Sale or return

[Joe Guy]

Police usually charge people who commit crimes.

Yes, but a report of a potential crime is made by someone before that happens. The police are investigating now so I guess that answers my question somewhat.

Why no charges have been filed in this case is baffling to me, because her behaviour was grossly irresponsible and could have exposed that child to grave harm. Anyone could have snatched him anywhere along the way. To say nothing of the fact that this was a child she committed to caring for and she threw him away like an old pair of shoes.

Children are put alone on airplanes, buses, trains and taxis quite often, I'd bet. I know of a few examples with my family and friends. Putting a young boy on an airplane alone is not a crime.

The fact that the woman did what she did doesn't say much for her character, but it's debatable (obviously) whether or not she committed a crime.

One thing that is certain, at least in my mind, is that the child is better off without having that woman for a parent, so in the long run there is an actual benefit.

[Scooter]

Children are put alone on airplanes, buses, trains and taxis quite often, I'd bet.

And on the other end is someone whom the child knows who is ready to take custody of him/her as soon as he/she gets off. This kid was being consigned into the hands of a stranger. How the hell would the kid know if the person who approached him in the airport was the one his mother paid to deliver him like a parcel? ANYONE could have come up to the kid and made believe he/she was the one who was supposed to pick him up. And who could know whether the delivery guy was actually reliable, and wouldn't have seen an opportunity to make a few thousand selling the kid?

[Joe Guy]

As much as some of us would like it to be, doing something stupid is not always against the law. We wouldn't have enough prisons in this country if being stupid was a crime.

[Scooter]

There's a difference between being stupid and putting someone else, particularly a child, in danger.

[Joe Guy]

There's a difference between being stupid and putting someone else, particularly a child, in danger.

There is?

Is putting a child on a one way trip to Russia not a stupid thing for someone to do?

Or are you saying that you believe it was intentionally done in order to put the child at risk?

[BoSoxGal]

Many Russian and eastern European orphans have been institutionalized and suffer from extreme RAD and many other developmental issues. There are plentiful stories of American families adopting such children who end up dealing with horrifically troubled kids. I'm not condoning what this woman did, but I also have doubts that the Daily Mail story indicating that Russian foster mother says he's without issues can be considered entirely credible, either.

[Scooter]

There's a difference between being stupid and putting someone else, particularly a child, in danger.

There is?

Is putting a child on a one way trip to Russia not a stupid thing for someone to do?

Or are you saying that you believe it was intentionally done in order to put the child at risk?

It was stupid AND dangerous.

And there doesn't have to be an intent to do harm for it to be criminal.

[Joe Guy]

It was stupid AND dangerous.

And there doesn't have to be an intent to do harm for it to be criminal.

So you are now saying there is NO difference between being stupid and putting someone else, particularly a child, in danger.

In other words, it is a crime to do something stupid.

I'm not twisting your words. I'm trying to understand your point. It looks to me as though you have made two conflicting statements.

[Lord Jim]

In other words, it is a crime to do something stupid.

If that's become the case, we're going to have some serious bed space issues throughout our entire penal system.....

On the upside though, freeway driving will be a much more pleasant experience....

[Joe Guy]

If that's become the case, we're going to have some serious bed space issues throughout our entire penal system.....

That's the same point I made earlier in this thread.

Brilliant minds think ali... alo.. somewhat... anyway, I previously thunk of that point too.

[Scooter]

So you are now saying there is NO difference between being stupid and putting someone else, particularly a child, in danger.

In other words, it is a crime to do something stupid.

There are some things that are stupid, but not criminal. There are some things that are criminal, but not stupid. There are some things that are both stupid and criminal. Putting a seven year old on a flight to a foreign country and arranging him to be picked up by a complete stranger whom you paid to return the kid like a pair of shoes you bought on the shopping channel and decided didn't match your purse, falls into the latter category.

I'm not twisting your words. I'm trying to understand your point. It looks to me as though you have made two conflicting statements.

I trust you understand it now, and if not, then I'm not interested in indulging the Mickey the Dunce routine any further.

[Joe Guy]

Putting a seven year old on a flight to a foreign country and arranging him to be picked up by a complete stranger whom you paid to return the kid like a pair of shoes you bought on the shopping channel and decided didn't match your purse, falls into the latter category.

That's where we disagree. I haven't yet seen evidence that what was done was a criminal act.

I trust you understand it now, and if not, then I'm not interested in indulging the Mickey the Dunce routine any further.

Please don't blame me for not understanding something that appeared to be conflicting statements from you and then asking for clarification.

If you want to continue to characterize me as playing a dunce, then have fun and continue. But that does nothing to help support your argument.

[Rick]

Children flying solo

General Age Guidelines
Airline rules vary, but here's a good idea of what to expect on domestic flights:

Children ages 1 - 4 may fly only when accompanied by an adult. A child must be at least 5 to fly alone.

Kids ages 5 - 7 can take a direct flight to a single destination but not connecting flights.

Anyone under the age of 17 who is flying alone on an international flight must have a signed note from a parent or responsible adult giving permission, destination and length of stay.

Minors must be met at their destination by another parent or responsible adult.

[Scooter]

Anyone under the age of 17 who is flying alone on an international flight must have a signed note from a parent or responsible adult giving permission, destination and length of stay.

I seriously doubt she told the airline that this was going to be a one way trip.

Minors must be met at their destination by another parent or responsible adult.

She paid someone $200 to meet the kid who was a complete stranger to him. He could have been approached by anyone, snatched, and sold into goddess knows what kind of slavery.

[Rick]

All that is prolly true. But where's the actual illegality?

[Scooter]

Neglect. Endangerment. Abandonment. Take your pick.

[Rick]

Evidently not, she only has to pay back child support.

[Joe Guy]

I seriously doubt she told the airline that this was going to be a one way trip.

The people who worked for the airline wouldn't need to be told it was a one way trip because they would very likely know that it was a one way ticket.

And she could have written that the length of stay was for months, years or permanent. Based on the information Keld gave, it doesn't seem to matter to the airline what the time frame is as long as there is a note.

[Scooter]

If she had said he was going permanently, there was no way the airline was going to take him unless they knew there was a legal guardian waiting for him at the other end. IOW, she would have had to lie.

And the "responsible adult" part? A stranger who was paid $200 to return the kid to sender? There are so many ways that could have gone very wrong...

[Rick]

She lied, like that's never happened before...