How a Prank Call Led to Kids Having Rights | In re Gault
ฝัง
- เผยแพร่เมื่อ 3 ส.ค. 2023
- In episode 74 of Supreme Court Briefs, two teenage boys get arrested for being obscene to a woman in an apparent prank telephone call.
Produced by Matt Beat and Beat Productions, LLC. All images/video by Matt Beat, found in the public domain, or used under fair use guidelines. Music by @rifadobeats.
Mr. Beat's Supreme Court Briefs playlist: • Supreme Court Briefs
Here's an annotated script with footnotes:
docs.google.com/document/d/1M...
Check out cool primary sources here:
www.oyez.org/cases/1966/116
Other sources used:
www.uscourts.gov/educational-...
supreme.justia.com/cases/fede...
en.wikipedia.org/wiki/In_re_G...
www.wisbar.org/NewsPublicatio...
Here is where you can get Mr. Beat's Supreme Court book:
Amazon: amzn.to/3Jj3ZnS
From my website: www.iammrbeat.com/merch.html
Bookshop (a collection of indie publishers): bookshop.org/books/the-power-...
Barnes and Noble: www.barnesandnoble.com/w/the-...
Amazon UK: www.amazon.co.uk/s?k=the+powe...
Mango: mango.bz/books/the-power-of-o...
Target: www.target.com/p/the-power-of...
Walmart: www.walmart.com/ip/The-Power-...
Chapters Indigo: www.chapters.indigo.ca/en-ca/...
Join this channel to get access to perks:
/ @iammrbeat
For business inquiries or to send snail mail to Mr. Beat:
www.iammrbeat.com/contact.html
/ iammrbeat
How to support and donate to my channel:
Subscribe to @iammrbeat & hit the notification bell 🔔
Join for great perks on Patreon: / iammrbeat
Donate to Mr. Beat on Paypal: www.paypal.me/mrbeat
Buy Mr. Beat a coffee: ko-fi.com/iammrbeat
Cameo: www.cameo.com/iammrbeat
Subscribe to my second channel: The Beat Goes On
Patreon for The Beat Goes On: / thebeatgoeson
Connect with me:
Links: linktr.ee/iammrbeat
Website: www.iammrbeat.com/
Podcast: anchor.fm/thebeatpod
Reddit: / mrbeat
@beatmastermatt on Twitter: / beatmastermatt
Facebook: / iammrbeat
Instagram: / iammrbeat
Beatcord: / discord
TikTok: / iammrbeat
Merch:
matt-beat-shop.fourthwall.com/
www.bonfire.com/store/mr-beat/
sfsf.shop/support-mrbeat/
amzn.to/3fdakiZ
Affiliate Links:
Useful Charts: usefulcharts.com/?aff=12
Fourthwall: link.fourthwall.com/MrBeat
StreamYard: streamyard.com/pal/d/52723408...
#supremecourtcases #supremecourtbriefs #supremecourt
In re Gault was a huge case because it expanded 14th Amendment protections to juvenile defendants. Kids must get the same rights as adults! It dramatically changed the entire juvenile system across the country. After this case, judges could no longer randomly and unfairly give out punishments at juvenile delinquency proceedings. For the first time in American history, the Court clearly said kids deserve constitutional protections, too.
Which Supreme Court case should I cover for this series next?
R.G. & G.R. Harris Funeral Homes Inc. v. Equal Employment Opportunity Commission (2020)? I know it's a bit recent but there aren't many US cases specifically about trans people, and it is one of the most relevant aspects of US law to my own life as UK trans person. Thank you so much x
Cassius Clay (Muhammad ali later on) v. United states when he refused to draft In vietnam
You should do Mendez vs. Westminster
Dobs v Jackson would be interesting
Dobs v Jackson would be interesting
How on Earth could anyone think that six years in prison is an even remotely appropriate punishment for making a prank call? Absolutely sickening.
Yet people defrauding millions from the working class get only a few years in prison.
Edit: In most cases no prison time or negative consequences whatsoever.
@@Puggy42069Right they dont even get jailtime sometimes.
@@Puggy42069 "a few years in prison" LMAO, more commonly they get a government bailout
It isn't. And Thank God SCOTUS was held by sane people unlike every other Judicial officials in Arizona that day
That's a textbook example of abuse of power.
It is absolutely insane that this needed to go to the supreme court. SIX YEARS for prank calls? That judge was on a power trip
I think he must have had a mental issue.
Judges need other ways to be fired that isn't impeachment
@@nonyadamnbusiness9887 I'd say most adults of that era had mental issues. It's all the lead in the air.
@@doomsdayrabbit4398 Most of the adults of that era went through the Great Depression and the Second World War. They were absolutely not tolerant of bullshit, but they also didn't over react. The ones that over reacted were buried in France and in the Pacific. In 1964 leaded gasoline had only been common for less than ten years. I bet this old judge was just coockoo.
A misdemeanor, no less. The maximum allowable sentence for a misdemeanor, by definition, is less than one year. Anything over one year is defined as a felony.
Aside from the obvious trampling of other rights mentioned, sentencing a juvenile to six years for a crime which has a maximum sentence of 2 months and/or a fine is clearly cruel & unusual punishment
I'm surprised the 8th Amendment isn't brought up more
I was thinking the same. 6 years for juveniles compared to 2 months for adults, thats a massive difference
@@iammrbeat because if they do it often enough (reasonable or not) it's not "unusual" anymore!
They probably didn't bother, because the 14th amendment was more effective
@algebrathemeow420 I'd argue that 5 years of incarceration for a crime that usually gets 2 months and a fine is clearly "unusual" and by nature of it's extreme irregularity is also excessively cruel.
Sentencing a juvenile to six years in prison over a prank call is far more obscene than anything that could have been said in the prank call.
Oh so threats of r*pe are nothing? People hear "teenager gets 6 years in prison" and their parental reflex kicks in. Get outta here, protect your own fucking children.
Unbelievable that his jail time was longer than if he had waited until he was an adult, made the call, then served the maximum.
It's insane.
@@iammrbeatCriminally insane
I’ve actually been involved with the juvenile court system and it’s unironically one of the most corrupt systems in this country.
Don't want to prod too much, but I'm a bit curious at the stuff that goes on with it?
Even more corrupt than the Pentagon?
@@123four...One thing is that in juvenile cases, there's a lot of discretion over whether to file charges, or just tell the kid's parents and let them discipline the kid. That generally means that the wealth, political connections, and skin color of a juvenile's family are very predictive of whether a juvenile is actually charged with a crime or is simply turned over to their family for "private discipline."
Rich kid steals a car: Well, boys will be boys.
Poor kid steals a sandwich: To the gallows!
@@MWSin1 I watched a video the other day about kids who stole a kia for a tiktok challenge and they were all black and poor. Not one of them got time in prison.
@@reprovedcandy Congratulations. You found one case where it didn't happen. Racism and the criminalization of poverty has been forever ended worldwide.
I just looked up more about this and boy those kids (now in their late 60s) got railroaded. There was no proof that they actually said anything vulgar or offensive. The judge threw the book at them because he had heard a rumor that one of them stole a baseball glove 6 years earlier (they were 14 at the time, so they would have been 8). The judge said the kids admitted to it yet there were no records or other witnesses that said that they did. Even the part in the video about the one kid saying the other kid actually spoke he just dialed the phone came from the presiding judge and both kids have denied it to this day. (They do admit that there was a humorous phone call along the lines of "Is your refrigerator running well you better go catch it"). There was no court stenographer and no witnesses to the trial except the judge, the bailiff, and the kids. The bailiff says that he didn't hear or pay attention to the trial (different sources there isn't a lot on this one). At the time whatever the judge said went and there was no questioning his judgments.
What a corrupt judge. :(
just wow.
The judge was also known locally as a bigot and a drunk for years. I have family in the area who knew him during that time period and passed down stories to the children. He was extremely abusive and was known to threaten to have people put in prison if they challenged him in any way. He was slime.
If this is true, every signal case that that judge proceeded over should be overturned and have massive reparations to all the defendants, or their next of kin as the case may be.
It blows me away that judges like this exist every time I hear about them. It reminds me of the case of the 17 year old who was placed on the sex offender registry by a judge because he had sex with a 14 year old who lied about her age, snuck out behind her moms back, and the mom called the cops purely because she wanted to know where her daughter was. She and her daughter didn't want to penalize the boy at all. The judge took it entirely upon himself to put him on the sex offender registry for life because, in so many words, hookup culture is bad. You have to have serious problems to think that a permanent crippling punishment like losing all of your teen years in juvy or being placed on the SO registry will somehow teach them a lesson or improve society instead of, best case nothing happening, worst and far more likely case you created a career criminal because the defendant has very very few options.
For those who don't know, "in re" means "in the matter [of]" in English. In legal terms, it's uaed to signify that the case is not about 2 sides having a disagreement, like in "A v. B" cases, like in bankruptcy cases. In this case, it's because juveniles aren't considered a side and don't completely have legal standing.
I should have mentioned this in the video. Thank you for clarifying for the viewers.
@@iammrbeat No problem
Thanks for info
@@iammrbeat how come Dred Scott vs Sandford has an official name if the Supreme Court said Dred Scott didn't have legal standing?
What about New Jersey v. TLO? TLO was a minor. Same with Powell v. Alabama.
All involved in the unconstitutional kidnapping of a child from their parents must be held accountable. The detention facility as well.
I’m surprised this wasn’t unanimous. This story was such a flagrant violation of due process!
It seems so obvious today, doesn't it?
@@iammrbeat I believe it was Justice Stewart that voted against the ruling. His argument was that juvenile court was for correction, not for punishment. Therefore, he believed the same procedures used in criminal trials, weren't needed for juvenile trials
@patrickroden4481 Which is absolutely bizarre. I don't know how he could look at imprisonment and say "Yeah, prison isn't punishment"
@@patrickroden4481 maybe back in Justice Steward's time as a child, but during his tenure, juvenile court was definitely not used for correction! - mico
@@patrickroden4481 Ah yes. I believe that's the same justification the Soviets used to imprison political opponents. Doctors argued that the only way anyone would deny the greatness of the Soviet Union would be if they were mentally disordered. As such, they could be committed to "high-security psychiatric hospitals" against their wills. For correction.
Judge McGee sounds like a real nut job. Putting a juvenile in prison for 6 years for making a phone call with lewd remarks while “women or children” are nearby is crazy. Who is really being protected if a juvenile can be jailed for that long because a juvenile was nearby at the time something that otherwise wouldn’t be a crime is nearby. Even his reasoning doesn’t sound like a legal decision as much as it sounds like he just wanted to impose his own moral code on others
This entire case is just the most insane one yet.
Jerry getting arrested and thrown into Precinct Jail but the Sheriffs didn't even inform the parents that they apprehended one of their son until the family called the office.
The Trial apparently didn't even need to have Ora Cook, the technically 'Plaintiff' of the case to appear in court to make their decision.
Judge McGee clearly putting cruel and unusual punishment for a 15 year old teenager. 6 years in State Juvenile Prison when it is only 2 months can be paid with a 50$ fine for any adults
And the Appellate court didn't realize that putting a teenager in prison for 6 years over a prank call is an insane judicial decision.
I am surprised that the entire Arizonan Law and Law Enforcement institutions aren't severely reprimanded over this absolute nonsense after SCOTUS decision... Then again, one of the dissenting opinion said another nonsense that "Juvenile Court and Detention are for correctional purposes, and not punishment"
I can't imagine what has been the case for other Judicial decisions directed at literal Children for the past 186 years before this Supreme Court decision took hold
Yep, so much we'll never even know about. Thank goodness for this decision.
The plaintiff in a criminal case is the state. She would have been the victim and witness.
@@totallytubular618 Even if she doesn't demand restitution, which is why the state became the plaintiff They would still call her into court for her Testimony to be heard.
The court doesn't do that is the problem
@@aribantala that's not how criminal cases work. The state is the plaintiff, always. The state seeks restitution on behalf of the victim on top of a fine or prison sentence. The victim can always file their own civil suit for restitution or damags, in which they will be plaintiff in their own suit, not the criminal suit.
@@totallytubular618 Again, the problem here is that Cook wasn't even called for her Testimony.
Do you think it's fair that the accuser did not come into court to provide her testimony?
I absolutely do not think so, and so does SCOTUS at the time
What a completely insane case. I'm not even talking about the content, but the process. It's weird that a writ of Habeas Corpus could be refered to THE SAME JUDGE guilty of the false imprisonment in the first place.
Yeah that part was nuts
I’m still shocked at the dissent. I cannot believe one of the justices would have upheld the decision of the trial judge,
At least this time SCOTUS isn't also the insane one... Unlike Buck v Bell
And here the defendant apparently didn't even make the call!
@@davidcantor8349 Reading and off the wiki article, it seems Stewart argued that because juvie is meant for correction and not punishment, the constitutional rules that apply to criminal cases shouldn't apply here.
Which seems extremely and unhelpfully pedantic to me.
How much control did McGee have over the sentence length? Sounds like he was a dreadful person if his decision was 6 years.
By the context of the video it seems that judges could hand out whatever punishment they felt like
@@luisfilipe2023*If it’s a minor, he mentioned the max sentence for an adult
"freedom is just another word for nothing left to lose"
-Bobby McGee
Full control. He could have given the minimum and he did not.
Kids for cash decades before our recent one? Were there private detention facilities that would allow a judge to get a kickback in those days?
SIX YEARS for an obscene phone call?! I'm glad that for once the Supreme Court made a good decision.
How is that even illegal, isn't that against the first amendment?
Imagine how many crimes we’d all get charged with if everything we did as kids to teens was seen in the same light as an adult
@@BONK_2000 In some case, rude or vulgar speech Isn’t protected by the 1st amendment because it could be deemed a threat to the public good. That usually only applies to public broadcasts however, so idk how that applies to private conversations. I do know a lot of states still have old timey “In the presence of a woman” laws on the books, so someone would have to challenge those to get them overturned.
One of the better decisions they have ever made
@superhumantvftw7214 Perhaps it could be viewed as a form of harassment? Since they called her, it was targeted, too. I'm not a lawyer, though, so I really don't know.
Apparently every judge in Arizona thought they were Roy Bean. Six years is ridiculous on an obscenity conviction, but I'm surprised they didn't try to hang him. The fact that children having rights under the Constitution had to go all the way to the Supreme Court is ridiculous. If the children didn't have rights, then it's the parents that should have been thrown in jail.
Even Roy Bean wasn't Roy Bean. He only ever sentenced two people to hang.
Judge Your Beans? I heard he tried his last case one month before he tried his first case (and some smartass figured out how to build a snake robot).
When you realize that once upon a time women children and slaves had the same social status, and that for the most part slaves were freed and women were empowered and children... got *parental* rights
And to top it all off, if he only dialed the number like he said, then he was got *6 years* for being an *accessory to a prank call*.
That judge must really, really hate teenage boys.
parents can send their kids to torture camps for less, because society does not see young people as human
Gaul says he never actually admitted to dialing the call either. The judge just made that up to say they confessed since there was no evidence.
“What are you in for?”
“I robbed a connivence store, you?”
“I made a prank phone call 2 years ago.”
lol ikr?
"Jesus. How much of your sentence remains?"
"Just 4 years..."
"I... get out in 6 months..."
Gosh, that was absurd. It's sad to hear how recent this was, but he was sentenced to 6 years? For a prank call?! And the Supreme Court decision came ~3 years later. How much would that damage you, emotionally and in your capacity to plan for your adult life?
That's something that will mess you up
Imagine spending this time with kids who murdered people while you are there for literal prank call... if that even happened at all...
That a child was still imprisoned for *THREE YEARS* over this is absolutely ridiculous
Abe Fortas was the lawyer who represented Clarence Earl Gideon in the Supreme Court case Gideon v. Wainwright (where we now all have a constitutional right to an attorney). A few years later, Johnson helped him become a Supreme Court Justice.
Educating us like a boss.
Fun fact: due to the fact that he didn't make the call and that his accuser was not on trial (again, violating the 6th amendment), he never even saw the face of the fragile Ms. Cook
I wouldn't judge her to harshly for this. She probably figured that he would just get picked up, his parents notified and then it would stop.
Considering she didn't show up for the trial, her priority was probably to just make it stop and have his parents teach him a lesson, not to banish him to the gulag for 6 years.
Indeed
Or they know this would happened. And they pratically know he will ne in jail longer than legally permitted
But they are silence about it
I feel like no reasonable person would anticipate that calling the police over a prank call would end up with a 15 year old going to jail for 6 years.
@@squiddler7731 That seems unimaginable. Prank call = six years. it does not compute unless it was a death threat, but even then, probably not.
That guy literally tried to ruin that kid’s life over making a prank call
Don’t forget the girl that called the sheriff over a prank call
He did ruin his life.
@@johnloman4164 she is just a kid trying to make a bully stop… the judge is entirely to blame here
@@creeperzoid2639 next time someone calls me asking for a Seymour butts I’ll make sure to dial 911. Since they are such foul bullies and therefore must face legal consequences. When you call the cops on someone, what do you expect to happen? Is it entirely surprising that calling the cops on someone might lead to that person being arrested?
The thing is, I don’t call the cops on pranksters, kids don’t call the cops on pranksters, and she did call the cops. Don’t act like the boy was a vicious bully, he’s a kid who made a prank call.
it's a little girl you idiot, of course they aren't going to make the perfectly rational choice. that's what kids do. but you can at least be empathetic. i did a lot of dumb shit as a kid and i'm sure you did too
i also didn't say the boy was a vicious bully, it sounds like he was just doing what kids do. really that's what they were both doing, but the justice system ran with it and made it something else entirely@@johnloman4164
As someone who just turned 18 I see this as an absolute win
I see this as a absolute lose since I have to be a adult now
Happy belated birthday!
@@Azurethewolf168 oh that’s true. Responsibilities 😭
I guess the good news is you’ll eventually get used to it
@@PremierCCGuyMMXVI yeah, you never realize how much you take something for granted until it’s gone
@@Azurethewolf168 very true and it’s ultimately my fear as well
This kid spent a year in a half in jail before the Supreme Court release him. Appeal Courts need to run faster especially when they are appeal such an obvious blatant disregard of the one's rights.
That punishment was absurd! Beyond the 5th and 6th amendment, I feel that court violated the 8th amendment for punishing 36x longer that the maximum penalty for adults and the 1st amendment because freedom of speech should allow “lewd” speech on a phone too. I hope that judge was fired!
Oh he retired as an old man, unfortunately.
We both know he was not. There are no punishments for judicial misconduct in the united states unless you're literally selling children into slavery. If the kids for cash thing was just judges being sadistic monsters, they'd still be on the bench today.
@@iammrbeatThis is gut-wrenching and is that type of injustice where people start to prefer lynching and vigilantism.
@@iammrbeat What do you think about writing a text book of 'shamfull' legal figures, and distributing copies to every law school in the US for Free.
@@iammrbeat i don't wish bad on people that often, but i hope that jogde suffered the last years of his life. just has he whantet that kid (and many others over the years probably) to do
Imagine how awful it must have been for him in juvie among actual tough criminal kids and admitting his crime was a prank call.
Kids who committed real crimes were sent to the adult justice system. They sent kids to the State Industrial School for things like running away from home, loitering, "talking back", "waywardness", "rebelliousness", or any indication of having a brain. I'm sure the inmates were chill, the guards not so much
There was a really great episode of the 5-4 podcast about this case. It's crazy how few rights kids used to have and how awfully they used to be treated. Today we have a different but similar problem, where lots of places kids used to hang out, like malls, are closing, and kids are being banned from other public spaces like parks and given strict curfews by law. We shouldn't be punishing kids for doing normal stuff like hanging out in public.
Yeah this is the reason no one socializes cause there’s no place to do so, if someone is at night people always assume they’re a drug dealer or weirdo. Kids nowadays have too little freedom in another way.
The only good thing about the malls closing is that at least kids won't be under the strict rules of the malls! The malls have been and still are restricting free speech, although it's less of a problem now because a lot of dying malls don't have security staff.
@@redcrystalnick7078 I never knew malls had strict rules, wasn’t that the place where everyone used to hang out 24/7?
I had no idea they covered this case. That's a great podcast.
I wish there were more public gathering spaces, areas for people to go other than home or work/school. Maybe children would be less socially isolated if that were so, speaking from my own experiences growing up.
It's pretty sad that this required a ruling from the highest court in the nation. What an absolute POS that judge was. I wonder if he felt good about imprisoning a child for 6 years?
It's amazing that it took our country almost 200 years to finally say, "yeah, kids should have rights too." But given how long it took for us to make this realization for so many other demographics, I guess it's par for the course. Looking forward to the day when our country actually lives up to the words that "all people are created equal".
I assumed it would be earlier since kids aren’t as smart as adults and shouldn’t be charged the same as them
It's more complicated than that. Children certainly do have rights, just not as many as adults do. They can't vote, they can't marry or enter into contracts without parental consent, they can't legally consent to sexual activity before a certain age, and they even have limited free speech rights when the step into public school gates. All of this is for good reason-- because kids are really stupid. Their brains and bodies haven't fully developed yet and, perhaps most importantly, they generally lack anything resembling the life experience that actually crafts a responsible person. Giving them all of this power before they're ready for it invites all kinds of predatory behaviors and is an overall recipe for disaster.
@@Azurethewolf168 kids not being smart explains how they were overlooked.
Well put there
@@iammrbeat thanks!
4:53 Wonder how it felt to be one of the many people who, thanks to them, brought their landmark cases to the Supreme Court and helped improved the USA.
It can also have the opposite effect and cause them stress. Just look at poor Norma McCorvey from Roe v. Wade. Her life and legacy were ruined as a result of the attention she got.
@@alonkatz4633 True
Well they must have not wanted the spotlight since I failed to find any images of them anywhere online.
@@iammrbeat yeah, not everyone likes the spotlight
Man that judge just feels tyrannical in this decision…
Oh absolutely
I don't think i've seen a single case other than this one where the court said that so many rights have been violated... usually it's one or two, but holy crap 6 different rights is absolutely ridiculous (and these were just the ones that were argued for in the case)
I am so glad you covered this one. I knew Jerry Gault and I tell kids all the time to not talk to police unless their parents are present.
Many states have laws against that anyway unless the parents are accused of some crime against the child.
Whoa... 🤯 The ignorance of parts of our Country had far reaches in our society. Term limits for Judges and accountability for them all.
It really is a crazy case.
1967 was a great year for the expansion of rights for people from the Supreme Court as this case and one month later the Loving case ruling which made banning interracial marriage illegal. Thank You Mr Beat for posting this as the current Supreme Court is reversing many of its rulings from the 1960s and 70s as many could see from the video here and the Loving case which You have made an excellent video of why these rulings were made in the first place.
I want to know two things.
1.) What happened to Arizona Judge McGhee after this?
2.) What was Supreme Court Judge Stewart's dissenting opinion on this, if he wrote one?
According to Wikipedia, Justice Potter Stewart was the sole dissenter. He argued that the purpose of juvenile court was correction, not punishment, and so the constitutional procedural safeguards for criminal trials should not apply to juvenile trials.
He wrote one. Check the sources. And McGhee had a long career.
This is a great series! Thank you for continuing it, Mr. Beat
This to me feels like a judge just lording his power because he knows a 15 year old cant fight back like an adult with a lawyer could
I love supreme court briefs, I know alot goes into making them so thank you for continuing to make them.
Thank you for bringing attention to such an injustice of a case. Absolutely insane what happened
It baffles me how so many people people treat kids like some kind of other, troublesome species, then expect them to grow into kind and responsible adults
Hey Mr. beat, love the briefs!
Very interesting cases, very important rulings.
It’s absurd that there was any question to weather minors had constitutional rights
I think what was decided in the Supreme Court was, "do children count as people?" If so, then any amendment which states "all persons" must include them. If children are not people, we might have some bigger problems to deal with than a prank call.
I love the videos Mr. Beat! Keep it up!
Thank you!
This shows how much some adults love to abuse power. Like damn:
If you’re a poor little adult you get your fine and small jail sentence and be on your way, but if you’re an despicable evil child you get 6 years in what is essentially prison but with a different name for a prank call to your neighbour. (sarcasm)
I wish there were more checks on people’s mental health before being given positions of power because there are too many people who take advantage of said power. There has to be a way to screen out people who will abuse it before they have it.
Imagine calling the police on a prank caller and getting them thrown into jail for 6 YEARS. To then not even bother showing up to the trial!
Imagine if the bartender from the Simpsons called the police on Bart.
A literal child calls a house and says something like “I’m looking for a Seymour Butts” and the first thought of the person behind the phone is to call the sheriff and have them locked up for 6 years.
Then the judicial system just allows it to happen. Shame on everyone involved in putting this kid in jail for 6 years.
Imagine spending 6 years in prison because of a damn prank call
I went to the stream last night. So fun, Mr. Beat!
Thanks for being there Brady!
@@iammrbeat My pleasure! Fun Fact: I had my regional spelling bee at the Gerald Ford museum, where I proceeded to go the National Spelling Bee.
If that happened to me, I would have civilly squeezed as much money out of the state as possible. That judge should have been removed from office.
Thanks for the new Supreme Court Briefs! I was just at work teaching today thinking about when the next one was coming out.
Well hopefully I have another one coming out in about a month or so!
Love your videos they are so well presented and interesting even as a non American have a great day.👍🏾
Thank you so much!
Great video! One of those topics where we are all aware of subconsciously, but dont know there is a word for.
The timing could not have been better, I was watching clips of the Simpsons when you uploaded this!
One of my favorite shows of all time.
@@iammrbeat I was watching clips of the episode "Lisa the Iconoclast" a critique of hero worship of historical figures. Truly an underrated episode
I think the thing we should be questioning really is how does prank calling get you months in jail?
Depends on the call. If it's just some stupid "Seymore Butts" thing, then I agree no jail time. But it, for example, you crank someone about their daughter being killed in a car wreck and the caller on the other end gets so upset that she had a heart attack and dies, that shouldn't be protected under free speech. Same deal with things like calling in a false bomb threat or claiming to be the police as part of a "prank". It can really only be determined on a case-by-case basis.
I suppose if we're talking about a repeat offender; like someone who calls the house hundreds of times a day or something.
Or ANY jail time whatsoever?
Because it's payable in Fine, Jail time is more likely also can be replaced with Supervised Community Service, House Arrest, etc
Just like a Traffic ticket.
Its _better_ for you to pay the fines... But there are other form of sanction if you can't/won't pay the fines imposed on it... And 60 days of House Arrest or Community service isn't bad at all
The "lewd comments" thing seems like an old-timey way of saying sexual harassment
I have a suggestion that I want to recommend you make the video about and I want to recommend John Qunicy Adams. Not so long ago I watched the movie Amistad. I was really impressed by John Quincy Adams even though in school I only got the impression that he was just a boring historical figure. When I took the opportunity to read a little more about him, I was shocked at how much I didn't know about him. He was everything from diplomat, secretary of state (he was the one who wrote the monroe doctrine, but still it was James Monroe who got to take the credit) senator to president. He is one of the most underrated presidents (if not the most underrated) and I admire him because of his resistance to slavery and the gag rule in Congress. I would like you to make a mini-documentary about him because there aren't many videos about John Qunicy Adams on TH-cam and the few that are are not as in-depth as your videos usually are. It was your video about Herbert Hoover that made me think more positively about Hoover.
Thanks for the great suggestion. One of these months, by golly, I shall make this video.
These Supreme Court videos are probably your best videos IMHO.
Well thank you!
I'm blown away that I just now found out about this channel!
So a kid gets six years for a prank call whereas an adult gets two months and a fine? It's like the judge believes kids are more troublemaker with adults. For a six-year term to be presented, that kid would've had to have murdered or assaulted the woman. Ridiculous.
Judges often have way too much power.
"do u have rights if u're 18"
Under 18 people being controlled by parents: *funniest shit I've ever heard*
Oh no, is my video going to cause a widespread trend of kids rebelling against their parents?!?
Why do I see you in every video ever
@@iammrbeat yes 😎
It’s interesting how we were taught about In Re Gault in high school. For us, we were taught it wasn’t about “kids have rights” but about how you have the right to face your accuser in court.
I actually live in Globe Arizona and work for the sheriffs office. I have read about this case for years. The county judges picture hangs in our current court house.
How is this case not precedent against solitary confinement for children? Because, yes, that is a thing at this moment in most states!
Judge McGhee is a great name for a judge
I resent this 😂
We should pick this name as a colloquial refering to every other judges but especially for those who has zero accountability
lol well that's something positive to say about him
As a native born Arizonan, this is sickening. The judge and Az Supreme Court should have all been recalled and any benefits denied.
It’s bad enough when the judicial system violates the rights of adults. But abusing a 15 year old kid like that is repulsive. The juvenile justice system is where the most conscientious legal experts should be working.
Thanks for highlighting this bit of history! I wish we could say, well it was the past, unfortunately I believe in many places the justice system, juvenile and adult, is broken….
I drove through Globe, AZ a few months ago. I’m sure there’s some nice folks there but prank calls seem about the most fun thing to do there.
YES! I love this series
ok this case is terrible, poor kids, how are you going to put a child in jail and not event notify their parents
You’re the best Mr. beat
Woahness...you are too kind.
The judge had clearly received a call at some point asking him if his refrigerator was running. And he took it personally.
Crazy how that power hungry judge couldn’t be punished for trampling on the kids rights
Imagine going to jail because you told your neighbors their refrigerator was running.
Six years for equivocation!
Your time in there might seem to run short, but they’ll catch up with it.
That sentencing alone should have already had that case declared a mistrial
No lawyer, no parents or even the plaintiff in the courtroom, and not even an explanation to the parents of why he was even being held in custody. In what universe does anyone think this is a fair trial? Especially given the fact that the crime was a prank phone call?
Mr breast give me money
mr. breast give me money
I am usually a law abiding citizen; since the Statute of limitations is up on this I will confess, I stole this book in high school. In Re Gault. The book is small and was like 5 AR points and I needed them in one day and I have tried to make up for it with good deeds ever since. This event had a big impact on my life, and I make sure to half explain the ruling to my young (3 and 6 now) kids so that they feel the same as i do in re gault and understand they can go to jail. In all, I have been creeped out by the judiciary ever since reading that book.
If I were one of their parents I would be absolutely FERAL. There would not be a single person involved in keeping my child in jail left alive.
Nice to know that police brutality and judicial incompetence have a rich history in this fine, free country of ours
Mr Breast give me money
whoever swent this is legaly classified as a homo
Good video Mr. Beat? How common were these unfair juvenille trials before this decision?
Wild that it took until 1966 for rights of minors to be examined by the Supreme Court.
mr breast give me money
MR BEAST GIVE MONEY PLS
How the hell did that judge get away with all this? He must’ve been power tripping harder than ever to strip all the rights from those kids. Truly he went above and beyond to make those children’s lives hell.
Algorithmic punch!
Great vid 👍
I'm shocked, saddened, and angry that this wasn't 9-0. What was Stewart thinking?
The more I learn about Stewart, the more I am disappointed in him. It often just came down to states' rights for him, though.
This is like, spending a night in jail, at most, as a, "teach him a lesson," moment. Not six fucking years, holy shit.
Mr Breast can I hav money
6 years for prank calling?! From a child, no less. Glad that the Supreme Court sorted this case out & expanded 14A juvenile protections
1964?! I took that long for juveniles to get rights? That's ridculous.
"I think it's clear that a 6 year detention is a cruel and unusual punishment for a $50 crime, thank god they got the case to the Supreme Court who undoubtedly freed him immediately.
What...? THREE YEARS LATER??"
lol well I believe he was out during the legal process
resisted clicking on your channel for a long time just because your name is so similar to mr beast. glad i caved
How could he be held responsible for violating a law forbiding vulgar language in front of children if he and Ronald were also children? By the vary nature of that rule you could assume an adult broke the law and taught or cursed at Gerald and Ronald.
they really looked at that and said "6 years for being edgy on the phone? mk". sheesh, man
And here the defendant apparently didn't even make the call!
this is a very important case
I’d be curious to know what Justice Potter Stewart said in his dissenting brief.
One of my sisters was a year behind those two in school. They were well-known punks and bullies.
That said, the sentence was inappropriate - a judge can consider prior convictions when sentencing, but not "community reputation." Which, if I remember correctly, was mentioned in the decision.
Love your videos