Ahmed's family case against the city and ISD dismissed (a.k.a Clock Boy)

[EEVblog]

You said it yourself, "was probably an innocent victim", in which case what's wrong with supporting him?

That support blew everything out of proportion to such an extent that the poor kid doesn't even live in the US any more.

That choice was AFAIK essentially the sole decision of the father, and made vastly worse by him, his history, and his willingness to mouth off (and then sue). I'm sure it would have turned out quite a bit different if he had come out and laughed about it and said something like "haha, it's all big mis-understanding, he's just a clever nerdy kid" et.al.
The father blew it, and everyone paid the price.

Yes, the praise heaped on him as some sort of child genius was ridiculous and unwarranted, but that's not to say that supporting him wasn't the right thing to do. He was 14 years old.

[NivagSwerdna]

Yes, the praise heaped on him as some sort of child genius was ridiculous and unwarranted, but that's not to say that supporting him wasn't the right thing to do. He was 14 years old.

He was a naughty 14yr old who didn't put the clock away despite being told by two teachers to do so.  The clock looked dodgy to someone who was unfamiliar with clock, hoax bomb & real bomb classification.  IMHO The authorities blew it by hand cuffing the kid (presumably following some protocol) as the hand cuffed whilst wearing a NASA T-shirt image was dynamite but in the end it was a political agenda that took it from naughty boy to boy genius status.

[Bud]

Yes, if Obama had a son, he'd look like Ahmed.

[Zero999]

Yes, the praise heaped on him as some sort of child genius was ridiculous and unwarranted, but that's not to say that supporting him wasn't the right thing to do. He was 14 years old.

He was a naughty 14yr old who didn't put the clock away despite being told by two teachers to do so.  The clock looked dodgy to someone who was unfamiliar with clock, hoax bomb & real bomb classification.  IMHO The authorities blew it by hand cuffing the kid (presumably following some protocol) as the hand cuffed whilst wearing a NASA T-shirt image was dynamite but in the end it was a political agenda that took it from naughty boy to boy genius status.

I still think the school overreacted. If he was being naughty messing around with the clock in class, rather than paying attention, then the correct course of action would be to confiscate the clock and give him detention, not call the police.

The school knew the clock wasn't a bomb, otherwise they would have evacuated the building and the police would have contacted bomb disposal, to investigate and deactivate the device.

I agree about the boy's farther being the worst culprit here. He could have got his son into a good university, to study electronics, not religion.

[EEVblog]

Yes, the praise heaped on him as some sort of child genius was ridiculous and unwarranted, but that's not to say that supporting him wasn't the right thing to do. He was 14 years old.

He was a naughty 14yr old who didn't put the clock away despite being told by two teachers to do so.

Then why didn't they just confiscate it and give him detention?

Everyone screwed up here, the issue could have been resolved at any point along the authority chain.

IMHO The authorities blew it by hand cuffing the kid (presumably following some protocol) as the hand cuffed whilst wearing a NASA T-shirt image was dynamite but in the end it was a political agenda that took it from naughty boy to boy genius status.

Yes, that photo made the story. Without that I think it wouldn't have made any mainstream news.

[NivagSwerdna]

Then why didn't they just confiscate it and give him detention?

Context. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mohamed_Elhassan_Mohamed is his father, a bit of a local character, and probably confused some people. 

I guess it could have been worse... poor Kiera, http://afro.com/fla-teen-lands-in-space-camp-after-unexpected-science-project-explosion-triggers-arrest/  at least Ahmed was in to electronics not chemistry.

[thermistor-guy]

...
To be fair, the law seems to indicate that the thing has to be manufactured with the express purspose of causing alarm rather than simply causing alarm in the first place. However, the latter seems to have become the standard in recent years. Widespread paranoia and fear causes peope to have hair triggers, yet you are somehow held responsible if a minor action causes a huge response.

I'd say the people feeding the public reasons to be afraid on a daily basis should be held responsible, but that might drift into political discussions.

This case reminds me of the professor detained for doing algebra on a plane:

https://www.schneier.com/blog/archives/2016/05/economist_detai.html

As security expert Bruce Schneier aptly states:

This is a result of our stupid "see something, say something" culture. As I repeatedly say: "If you ask amateurs to act as front-line security personnel, you shouldn't be surprised when you get amateur security."

I would change "amateurs" and "amateur" to "morons" and "moronic".

[helius]

I guess it could have been worse... poor Kiera, http://afro.com/fla-teen-lands-in-space-camp-after-unexpected-science-project-explosion-triggers-arrest/  at least Ahmed was in to electronics not chemistry.

Attitudes changed a lot in this country after 9/11. In the '80s and '90s, even calling a plastic soda bottle "a bomb" would not have got anyone that exercised. It was clear to anyone with half a brain that it is incapable of fragmenting or detonating and not much more dangerous than popping a balloon. This was a pretty common form of entertainment and police weren't very interested.

[Mr. Scram]

Attitudes changed a lot in this country after 9/11. In the '80s and '90s, even calling a plastic soda bottle "a bomb" would not have got anyone that exercised. It was clear to anyone with half a brain that it is incapable of fragmenting or detonating and not much more dangerous than popping a balloon. This was a pretty common form of entertainment and police weren't very interested.

Currently there seems to be a system that groups people based on minor or even innocent incidents together with serious offenders. I'm not sure what use it is to society to both destroy the future of decent citizens and cause inflation in when it comes to serious crimes. You can't keep crying wolf and expect people to be scared every time.

[rsjsouza]

Attitudes changed a lot in this country after 9/11. In the '80s and '90s, even calling a plastic soda bottle "a bomb" would not have got anyone that exercised. It was clear to anyone with half a brain that it is incapable of fragmenting or detonating and not much more dangerous than popping a balloon. This was a pretty common form of entertainment and police weren't very interested.

Currently there seems to be a system that groups people based on minor or even innocent incidents together with serious offenders. I'm not sure what use it is to society to both destroy the future of decent citizens and cause inflation in when it comes to serious crimes. You can't keep crying wolf and expect people to be scared every time.

A certain group of very famous people plus a popular social media platform comes to mind?

You are right; the constant state of alert for minor issues tends to numb people when confronted with the real problems.This case was one more step towards the general polarization that is rampant today, with finger wagging and moral lecturing of dissenting groups.

IMO this case illustrates how a mischievous and completely forgettable/forgiveable action is put into law, which gives no other course of action if it reaches levels of hierarchy (the principal, the law enforcement) that have judicial consequences. Although I find it ridiculous, I don't blame the authorities for taking the actions they did. On the other hand, if it was my kid, I would probably have tried to defend him using any means necessary (including a media blow) if he was taken into custody simply for this.

I can't comment on the family decison to move out of the country but, if there were threats to my family due to the excessive exposure, I would probably have moved away as well.

[EEVblog]

On the other hand, if it was my kid, I would probably have tried to defend him using any means necessary (including a media blow) if he was taken into custody simply for this.

When you start a war, you have to be prepared for the consequences.
Sometimes walking away is better.

I can't comment on the family decison to move out of the country but, if there were threats to my family due to the excessive exposure, I would probably have moved away as well.

Make no mistake, the reactions of the family caused that "excessive exposure".
Like I said, if they had simply laughed it off and/or refused to give interviews, the story dies. If the relative (IIRC) had not shared that infamous photo, the story again dies. But no, they wanted their 15 minutes of fame, and got it, in spades. Poor 14yo Ahmed probably had no say in any of it.

That's of course not excusing any threats made to him etc.

[Zero999]

On the other hand, if it was my kid, I would probably have tried to defend him using any means necessary (including a media blow) if he was taken into custody simply for this.

When you start a war, you have to be prepared for the consequences.
Sometimes walking away is better.

Hindsight is a wonderful thing.

I agree he shouldn't have attempted to sue, but I don't blame him for attempting to the press and social media to help his son. I think most people would have done the same.

[EEVblog]

On the other hand, if it was my kid, I would probably have tried to defend him using any means necessary (including a media blow) if he was taken into custody simply for this.

When you start a war, you have to be prepared for the consequences.
Sometimes walking away is better.

Hindsight is a wonderful thing.
I agree he shouldn't have attempted to sue, but I don't blame him for attempting to the press and social media to help his son. I think most people would have done the same.

Sure they would have. But you can't say it's ultimately not their fault (or hindsight) when their ignorance of the potential consequences of deliberately using the media for exposure for their own ends and then complaining when that exposure they sort backfires on them.
Any reasonably educated adult should know that's a risk. Willful ignorance for your own gain is not an excuse.

Also, what "help" did he really need? He wasn't actually charged with a crime. All he faced was a suspension from school.

[rsjsouza]

On the other hand, if it was my kid, I would probably have tried to defend him using any means necessary (including a media blow) if he was taken into custody simply for this.

When you start a war, you have to be prepared for the consequences.
Sometimes walking away is better.

Hindsight is a wonderful thing.
I agree he shouldn't have attempted to sue, but I don't blame him for attempting to the press and social media to help his son. I think most people would have done the same.

Sure they would have. But you can't say it's ultimately not their fault (or hindsight) when their ignorance of the potential consequences of deliberately using the media for exposure for their own ends and then complaining when that exposure they sort backfires on them.
Any reasonably educated adult should know that's a risk. Willful ignorance for your own gain is not an excuse.

Also, what "help" did he really need? He wasn't actually charged with a crime. All he faced was a suspension from school.

You are right; the exposure fueled by the kid's parents was certainly what ultimately brought the case to its ultimate consequences, but thinking they wanted to "start a war" is really a dangerous proposition - it was a local story ran by local news and nobody could have predicted a country wide (and even less worldwide) press coverage.

[EEVblog]

You are right; the exposure fueled by the kid's parents was certainly what ultimately brought the case to its ultimate consequences, but thinking they wanted to "start a war" is really a dangerous proposition

It's just a turn of phrase, and I did not use that term in relation to this case anyway.

- it was a local story ran by local news and nobody could have predicted a country wide (and even less worldwide) press coverage.

But they gave interviews and shouted from the rooftops to that international media when it came knocking.
And the entire intent of telling your story to the media (local or otherwise) is because you want the public to hear your story.
You can't make any tenable argument about expecting it to only stay "local".
They also planted the seed in that first local interview. Like I said, and I'll say it again, they approached it with the wrong intention from the get-go that ultimately caused all the hoopla. If they had laughed it off to the local news as a misunderstanding, it would have very likely just died out.

[Zero999]

You are right; the exposure fueled by the kid's parents was certainly what ultimately brought the case to its ultimate consequences, but thinking they wanted to "start a war" is really a dangerous proposition

It's just a turn of phrase, and I did not use that term in relation to this case anyway.

- it was a local story ran by local news and nobody could have predicted a country wide (and even less worldwide) press coverage.

But they gave interviews and shouted from the rooftops to that international media when it came knocking.
And the entire intent of telling your story to the media (local or otherwise) is because you want the public to hear your story.
You can't make any tenable argument about expecting it to only stay "local".
They also planted the seed in that first local interview. Like I said, and I'll say it again, they approached it with the wrong intention from the get-go that ultimately caused all the hoopla. If they had laughed it off to the local news as a misunderstanding, it would have very likely just died out.

I'm sure they did. They were understandably very angry with the school and police, for handling the situation in the way they did.

[EEVblog]

I'm sure they did. They were understandably very angry with the school and police, for handling the situation in the way they did.

For sure, and I don't actually blame them for doing that. But they ultimately have to own any response from doing that I'm afraid.

[rsjsouza]

You are right; the exposure fueled by the kid's parents was certainly what ultimately brought the case to its ultimate consequences, but thinking they wanted to "start a war" is really a dangerous proposition

It's just a turn of phrase, and I did not use that term in relation to this case anyway.

- it was a local story ran by local news and nobody could have predicted a country wide (and even less worldwide) press coverage.

But they gave interviews and shouted from the rooftops to that international media when it came knocking.
And the entire intent of telling your story to the media (local or otherwise) is because you want the public to hear your story.
You can't make any tenable argument about expecting it to only stay "local".
They also planted the seed in that first local interview. Like I said, and I'll say it again, they approached it with the wrong intention from the get-go that ultimately caused all the hoopla. If they had laughed it off to the local news as a misunderstanding, it would have very likely just died out.

I'm sure they did. They were understandably very angry with the school and police, for handling the situation in the way they did.

For sure, and I don't actually blame them for doing that. But they ultimately have to own any response from doing that I'm afraid.

Dave, stating they approached it with the wrong intention and not actually blame them for doing that seem contradictory, as they involve intention on the act - I personally don't know their intentions and can't really tell if they acted in bad faith or not. However, in the heat of the moment they would have talked to whomever wanted to listen to the story, which I think we all agree is a very risky proposition in these modern times of worldwide coverage and yes, they have to own the responsibility of their acts. Just like you, I feel sorry for the kid.

[Howardlong]

Then there's this pearler:

Student says math symbol looks like a gun, prompts police investigation

[Mr. Scram]

Then there's this pearler:

Student says math symbol looks like a gun, prompts police investigation

The statement in your link is incorrect. It was a comment made in a conversation that was sparked by the supposed likeness of a square root symbol, not the remark that it looks like that itself. That's quite a difference.

[NivagSwerdna]

August 2014... Police were summoned to a high school after a boy wrote a story about using a gun to kill a dinosaur. The boy was searched, suspended from school, and subsequently handcuffed and arrested when he did not handle the interrogation calmly. http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/blogs-news-from-elsewhere-28897353

[EEVblog]

For sure, and I don't actually blame them for doing that. But they ultimately have to own any response from doing that I'm afraid.

Dave, stating they approached it with the wrong intention and not actually blame them for doing that seem contradictory, as they involve intention on the act

People's natural reaction is to sprout to the media when they think they have been wronged in some way, that's what I mean when I don't blame them for wanting to go to the media.
But as I said, they did approach it the wrong way and they have to own that. But it seems that all they have ever done is double down on the media exposure, whilst at the same time complaining about the results of the exposure.

- I personally don't know their intentions and can't really tell if they acted in bad faith or not.

Well it's pretty clear that the already attention seeking father rubbed his hands at the opportunity when it was presented to him.
At 14yo, Ahmed was in no position to decide for himself.
I don't believe a word of the conspiracy theorists that he planned the entire thing from the get go.

[NivagSwerdna]

I don't believe a word of the conspiracy theorists that he planned the entire thing from the get go.

One of the conspiracy theories is that he was set up by his sister who had had a previous run-in over a bomb hoax.  IMHO Ahmed himself seems too naive to have plotted it but he might have been encouraged by his sister to show off his clock. 

But who cares? Not me. Life moves on.