Vigilante Baker parents bashed daughter's tormentor

[Trumplestiltskin 5,791]

A QUEENSLAND couple so fed up with their 14-year-old being bullied at school have narrowly avoided jail after bashing their daughter's tormentor.

Stephen Lester Baker and Suzane Maree Baker took justice into their own hands when they believed Queensland police and Beenleigh High School failed to act on their complaints about the bullying.

The Beenleigh District Court was told yesterday how the pair confronted their daughter's tormentor and repeatedly punched her in the head.

The attack - condemned by Judge Ian Dearden - reveals how quickly schoolyard bullying can spiral out of control.

A recent survey of Year 11 students found more than 70 per cent considered bullying a problem in their schools.

Education Queensland, teachers' unions and the Queensland Council of Parents and Citizens do not keep statistics on school bullying, but most agreed the problem was on the rise as teenagers turned to the internet and mobile phones to target victims.

An Education Queensland spokesman said the department took bullying very seriously.

"Every state school must implement a responsible behaviour plan that follows the department's guidelines and policies on bullying, harassment and other discrimination," he said.

Parents and Citizens Metropolitan West president Charles Alder said respect, tolerance and simple defence mechanisms needed to be taught to today's youth.

He said victims should ignore unwanted phone or internet messages, and advise parents, teachers and police of any physical attacks.

The court was told the Bakers' attack, which took place in a park on April 3, 2006, came after the parents notified the school and police over the repeated bashing and bullying of their daughter.

Prosecutor Nicholas McGhee said the Crown conceded the couple's daughter had been subjected to violent bullying by the girl identified only as Rachel, including an attack in which she bashed the girl's head against a school toilet wall.

But Mr McGhee said Baker, 44, and his wife, 41, had acted like disgraceful vigilantes by attacking their daughter's assailant rather than pursuing the matter through police.

He said the issue came to a head when Rachel and the Bakers' daughter became involved in an after school argument, which involved taunts and pushing.

After the incident in the park, the Bakers and their daughter drove around the area looking for Rachel and a group of her friends in a bid to resolve the bullying problem.

Mr McGhee said Stephen Baker punched Rachel in the head up to four times.

"(Baker told Rachel) 'no one hits my daughter'," Mr McGhee told the court. "(Baker) stated he would kill them if they touched her again."

Suzane Baker then grabbed Rachel by the hair and punched her in the head up to four times, he said.

Barrister Paul Brown, for Stephen Baker, said his client had become frustrated when neither the school or the police appeared to act on the family's complaints.

Barrister Geoff Seaholme, for Suzane Baker, said the mother was also frustrated by the situation and had been the subject of an alleged revenge attack by members of Rachel's family.

Mr Seaholme said one of Rachel's family had been charged over an attack on Suzane Baker, during which she received two black eyes. The attack allegedly occurred the day after the assault on Rachel.

Rachel and members of her family made a number of disapproving grunts and groans during yesterday's sentencing hearing.

Judge Dearden, in sentencing the Bakers, said the actions of all concerned - the Bakers, Rachel and her family - could best be described as disgraceful and appalling.

He said it was clear the actions of Rachel, the Bakers and anyone responsible for the attack on Suzane Baker were criminal and as such should, if they had not already, be referred to police.

"Instead of putting (your daughter) in the car and looking for the bully, you should . . . (have been) driving to the police station," he told the Bakers.

"The 14-year-old (Rachel) could/may (still) be subjected to criminal offences (if reported to police)."

Judge Dearden also gave a forceful warning to both families to try to resolve their differences to avoid establishing a long-term feud between them.

Stephen and Suzane Baker were given wholly suspended jail terms of six and three months respectively.

http://www.news.com.au/dailytelegraph/stor...5005941,00.html

[VanessaTony 3,567]

No-one replied to this, and it's REALLY old, but GOOD!

As someone who was bullied (not bashed, verbally bullied) I know first hand how the schools do NOTHING to help. And how little power they have. how the school sometimes has strict policy about not involving police unless their avenues have been exhausted, and how your kid could be expelled if you go to police before following the school's avenue.

Obviously the parents should not have beaten the girl but obviously nothing else was working and now they've drawn attention (that should ALREADY have been there) to their daughters plight.

Edited February 11, 2010 by Vanessa&Tony

[Ali G. 37]

This is how people should react. When the law fails to protect, due to disingenuous groups like the ACLU protecting the perpetrators rights, we need to take matters into our own hands.

[Ali G. 37]

The one thing I don;t get about bullying in schools is why are these kids not thrown out of the school and forced to attend another school, much further away, at their parents expense?

Better yet, why not round them up and put them into a facility purposely built for behavioral retards? Not as if they are ever going to become functional members of society and certainly do nothing to further their education or that of others. F-ck em really..

Edited February 11, 2010 by Booyah

[SMOKE 1,426]

probably because the school would lose funding. they get xx dollars per student....i dunno just a guess

[Peikko 1,575]

The law isn't designed to protect any one. It's designed to allow society to deal with people who commit acts that are deemed unacceptable by that society. If one allows anyone that feels they haven't been fairly treated by those who are entrusted to investigate illegal activity the right to not only seek out the 'guilty party' but also enact whatever justice they deem appropriate directly once the 'guilty party' is found the result will soon be anarchy. I never understand how anyone can justify vigilante activity if one wants to maintain a society that respects law and order.

[Ali G. 37]

Heck some of my friends should have been kicked out of school.

As a kid, hating on others was funny. Yet once you grow up, you realize how idiotic it was. Which is why the school should have rounded us up and taught us the consequences of our actions.

[Fandango 1,439]

When I read the title of this tread, I had images of two actual bakers in hats beating someone up with rolling pins...

[Peikko 1,575]

Heck some of my friends should have been kicked out of school.

As a kid, hating on others was funny. Yet once you grow up, you realize how idiotic it was. Which is why the school should have rounded us up and taught us the consequences of our actions.

Do you think you should have been 'rounded up' and stuck in a special facility for behavioral retards? Are you a functioning member of society?

Edited February 11, 2010 by Madame Cleo

[Pinocchio Liberal 268]

What happened to the good ol days when two kids could call each other out to the alley, duke it out and shake hands afterward?

[Ali G. 37]

The law isn't designed to protect any one. It's designed to allow society to deal with people who commit acts that are deemed unacceptable by that society. If one allows anyone that feels they haven't been fairly treated by those who are entrusted to investigate illegal activity the right to not only seek out the 'guilty party' but also enact whatever justice they deem appropriate directly once the 'guilty party' is found the result will soon be anarchy. I never understand how anyone can justify vigilante activity if one wants to maintain a society that respects law and order.

Sorry Cleo but law and order has failed us, especially when ACLU and their equivalents do anything and everything to protect the rights of criminals. After all, there is a reason why organized crime and gangs have flourished so much in America versus other first world countries. The police in Aus have a lot of power to do their job. Unfortunately bullying is a gray area, which can only be dealt with by the parents.

There was a movie based on a real incident on lifetime once, where a kid was bullied and beaten unconscious in a wealthy area in California. The victim was out of school for three months, while learning to walk again. Anything happen to the bullies? Nope, as his mother was a hot-shot lawyer and threatened to sue the school and family. Zero evidence and all of that rubbish. Is that what you call justice?

Had that been my kid, I would have dealt with both the mother and her teenager 'accordingly'. Put it this way, it would be a long time before either of them walk, spoke or even chewed again, if ever.

Edited February 11, 2010 by Booyah

[Ali G. 37]

Do you think you should have been 'rounded up' and stuck in a special facility for behavioral retards? Are you a functioning member of society?

I never participated, however, I did watch and say nothing. Whereas, the kids who were the worst culprits, are now serving prison time for a range of other crimes.

I've seen a lot and was a trouble maker myself when I was young. Hence why I know what I am talking about, when it comes to getting tougher on crimes and not buying the excuses. Furthermore, it had almost zero to do with socioeconomics, since half the kids who behaved the worst and were the most violent, were not poor by any stretch.

Edited February 11, 2010 by Booyah

[The_Dude 1,142]

Sorry Cleo but law and order has failed us, especially when ACLU and their equivalents do anything and everything to protect the rights of criminals. After all, there is a reason why organized crime and gangs have flourished so much in America versus other first world countries. The police in Aus have a lot of power to do their job.

Are you really trying to blame the ACLU for the reason why there is organized crime in the U.S.? For your information, it is rampant worldwide, not just the U.S.. The reason it is so prevalent here is because there is such a market for it. Plain and simple, we have too much ######, and too many willing to buy stolen ###### at a severely discounted rate. Additionally, we have a lot of people here, like most western nations who are willing to buy ###### to put up their noses. Most crime and organized crime revolves around drugs. The ACLU defends the peoples rights whether they are a criminal, or like the case in skokie illinois. If you don't like that people have those rights in this country, you are free to GTFO.

[Peikko 1,575]

Sorry Cleo but law and order has failed us, especially when ACLU and their equivalents do anything and everything to protect the rights of criminals. After all, there is a reason why organized crime and gangs have flourished so much in America versus other first world countries. The police in Aus have a lot of power to do their job. Unfortunately bullying is a gray area, which can only be dealt with by the parents.

There was a movie based on a real incident on lifetime once, where a kid was bullied and beaten unconscious in a wealthy area in California. The victim was out of school for three months, while learning to walk again. Anything happen to the bullies? Nope, as his mother was a hot-shot lawyer and threatened to sue the school and family. Zero evidence and all of that rubbish. Is that what you call justice?

Had that been my kid, I would have dealt with both the mother and her teenager 'accordingly'. Put it this way, it would be a long time before either of them walk, spoke or even chewed again, if ever.

Law and order hasn't 'failed us'. It fails some people some of the time, but society isn't falling apart. There are areas where things go wrong, when individuals are not prosecuted and punished for acts for which they should be duly processed. However, the answer to these failings is certainly not beating the ###### out of anyone towards whom you bear a grudge.

[Pinocchio Liberal 268]

Are you really trying to blame the ACLU for the reason why there is organized crime in the U.S.? For your information, it is rampant worldwide, not just the U.S.. The reason it is so prevalent here is because there is such a market for it. Plain and simple, we have too much ######, and too many willing to buy stolen ###### at a severely discounted rate. Additionally, we have a lot of people here, like most western nations who are willing to buy ###### to put up their noses. Most crime and organized crime revolves around drugs. The ACLU defends the peoples rights whether they are a criminal, or like the case in skokie illinois. If you don't like that people have those rights in this country, you are free to GTFO.

The ACLU is in queensland?