municipal Judge David Rozier quickly remanded the speeding ticket after her release; Rozier did not respond to requests for comment. The ticket never came to trial, and the Berryhills never even saw a copy of it. Flynt still works for the JPD, on the same patrol he had when he pulled over Leslie. Was there a ticket or not? I don't see how there can be a ticket that protects the city from the lawsuit, and yet the "ticket never came to trial". If there was a ticket, it had to have a unique number. If Flint issues tickets to everyone on Old Canton exceeding the speed limit by 5 mph (hell even 22 mph) he must be writing ALOT of tickets! So the ticket numbers issued before and after Leslie's should pretty closely bound the time she was issued her's. Did Danks check the data on that? Seems like a no-brainer, but I have learned not to assume too much. My guess is the data on number and time issued of tickets written by Flint would support the theory of fraud (though I may be judging a bit).

Author

pjiv

Date

2005-10-23T22:01:16-06:00

ID

79042

Comment

Good question, pjiv. Obviously, an ordinary speeding ticket would have been admissible--so if this was an ordinary speeding ticket, as Flynt and the city government seem to be suggesting, why wasn't it admitted? There must have been a good reason, or the judge would have allowed it. Cheers, TH

Author

Tom Head

Date

2005-10-24T12:30:02-06:00

ID

79043

Comment

I think I misread something; on a second reading it sounds as if it was admitted. So the question then becomes why the Berryhills never saw it. Cheers, TH

Author

Tom Head

Date

2005-10-24T12:32:59-06:00

ID

79044

Comment

Regarding the speeding ticket, there is a copy of a speeding ticket on file as part of the federal court records for this case. If memory serves, the clerk's stamp on the ticket is dated 7 days after Leslie was pulled over, though Flynt said in his deposition that this date only indicated when the clerk filed the ticket. For what it's worth, Flynt was consistent in all of his testimony about why he pulled over Leslie: for going 62 in a 40. I don't know why he wouldn't have given Leslie the ticket at the time he arrested her, or why it wasn't released with Leslie when the Berryhills picked her up from the detention center. The Berryhills say they left the detention center without any documentation at all, which certainly sounds sloppy on the part of the detention center, at the very least. The Berryhills say they never saw a copy of the speeding ticket. As for what happened with the ticket, here we enter the thickets of legal thinking. For some reason, the ticket was "remanded" by a local judge named David Rozier. I called Rozier to ask why and he never returned my calls. Remanding a ticket, as I understand it, just means that it's set aside and never pursued. That's not quite the same as dropping the ticket, i.e. exonerating the defendant of wrong-doing. I do wonder why the ticket was remanded. Flynt says he assumed it was because the Berryhills used their contacts to get to Rozier, though I think he's just speculating. Legal sources have told me that tickets are remanded when there is some problem with the ticket or other actions make the ticket moot. The kicker to all of this is that even though the ticket was remanded, it still provides a legal justification for arresting Leslie. Judge Barbour, who decided the federal case, was quite explicit on this point. Leslie could not sue for wrongful arrest because the arrest for speeding was valid. (As the Berryhills point out, if Leslie had just lied and said she was going 40 rather than 45, it might have made all the difference for their case.) To make this explicit, Barbour never even addressed the ways in which Flynt may have misapplied the youth curfew, because if any one part of the arrest is valid, you can't sue for wrongful arrest. Since Leslie admitted to going 5 mph over, the arrest was valid, even if the ticket was remanded. You see why it all looks a bit strange, if not suspiciously convenient for the city. My guess is that Flynt really did write out the ticket that night, though I certainly can't blame the Berryhills for being suspicious on this count, since so much turned on this one point. I do wonder why Rozier remanded the ticket right as the lawsuit got started. From a supicious frame of thought, remanding the ticket provided ideal protection for the city, since it could rely on the ticket legally without ever having to defend it legally. Or maybe Rozier thought Flynt was a jerk. We may never know.

Author

Brian C Johnson

Date

2005-10-24T19:08:54-06:00

ID

79045

Comment

In other words, Tom, the ticket was admitted and not admitted at the same time. You gotta love the law.

Author

Brian C Johnson

Date

2005-10-24T19:11:59-06:00

ID

79046

Comment

In reguard to the ticket for Leslie,this is how the process presented.Leslie was followed on Old Canton by officer Flynt. Looking at the police tape we viewed that was filmed from HIS car,she never hit her brakes,as she thought 45 was acceptable.When she turned on River Thames,she braked to turn and stopped her car and rolled down her window. She ask what was the matter,thinking she might have a tail light out etc. He asked for her liscense and insurance-which she provided. He looked at them and said do you know I clocked you going 62? She said ,no sir ,my cruise control is still set on 45,you can check and see. no reply from Flynt. He went to his car,returned after several minutes and asked her to step out of the car,which she did ,as seen on police tape,he asked her if she knew that she could go to jail and so could her parents for breaking curfew? Leslie replied,no sir,may I have a warning his reply, "no leslie there have been too many warnings for you kids," you are under arrest for CURFEW VIOLATION.HE FRISKED HER, HAND CUFFED HER PUT HER IN THE BACK OF THE POLICE CAR WITH NO SEATBEALT,SEARCHED HER CAR FOR DRUGS AND A WEAPON. Then at the detention center. when we picked leslie up,she was put back in her clothes,from the prison wear,and we were given a bag with her jewelry in it and that is ALL. we went back the next day to detention center as instructed to see a judge,for curfew violation, and told it was not necessary. We went to city council, where they asked if she was speeding and she said yes sir I was going 45, still no physical ticket in our possession.We met with Mr Danks discussed the issues and the next day we left for Florida on a family vacation that had been planned,and much needed.The second day in Destin Mr. Danks called and said that a ticket had surfaced and that he went to court and it was remanded; which to our understanding,and we are not attorneys,means it was either thrown out for lack of evidence or sent back to the officer. We never have had a ticket written by officer Wes Flynt put in any member of the berryhill family's hands. We never paid any fine nor did Mr.Danks pay for any ticket..so you tell us ...how and where did this ticket take precedence over my childs civil rights, if she has any????? thank you for still listening,it really means so much,lisa

Author

Lisa & Robert Berryhill

Date

2005-10-24T19:35:25-06:00

ID

79047

Comment

One that note brjohn9- I do know for a fact that my parents most certainly did NOT contact Judge Rozier to remand my ticket. We actually had a family vacation to the beach the following Saturday I was arrested and my parents had no way to get in touch with Judge Rozier. Plus my parents do believe in making me get what i deserve - therefore if I was given a ticket obvisouly I deserved it and would have paid for it somehow. On the comment about "(As the Berryhills point out, if Leslie had just lied and said she was going 40 rather than 45, it might have made all the difference for their case.)" In a way that makes my parents look like they wanted me to lie - and in NO I mean NO way would they want me to lie about something like that, that would be disrespecting everyone - Mr. Danks, JPD, Judge Rozier, and even my family and I would NEVER EVER do that and make a mockery of my family plus I would feel HORRIBLE! At the time I did not know you were able to get a ticket going 5 over - now I do - and I after I found out I knew I deserved a ticket, but you just think about if you were arrested - had to take a shower - put on undergarments that were not yours (white but yet they were brown) - never knowing who else had worn them and how well the JDC had washed them and sat on a cot in a pitch black detention cell for two hours just because you were arrested for speeding and being out past curfew you would at least have wanted a ticket to know for a fact why you were arrested. Just thought I should put my two cents in on those few little comments by brjohn9. Thanks! Respectfully submitted - Leslie Berryhill

Author

LABerryhill

Date

2005-10-24T19:45:39-06:00

ID

79048

Comment

Leslie, I certainly didn't mean to imply that your parents actually used their influence with Judge Rozier. For one thing, I'm pretty sure they didn't even know who Judge Rozier was until I mentioned it to your mom. More importantly, if you reread my post, I said that this was Flynt's assertion, not mine. When I wrote that I thought Flynt was speculating, I did not mean to imply that I thought he might be telling the truth. Rather, I meant that his comments were musings on what he thought had happened rather than an assertion of what actually had happened. So even Flynt was not saying that he actually knew your family had used its influence. He was guessing. (He was not completely clear on this point, but this is my interpretation of the tone of his remarks.) On the significance of your telling the truth about going 45, I was not implying that your parents would have wanted you to lie. On the contrary, the fact that you said you told the truth when you had much to gain by lying increases your credibility, in my eyes.

Author

Brian C Johnson

Date

2005-10-25T01:27:01-06:00

ID

79049

Comment

Well thank you - I only wanted to clear that up to the public because some people might read it in a different. I wasn't pointing fingers just making sure everyone else knew the complete truth

Author

LABerryhill

Date

2005-10-25T11:11:40-06:00