Chicago mon arrested for non-crime
       |           

Welcome, Guest. Please login or register.
Did you miss your activation email?
April 29, 2024, 07:29:14 PM
News: Election Simulator 2.0 Released. Senate/Gubernatorial maps, proportional electoral votes, and more - Read more

  Talk Elections
  General Politics
  U.S. General Discussion (Moderators: The Dowager Mod, Chancellor Tanterterg)
  Chicago mon arrested for non-crime
« previous next »
Pages: [1]
Author Topic: Chicago mon arrested for non-crime  (Read 739 times)
Bono
Atlas Icon
*****
Posts: 11,699
United Kingdom


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« on: March 13, 2008, 10:12:57 AM »

www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,337012,00.html

Case of Illinois Mother on Trial for Leaving Child in Car for Minutes Sparks Debate

Wednesday, March 12, 2008



CHICAGO  —  Treffly Coyne was out of her car for just minutes and no more than 10 yards away.

But that was long and far enough to land her in court after a police officer spotted her sleeping 2-year-old daughter alone in the vehicle; Coyne had taken her two older daughters to pour $8.29 in coins into a Salvation Army kettle.

Minutes later, she was under arrest — the focus of both a police investigation and a probe by the state's child welfare agency. Now the case that has become an Internet flash point for people who either blast police for overstepping their authority or Coyne for putting a child in danger.

The 36-year-old suburban mother is preparing to go on trial Thursday on misdemeanor charges of child endangerment and obstructing a peace officer. If convicted, she could be sentenced to a year in jail and fined $2,500, even though child welfare workers found no credible evidence of abuse or neglect.

On Dec. 8 Coyne decided to drive to Wal-Mart in the Chicago suburb of Crestwood so her children and a young friend could donate the coins they'd collected at her husband's office.

Even as she buckled 2-year-old Phoebe into the car, the girl was asleep. When Coyne arrived at the store, she found a spot to park in a loading zone, right behind someone tying a Christmas tree onto a car.

"It's sleeting out, it's not pleasant, I don't want to disturb her, wake her up," Coyne said this week. "It was safer to leave her in the safety and warmth of an alarmed car than take her."

So Coyne switched on the emergency flashers, locked the car, activated the alarm and walked the other children to the bell ringer.

She snapped a few pictures of the girls donating money and headed back to the car. But a community service officer blocked her way.

"She was on a tirade, she was yelling at me," Coyne said. The officer, Coyne said, didn't want to hear about how close Coyne was, how she never set foot inside the store and was just there to let the kids donate money, or how she could always see her car.

Coyne telephoned her husband, Tim Janecyk, who advised her not to say anything else to police until he arrived. So Coyne declined to talk further, refusing even to tell police her child's name.

When Janecyk pulled up, his wife already was handcuffed, sitting in a patrol car.

Crestwood Police Chief Timothy Sulikowski declined to comment about the case. But he did not dispute the contention that Coyne parked nearby or was away from her car for just a few minutes.

He did, however, suggest Coyne put her child at risk.

"A minute or two, that's when things can happen," he said.

Talk about the case has intensified, particularly online, where bloggers are weighing in on various message boards.

Many have harsh words for the police department, calling the arrest of a mother who left her child in a locked car for a few minutes an abuse of authority.

Yet statistics show thousands of children are injured and dozens die every year after being left unattended near or inside vehicles.

"I am talking tens of thousands of people who leave their kids in the car for any period of time all around America," said Janette Fennell, founder and president of Kansas-based Kids and Cars. "People don't appreciate the dangers of leaving a child alone in the car."

Coyne's attorney, Michelle Forbes, argued that Coyne did not break the law any more than a mother who parks in front of a school in a rainstorm and leaves an infant in the car as she runs a few feet to pick up another child.

"As long as the car is not out of her sight, then the child is not unattended," she said.

Coyne and her husband believe she is unfairly being lumped in with parents who put their children's lives at risk.

"If I were going on a shopping spree then, yes, I would deserve arrest," Coyne said. "I was standing right there. I never went into the store.

"I'm a great parent."

I wonder how many true crimes were happening in Chicago during the time the officer wasted with this.
Logged
MODU
Atlas Star
*****
Posts: 22,023
United States


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #1 on: March 13, 2008, 10:21:42 AM »


I'm not sure what a "community service officer" is, but as far as the police go, it is the responsible action for them to ensure children are not in harms way.  Now, we know the mother was not looking at her car for much of the time as she had to walk away from the vehicle and take a few picture of the kids.  However, without knowing the actual distance from the car and where the bell ringer was (article says 10 yards, but is that the mothers account or the actual distance), it's hard to say exactly how far/long she was from the car.  If this "community service officer" was at the vehicle for any length of time (which it sounds like he/she was) and the mother never noticed the person was there, then the officer was right to assume that the child was being neglected and took the right action in recommending the mother to be charged.  Most likely, she'll get a warning or a fine for this, but I doubt she'd get jail time.
Logged
John Dibble
Atlas Icon
*****
Posts: 18,732
Japan


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #2 on: March 13, 2008, 11:57:16 AM »

If she was that close and she did lock the car and turn on the alarm then I'd say she took reasonable precautions required for the safety of her child.
Logged
MODU
Atlas Star
*****
Posts: 22,023
United States


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #3 on: March 13, 2008, 12:26:49 PM »

If she was that close and she did lock the car and turn on the alarm then I'd say she took reasonable precautions required for the safety of her child.

Of course, such actions might lead this officer to assume the mother abandoned the child and went into the store to go shopping.  Additionally, would the officer know how long the mother had been gone?  If it was for an extended period of time, that car could be quite cool inside, making the child sick.
Logged
Bono
Atlas Icon
*****
Posts: 11,699
United Kingdom


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #4 on: March 13, 2008, 12:39:29 PM »

If she was that close and she did lock the car and turn on the alarm then I'd say she took reasonable precautions required for the safety of her child.

Of course, such actions might lead this officer to assume the mother abandoned the child and went into the store to go shopping.  Additionally, would the officer know how long the mother had been gone?  If it was for an extended period of time, that car could be quite cool inside, making the child sick.

Well, that little thing known as the presumption of innocence should have guided her actions.
Logged
John Dibble
Atlas Icon
*****
Posts: 18,732
Japan


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #5 on: March 13, 2008, 12:44:18 PM »

If she was that close and she did lock the car and turn on the alarm then I'd say she took reasonable precautions required for the safety of her child.

Of course, such actions might lead this officer to assume the mother abandoned the child and went into the store to go shopping.  Additionally, would the officer know how long the mother had been gone?  If it was for an extended period of time, that car could be quite cool inside, making the child sick.

In which case all the officer has to do is ask the guy ringing the bell as well as any other witnesses to corroborate the woman's story. He would have seen whether she was coming directly from the car or from inside the store.

If she was unsure whether the woman would enter the store or not, she could have adopted a wait and see policy and waited to see if the woman entered the store or not after the donation occured.

You know what happens when you assume - it makes and ass out of u and me.
Logged
MODU
Atlas Star
*****
Posts: 22,023
United States


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #6 on: March 13, 2008, 01:09:02 PM »


That's why I think there is more missing from this story.  If the mother was so concerned about the child (locking the doors, turning on the alarm, etc), she would have noticed someone walking around the car and looking in at the kid, and not just run into the officer on their way back to the car.
Logged
John Dibble
Atlas Icon
*****
Posts: 18,732
Japan


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #7 on: March 13, 2008, 01:14:01 PM »

That's why I think there is more missing from this story.  If the mother was so concerned about the child (locking the doors, turning on the alarm, etc), she would have noticed someone walking around the car and looking in at the kid, and not just run into the officer on their way back to the car.

The officer was probably in uniform - would you be that concerned about a police officer walking around the parking lot?
Logged
riceowl
riceowl315
YaBB God
*****
Posts: 4,358


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #8 on: March 13, 2008, 01:37:23 PM »

good.  rastafarians don't belong in illinois anyway.
Logged
John Dibble
Atlas Icon
*****
Posts: 18,732
Japan


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #9 on: March 13, 2008, 02:10:15 PM »

And the charges have been dropped. The prosecution decided they couldn't meet the burden of proof.

http://ap.google.com/article/ALeqM5h-zINILllcWKubXt21ki9Ti_eGcQD8VCMF6G1
Logged
MODU
Atlas Star
*****
Posts: 22,023
United States


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #10 on: March 13, 2008, 02:11:42 PM »

That's why I think there is more missing from this story.  If the mother was so concerned about the child (locking the doors, turning on the alarm, etc), she would have noticed someone walking around the car and looking in at the kid, and not just run into the officer on their way back to the car.

The officer was probably in uniform - would you be that concerned about a police officer walking around the parking lot?

YES, because I would want them to know that I was nearby and not abandoned my child to go shopping.  But then again, I don't what what a "community service officer" uniform looks like to begin with.  

And the charges have been dropped. The prosecution decided they couldn't meet the burden of proof.

http://ap.google.com/article/ALeqM5h-zINILllcWKubXt21ki9Ti_eGcQD8VCMF6G1

Thought as much.
Logged
Queen Mum Inks.LWC
Inks.LWC
Atlas Superstar
*****
Posts: 35,011
United States


Political Matrix
E: 4.65, S: -2.78

P P

Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #11 on: March 13, 2008, 02:55:21 PM »

OK - this was ridiculous.  I'll oppose the peace officer on this one.
Logged
True Federalist (진정한 연방 주의자)
Ernest
Moderators
Atlas Legend
*****
Posts: 42,144
United States


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #12 on: March 13, 2008, 06:44:11 PM »

The child welfare issue here was overblown, but I do hope she gets a ticket for illegal parking in a loading zone.
Logged
Pages: [1]  
« previous next »
Jump to:  


Login with username, password and session length

Terms of Service - DMCA Agent and Policy - Privacy Policy and Cookies

Powered by SMF 1.1.21 | SMF © 2015, Simple Machines

Page created in 0.038 seconds with 11 queries.