| |
| COLUMNISTS |
|
Business Directory Now Online!!!
Please visit our kind sponsors |
|
||||||
|
COLUMNS: FAIRDALE: The Ladies’ Aid will hold an apron sale and chicken pie supper in the basement of the M.E. church, Wednesday evening, Feb. 22, to which all have a cordial invitation. Price of supper, 25 cents. Proceeds to apply on pastor’s salary. KINGSLEY: The Kingsley Book Club met with Mrs. E. E. Titus on Friday. After a bountiful dinner the following officers were elected for the ensuing year: president, Mrs. Clara Masters; vice pres., Mrs. Carrie Tiffany; sec. and treas., Mrs. Belle Tiffany. The club consists of 24 members. LINDAVILLE, BROOKLYN TWP.: The sleighing has been fine the past week and the farmers took advantage of it by hauling lime, coal, hay, etc. ALSO, in Brooklyn, Archie F. Kent is in New York city, taking a course in the Barnes’ School of anatomy, sanitary science and embalming. SHANNON HILL, AUBURN TWP.: Mrs. Will White entertained the Ladies’ Aid Society last Wednesday and although the day was rather stormy, 30 took dinner and 37 pounds of carpet rags were sewed. The Society received $4.05. TRANSUE: Lincoln’s birthday was observed in our school last Friday by recitations, songs and a debate, “Which was the greater man - Lincoln or Washington?” Minnie Harned and Nina Durling took the affirmative and Lester Barnes and Harry Brotzman the negative. Both sides were discussed and ended in a draw. SOUTH NEW MILFORD: Relatives and friends made Watson Brainard a surprise party on his birthday last week. A present of a fine chair was made him. ALSO, Charles Darrow is in very poor health. He expects to move on the poor farm March 1. Guy Lewis, who has been there for the past two years, has accepted a position in New Jersey. LITTLE MEADOWS: Teresa Shaughnessy, of this village, and Frederick Spencer, of Port Crane, N.Y., were united in marriage by Rev. J. J. O’Malley, at high noon, Feb. 8. The young couple were given a lively serenade Saturday evening, and Mr. Spencer responded by treating the boys to a good smoke. BROOKDALE: Mr. and Mrs. Shelp, who have been managers of the Orphans’ home for the past few years, left for their new home last week. SILVER LAKE: A very large crop of ice has been harvested, with the ice 16 inches thick. FOWLER HILL, AUBURN TWP.: The team belonging to J. W. Devine ran away on Tuesday last. They were stopped at George Wootton’s, no serious damage being done. ROYAL, CLIFFORD TWP.: Joel Truesdell, formerly of Lenox who married Amanda Weaver, of Clifford, and moved west several years ago, has a son and daughter who are now visiting their aunt, Arvilla Wells, of this place this week. SANKEY: There was a quiet hop at James McGavin’s on Friday evening, Feb. 10. JACKSON: The Jackson Dramatic Society will present “The Corner Store,” at Roberts’ Opera House, Tuesday and Wednesday evenings, Feb. 21 and 22. DIMOCK: A birthday party was given T. B. Williams on Saturday, Feb. 11th, it being is 88th birthday. Several of the oldest men were invited and a good dinner was served to all present. FLYNN: The young ladies here are somewhat like the republics of South America, as there is likelihood of an uprising at any moment. Some of them think that anything is fair in love or war, and there are some who cannot see it that way, so there is liable to be some hair pulling at least. GREAT BEND: Citizens of Great Bend fear the ice gorge near that place, and are taking up a subscription with which to buy 500 pounds of dynamite to break the gorge. MONTROSE: A rumor with some foundation is current that McKeage Bros. foundry may be re-located near the old Lehigh Valley station, which is conveniently located for shipping near the two railroad lines. The growing business of the plant necessitates some such arrangement, although Mr. McKeage informs us that it will probably not take place for a year or two, and even this plan may not be adopted. “50,000,000 FOR GOOD ROADS:” Senator Sproul has introduced a bill in the legislature which has the approval of the governor, and which if carried out will make this State a model for good roads. It asks for an amendment to the constitution in order to borrow $50,000,000 to commence the work. Every county seat in the State will be connected by the highway. The tentative route as mapped out would affect this county as follows: From Scranton to Montrose - commencing at a point on the boundary line of Scranton and running by way of Clark’s Summit, Glenburn and LaPlume to a point on the dividing line between Lackawanna and Wyoming counties; thence by way of Factoryville and Nicholson to a point on the dividing line between Wyoming and Susquehanna counties into Montrose. From Montrose it will follow along Snake creek to the border line between Susquehanna Co. and New York State. From Tunkhannock to Montrose - Commencing in Tunkhannock and running by way of Avery to a point on the dividing line between Wyoming and Susquehanna counties; thence by way of Springville into Montrose. From Towanda to Montrose - Commencing in Towanda; thence running by way of South Hill and LeRaysville to a point on the dividing line between Bradford and Susquehanna counties; thence by way of Rushville into Montrose.
From the Desk of the D.A. A friend sent me an interesting news story regarding a substitute math teacher in Illinois who decided to play the movie “Brokeback Mountain” to a class of eighth grade students. The teacher did not get parental consent prior to allowing the class of young teenage students to view the movie. The movie has an “R” rating, which means that a child under 17 could not view the movie without a parent or a supervising adult being present. The teacher showed 44-minutes of the film which included two separate sexually explicit scenes involving two homosexual cowboy lovers. Prior to allowing the children to view the movie, Marnetta Buford, the substitute teacher, allegedly told the kids: “What happens in Ms. Buford’s class stays in Ms. Buford’s class.” While this might work for Vegas, Ms. Buford’s confidence in middle school students to keep quiet was sorely misplaced. Jessica Turner was a 12-year old student in the math class and she watched the movie. When her grandparents asked her about what she learned at school that day, she did not heed the warning, she spilled her guts, and her grandparents were not happy. They filed a lawsuit against the school district contending that the movie had caused extreme emotional distress to their granddaughter. In order to support a claim for intentional infliction of emotional distress, a litigant must demonstrate outrageous conduct that would reasonably cause extreme emotional distress to a reasonable person. When I say emotional distress, this is more than being upset or angry; rather, a litigant would have to demonstrate extreme emotional distress that actually required mental health treatment as a result of psychological or physical manifestations. Apparently, Jessica went to one counseling session which the grandparents contended was necessary as a result of viewing the offending film. This was the only evidence that the grandparents had to prove their granddaughter’s claim of extreme emotional distress - a pretty flimsy reed. The case went to trial and a jury concluded that the conduct was not sufficiently “outrageous” so as to expect that it would cause emotional distress to a reasonable child. The school board had also pointed out that the school had a policy that only G-rated movies were allowed to be shown to students, and any movie with a different rating had to be approved by the principal. The substitute teacher did not get permission to show “Brokeback Mountain” to the math students - and one could expect that permission would have been denied by the administrators if it had been sought. My friend asked me what I thought about it. First, I have no idea what the film has to do with math. Second, it is disappointing that any teacher would show such a sexually explicit film to any child without parental approval. Third, as a parent, I would have been outraged by the conduct - though I tend to agree with the jury’s conclusion that this is not the type of conduct that would cause extreme emotional distress to a child. I would expect that the child might be confused by the film, embarrassed by the content, curious about the subject, and concerned about the message if it conflicted with the child’s religious beliefs. These are all things that the parents could address with their child at home after learning of the event, albeit things that the parents should not have to address as a result of unilateral and inappropriate conduct by a school teacher. On the other hand, I wondered whether this conduct would be sufficient under Pennsylvania law to support criminal charges for Corruption of a Minor. Under that statute, it is unlawful for any person over 18 years of age to engage in any conduct that tends to corrupt the morals of a minor, i.e., a person under 18 years of age. Is this the type of conduct that tends to corrupt the morals of a minor? The statute provides no definition whatsoever and relies upon the community as represented by the jury to determine whether the action is criminal. In other words, the jury would have to determine that this conduct was corrupting in nature, i.e., something that a minor should not be exposed to. This burden seems a little lighter than the requirement of proving “outrageous” conduct that was necessary in the civil litigation. There are a few things that would support the suggestion that this was inappropriate and potentially corrupting material. First, the movie had an “R” rating, which means that an independent body had already determined that it had inappropriate material for children under 17. Second, the school district itself had a policy that allowed only “G” rated films for children, which demonstrated the school district intent to avoid exposing children to inappropriate material. Third, the teacher encouraged the children not to tell anyone about what they were doing, which suggests that the teacher knew that the conduct was inappropriate. Fourth, there are undoubtedly members of the community who would conclude that this conduct was corrupting in nature, but the question would be whether you could get 12 of them to agree on it. Frankly, as offensive as I find this conduct to be, I am not sure you would ever get a jury to agree that it was criminal. Please submit any questions, concerns, or comments to Susquehanna County District Attorney’s Office, P.O. Box 218, Montrose, Pennsylvania 18801 or at our website www.SusquehannaCounty-DA.org or discuss this and all articles at http://dadesk.blogspot.com/.
The Healthy Geezer In our last column we discussed gun safety. Today's column provides advice to parents and grandparents who have a gun in the home. Guns and children are a volatile mix. Gunshot wounds are second only to car accidents as a cause of fatal injury in children. Almost 30 children are injured or killed daily by guns; most of the guns are owned by the child's family or friends, researchers have found. One-third of all families in America that have children also have guns, and more than 40 percent of them don't keep their guns locked up. Children younger than eight can't tell the difference between a real gun and a toy, and 3-year-olds are strong enough to pull the trigger on a real gun. Children and teens commit more than half of all unintentional shootings. So what should you do to protect children who are in a home with a gun? I'll provide some tips, but, if you want a detailed safety program you can teach your children at home, call the "Eddie Eagle Program" at 800-231-0752. This program is sponsored by the National Rifle Association. If you teach them nothing else, repeat these instructions over and over to them. If you find a gun: STOP! Don't Touch. Leave the Area. Tell an Adult. Don't allow guns to become mysterious. If they are an unknown, children will become curious and look for your gun when you are not around. Talk openly about them. Discuss gun use on television and movies where firearms are often handled carelessly and characters are “killed.” Tell children about the real dangers guns present. Explain the difference between toy guns and real guns. If your child has toy guns, you can use them to demonstrate how they are different from genuine firearms. You can also use them to teach safe gun handling. Store guns so that they are inaccessible to children and other unauthorized users. Gun shops sell a wide variety of safes, cases, and other security devices. And gun safety is worth teaching your children even if you don't own a gun. According to federal statistics, there are guns in about half of all U.S. households. Your child or grandchild could visit a friend and confront a gun. A recent survey done at the University of Michigan found that most American parents who own guns discuss gun safety with their children, but the majority of parents who don't own guns ignore the subject. In their national poll on children's health, the researchers asked 1,621 parents about gun ownership and if they had discussed gun safety with their children. One-third of respondents with children ages 5 to 17 said they had a gun in the home. Of parents with guns in the home, 82 percent said they have talked to their children about gun safety. But only 48 percent of parents without guns in the home have ever discussed gun safety with their children. If you have a question, please write to fred@healthygeezer.com.
Library Chitchat No Library Chitchat This Week
Rock Doc No Rock Doc This Week
EARTH TALK No Earth Talk This Week
Barnes-Kasson Corner No Barnes-Kasson Corner This Week
News
|
Living
|
Sports
|
Schools
|
Churches
|
Ads
|
Events
Military | Columns | Ed/Op | Obits | Archive | Subscribe © |
|||||||
