Teen charged in NJ Walmart racial comment case

The #1 community for Gun Owners in Indiana

Member Benefits:

  • Fewer Ads!
  • Discuss all aspects of firearm ownership
  • Discuss anti-gun legislation
  • Buy, sell, and trade in the classified section
  • Chat with Local gun shops, ranges, trainers & other businesses
  • Discover free outdoor shooting areas
  • View up to date on firearm-related events
  • Share photos & video with other members
  • ...and so much more!
  • Ogre

    Master
    Rating - 0%
    0   0   0
    Jan 4, 2009
    1,790
    36
    Indianapolis
    Teen charged in NJ Walmart racial comment case

    By BRUCE SHIPKOWSKI, Associated Press Writer Bruce Shipkowski, Associated Press Writer 26 mins ago

    WASHINGTON TOWNSHIP, N.J. – A 16-year-old boy patronizing a Walmart store in southern New Jersey took over the public-address system and ordered black people to leave, angering customers and prompting company leaders to apologize, police said Saturday.
    Police said the boy, whose name is not being released because he is a juvenile, went on the intercom at Walmart's Washington Township store Sunday evening and calmly announced: "Attention, Walmart customers: All black people, leave the store now."
    The teen was arrested Friday on charges of harassment and bias intimidation. Authorities said he was released to the custody of his parents; they did not know whether he had a lawyer.
    "This was an extremely disturbing event on many levels," Gloucester County Prosecutor Sean Dalton said at a news conference. "Any statements like these that can cause harm or grave concern must be addressed as quickly we possibly can."
    Dalton said the case would be handled in juvenile court in neighboring Atlantic County, where the boy lives. He would not say whether the boy has a criminal record, citing the teen's age, and would not disclose the teen's race, saying that did not factor into the investigation.
    Authorities would not say whether the announcement was planned or made impulsively. Police said they were also investigating a teenage boy who accompanied the suspect to the store, but they had not charged the other boy.
    Although a manager quickly went on the intercom system and apologized for the remark, many customers expressed their anger to store management. Some community members said Saturday that they've heard reports of similar incidents happening at the store in recent months that were not reported to police.
    "We are concerned about that, and we're looking into these incidents. We want to work with the community to make sure these types of incidents don't happen," said Loretta Winters, president of the Gloucester County chapter of the NAACP.
    Winters said she hopes the boy will get counseling and be educated about sensitivity so he can understand the consequences of his actions.
    "I'm assuming this person didn't realize how hurtful his comments were," she said.
    Officials for Bentonville, Ark.-based Wal-Mart Stores Inc. said the announcement was "unacceptable," and Dalton praised the company for its strong cooperation in the investigation.
    "We're pleased this matter is resolved," Walmart spokesman David Tovar said in a statement issued after the news conference. "We have updated our intercom system at this store to prevent this from happening again. We again apologize to all of our customers and associates who had to listen to something so offensive."
    The incident was the latest in a series of problems the retailer has had in its dealings with minorities and women.
    There have been several past instances of black customers claiming they were treated unfairly at Walmart stores, and the company faced lawsuits alleging that women were passed over in favor of men for pay raises and promotions.
    In February 2009, the retailer paid $17.5 million to settle a class action lawsuit alleging racial discrimination in its hiring of truck drivers.
    And the U.S. Equal Employment Opportunity Commission sued the company in May 2009, claiming some Hispanic employees at a Sam's Club subsidiary in California were subjected to a hostile work environment. That suit alleges managers failed to stop repeated verbal harassment, including the use of derogatory words, against employees of Mexican descent.
    However, the National Association for the Advancement of Colored People has said the company has worked hard in recent years to show it cares about diversity.


    What the kid did was obviously wrong, and he should be punished, by his parents. But being arrested seems a bit much. The thing that bothers me the most is, he was arrested for making a statement. While what he said was wrong, but this seems like it would be a freedom of speech issue. :dunno:
     

    LEO IN TRAINING

    Plinker
    Rating - 0%
    0   0   0
    Mar 19, 2010
    73
    6
    wheatfield, indiana
    i dont believe that this will fall under freedom of speech, its one thing protesting with the proper permits, but taking over the PA at a local walmart does not constitute freedom of speech i believe he broke the law and is going to get prosecuted for his actions...Hate crimes are a growing battle in this country...everyone has an opinion, as long as someone is not bothering you leave that person alone and mind your business...
     

    Prometheus

    Master
    Rating - 100%
    1   0   0
    Jan 20, 2008
    4,462
    48
    Northern Indiana
    i dont believe that this will fall under freedom of speech, its one thing protesting with the proper permits,

    That is a very disturbing statement. You need to brush up on the Constitution. Before you get your badge you have to take and oath to uphold and defend it. The Constitution is the supreme law of the land. The only time permits can be justified is if the demonstration plans to shut down a public venue, such as a parade/protest that closes a street to traffic ect.

    but taking over the PA at a local walmart does not constitute freedom of speech
    Correct, he was on private property... or at least as private as a corporations property can be anyway.

    i believe he broke the law and is going to get prosecuted for his actions...

    Get expelled from the store and a trespassing warning? Absolutely. Beyond that? I don't see how what he did can legally fall under "harassment and bias intimidation". That is a huge stretch IMO.

    Hate crimes are a growing battle in this country...everyone has an opinion, as long as someone is not bothering you leave that person alone and mind your business...

    A crime is a crime. All hate crime laws are bullsheet IMO. Hate crimes are nothing more than Orwellian thought crime mutations and should be stricken from the books.
     

    sporter

    Master
    Rating - 100%
    30   0   0
    Mar 9, 2009
    2,397
    48
    Southern, Indiana
    That is a very disturbing statement. You need to brush up on the Constitution. Before you get your badge you have to take and oath to uphold and defend it. The Constitution is the supreme law of the land. The only time permits can be justified is if the demonstration plans to shut down a public venue, such as a parade/protest that closes a street to traffic ect.


    Correct, he was on private property... or at least as private as a corporations property can be anyway.



    Get expelled from the store and a trespassing warning? Absolutely. Beyond that? I don't see how what he did can legally fall under "harassment and bias intimidation". That is a huge stretch IMO.



    A crime is a crime. All hate crime laws are bullsheet IMO. Hate crimes are nothing more than Orwellian thought crime mutations and should be stricken from the books.

    What he said.
     

    topash

    Marksman
    Rating - 100%
    1   0   0
    Feb 20, 2010
    187
    28
    Anywhere
    Indiana doesn't have hate crime laws. As of 2008-AUG, only five states don't have hate crime laws (AR, GA, IN, SC, WY). This keeps the local LEOS in control of all investigation when members of the local good old boys burn minority owned property to the ground and no one is ever charged.
     

    2cool9031

    Grandmaster
    Rating - 100%
    43   0   0
    Mar 4, 2009
    6,569
    38
    NWI
    Was it a hate crime? Are you kidding me?...Just 2 kids using bad judgement screwing around. I'm sure it will be blown out of proportion.
     

    T-rav

    Expert
    Rating - 100%
    1   0   0
    Dec 3, 2009
    1,371
    36
    Ft. Wayne
    It took that for them to secure their PA system, me and my buddies used to get on them all the time in high school.

    ANYWAYS

    I can see this going way farther than it needs. The article said the boys races is not being taken into account for the investigation, then how would they charge him with a hate crime? Ban him from Wal-Mart is about all I can see really happening, cant get him with trespassing because he was never asked to leave before he did what he did.
     

    semperfi211

    Master
    Rating - 100%
    1   0   0
    Nov 17, 2008
    3,409
    113
    Near Lowell
    Hate crime? Are you kidding? A hate crime is beating someone with a bat because you don't like their race. But a intercom prank? Give me a f ing break. When I called a place and had Mike Hunt paged by the woman answering, was that sexual harassment?(you know what mike hunt sounds like when being said together) How about when we would call and ask if the grocery store had Prince Albert in the can and when they would answere yes we would say, well you better let him out. Was that breaking some sort of law.
    My point is, it was some teenage kids playing. Get over it. For it to go any further than that is stupid.
     

    Ogre

    Master
    Rating - 0%
    0   0   0
    Jan 4, 2009
    1,790
    36
    Indianapolis
    That is a very disturbing statement. You need to brush up on the Constitution. Before you get your badge you have to take and oath to uphold and defend it. The Constitution is the supreme law of the land. The only time permits can be justified is if the demonstration plans to shut down a public venue, such as a parade/protest that closes a street to traffic ect.


    Correct, he was on private property... or at least as private as a corporations property can be anyway.



    Get expelled from the store and a trespassing warning? Absolutely. Beyond that? I don't see how what he did can legally fall under "harassment and bias intimidation". That is a huge stretch IMO.



    A crime is a crime. All hate crime laws are bullsheet IMO. Hate crimes are nothing more than Orwellian thought crime mutations and should be stricken from the books.
    :yesway:
     

    Bill of Rights

    Cogito, ergo porto.
    Site Supporter
    Rating - 100%
    7   0   0
    Apr 26, 2008
    18,096
    77
    Where's the bacon?
    Indiana doesn't have hate crime laws. As of 2008-AUG, only five states don't have hate crime laws (AR, GA, IN, SC, WY). This keeps the local LEOS in control of all investigation when members of the local good old boys burn minority owned property to the ground and no one is ever charged.
    No. Not having "hate crime" laws keeps idiocy out of the investigation. When a Black woman is raped by a White man, a Mexican is killed by a Black man, or a Chinese woman gets the :poop: beaten out of her by who knows who, that Black woman is not "more raped", the Mexican "more dead", nor the Chinese woman "more beaten" solely because of their race (though the latter might be "beaten more", but that's an individual thing based on that specific crime) but hate crime legislation means that the criminal will be punished more solely on the basis of the victim's race- and THAT is not right.

    I do not agree with the "good ol' boy" network as you describe it, but I disagree much more with the idea of punishing the same crime two different ways based solely on the opinions someone might or might not hold of the person on the receiving end.

    Justice is supposed to be blind, and that includes color-blindness.

    Blessings,
    Bill
     

    Bill of Rights

    Cogito, ergo porto.
    Site Supporter
    Rating - 100%
    7   0   0
    Apr 26, 2008
    18,096
    77
    Where's the bacon?
    Oh... And the kid got on a PA and talked. Someone (or several someones) didn't like what he said. It was not a crime. It should not have involved the police unless he refused to leave. One person owed an apology, and it was NOT anyone who gets a check from WalMart.
    I mean... "...We again apologize to all of our customers and associates who had to listen to something so offensive." Really? Why are you apologizing unless you are at fault?
    I don't defend the kid's BS, not in the slightest, but I think it was a stupid prank, not a crime, and I'd say the same no matter who he thought he had the right to say who had to leave.

    Blessings,
    Bill
     

    Markedup

    Sharpshooter
    Rating - 0%
    0   0   0
    Oct 17, 2008
    458
    18
    Fort Wayne
    I think this kid spoke in the spirit of an old
    Joseph Wambaugh novel.

    Who are the next victims on a Walmart intercom ?
    The elderly, the overweight, the blind,
    the broke, the employees ? This could
    go on and on. Perhaps not at Value City,
    though.

    Thanks

    Mark

    No shirt, no shoes, no microphone
     
    Last edited:

    public servant

    Grandmaster
    Rating - 100%
    23   0   0
    Should idiots like this be charged with a crime? Not IMO. Just put them in a room full of whoever they offend and let them explain it to the group. If you feel you should be able to say whatever you want...be prepared to take a butt stomping over it. :twocents:

    Concerning crimes of violence...if it adds more time to their sentence...I have no problem with it.
     

    antsi

    Expert
    Rating - 0%
    0   0   0
    Nov 6, 2008
    1,427
    38
    Indiana doesn't have hate crime laws. As of 2008-AUG, only five states don't have hate crime laws (AR, GA, IN, SC, WY). This keeps the local LEOS in control of all investigation when members of the local good old boys burn minority owned property to the ground and no one is ever charged.

    "No one is charged" is not necessarily a race issue. If the police don't identify the perpetrator, or can't find sufficient evidence against him, the prosecutor is not going to be able to charge him.

    Can you give a recent example in Indiana where there was sufficient evidence to prosecute someone for a crime against a minority - arson against a minority owned property, to use your example - and the perpetrator wasn't prosecuted?
     
    Top Bottom