How is what she is doing illegal? Asking children what they dislike about something is illegal? I don't think there are legal issues here or she would be long gone already. -Petey
<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (Chutney @ Jun 3 2008, 09:50 AM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}></div><div class='quotemain'><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (Laker_fan @ Jun 3 2008, 09:07 AM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}></div><div class='quotemain'><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (Chutney @ Jun 2 2008, 01:35 PM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}></div><div class='quotemain'>Because the news reporters obviously would have researched the situation before giving it significant air time. I also don't see what she'd gain from lying.</div> The news reporters only care about ratings. As long as the basis of the story is true, they don't care about any other fabrications of the truth. The basis is that the kid got kicked out the class by being voted against (probably true), the bullshit (IMO of course) is the stuff about the 5 year old kid re-living the incident and the kids friend being prompted by the teacher to vote against the kid. How the hell does the mother know that the teacher forced the kids friend to vote against him? What does she have to gain about adding extra bullshit onto the story? How about publicity, money from selling the story and even more dollar from sueing the school (adding the bullshit onto the story makes it even more dramatized and that gives her an even bigger paycheck than she would have got from telling the truth). </div> The kid's a close friend of her son. You don't think its possible that she asked the kid why he voted against him when her son told her the story? And you don't win court cases with made-up, exaggerated stories. There are opposing lawyers that would ask for some sort of substantial proof, you know. Dude, what you're saying very well may be true, but your reasoning is so incredibly random. It'd be the equivalent of me watching the news tonight and claiming that every 2nd story is completely fabricated. I don't have any specific reason to suspect it, but I can always justify it under the same "umbrella excuses" (all news is about getting ratings, people just want money, etc., etc., etc.) </div> Watch the video again. She say's the kids friend was asked once and he didn't reply so she ASSUMES that he was kind of forced the second time to vote against her son. If she asked the kids friend she wouldn't be assuming anything. I can bet that the school would pay up quickly because they don't want the media attention and bad reputation. My reasoning is not random, I watched the thing and she came across as a money-greedy whore. ghotti pretty much summed it up. If she really cared, would she be saying the story again loud and clear while he's right there on her lap? Why the hell would she drag her 5 year old kid on TV? I really doubt a 5-year old kid could re-live the entire situation and say he's not "special." She's all about the $$$$$$$.
<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (Denny Crane @ May 28 2008, 09:10 PM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}></div><div class='quotemain'>I didn't watch the video, but I do think that special needs kids should have special needs schools. It's ridiculous to have the extra cost of dealing with these kids at every school; the quality of education for all suffers. With special needs schools, the kids at regular schools would have budget for the arts, and special needs schools would be tailored to deal with the needs of those kids.</div> That I disagree with. As a brother of someone w/ asperger's syndrome (the same thing as this boy has), I know that putting my brother in the enviroment of a public school with the mainstream students, he developed very quickly and is better off (I think) than he would have been had he gone to a special school. And it also gives younger kids a better understanding of kids with special needs and what all of that means. All of this happening at a younger age.
