MovieChat Forums > Valentine Road (2013) Discussion > The teacher who had given Larry the dres...

The teacher who had given Larry the dress...


Was she fired from her job for giving him the dress, therefore encouraging his 'flambouyant' behavior, or did she willingly resign? The other teacher interviewed came off as a moron; being appalled by a gay rights parade in front of the school. It was a sign of solidarity and support. Who cares if you've never heard of it before.
And that 'pro bono' attorney getting a "save Brandon" tattoo...WTF?? Go drink some wine with those imbecile jurors, while you "doodle" swastikas.

This documentary was far more scary than any horror film. 21 years seemed too much for murder? Poor Larry will be dead way longer than 21 years; how about forever, without visiting hours.

reply

[deleted]

Some of the people in this, particularly the homophobic teacher you mentioned made me absolutely sick. I'm watching it OnDemand for HBO right now, so I'm not all the way through it yet. I see that you said he got 21 years and that people thought that was too much. I agree with you, what about Larry. He's lost everything and the people that care about him will never completely get over this. The teacher that gave him the dress, and his guardian, etc. were the only people I could understand. Why can't people who aren't violating others rights, have their own right to be who they are and be safe?



"Everybody lies.."

reply

The vice principal who gave Larry the dress was fired, and currently works at a Starbucks. The anti-gay teacher who harassed Larry is still employed at the school, even after the VP filed a complaint about her anti-gay and anti-Semietic comments. The complaint was dropped, just before the VP was fired.

reply

Unless I'm mistaken, it's a teacher who gave the dress and was fired. The VP hasa since been promoted.

reply

I think the teachers and the principal are partially to blame. In a school where school uniforms were mandated to prevent things like this from happening, Larry was allowed to skirt the rules. This school was obviously a racial powder keg, so there needed to be zero tolerance for dress code violations, this is where the system failed Larry.

As passionately as we may feel about this issue, all offenders have to be treated fairly and equally before the law. The prosecutor in this case was clearly out to make a name for her self and make an example of a kid who was barely 14 years old, and actually younger than Larry.

So if you can try a 14-year old as an adult, how about a 13 or 12 year old? Where do you draw the line?

This piece, as biased as it is, actually makes the case against Hate Crime laws. Are we to treat offenders differently for committing the same crimes, based on what we think their intent was? How is this determined fairly in a Court of Law?

The kid will spend ages 14-39 behind bars. This is an incredibly harsh sentence for a minor. I don't see any reason for outrage.

This could have only happened in California.




"For dark is the suede that mows like a harvest"

reply

The kid will spend ages 14-39 behind bars. This is an incredibly harsh sentence for a minor

He was actually lucky to get that sentence. Hate crime could have got him life without parole or worse.

Watch Me Win

reply

Perhaps he was lucky? Who can say, maybe a second trial would have been another mistrial and even an acquittal. Maybe he would have been pleaded down to a lesser sentence? Like I say, jurors don't seem to like the logic that Hate Crime laws allow a 14-year old to be tried as an adult. This has happened in other cases.

Its important to look at this objectively, not to get sucked into the bias of the film makers or this ridiculous prosecutor.

If the prosecutor believes that individuals are taking advantage of juvenile sentences and putting minors "up to" killings, etc, then its on her to prosecute and convict such individuals, not make vague, hearsay comments which bias the viewer.

"For dark is the suede that mows like a harvest"

reply

even an acquittal

An acquittal where 25 eye witnesses saw what happened? Where the murder weapon was recovered and a motive established?

Ok, yeah. I've got a bridge to sell you too.

Watch Me Win

reply

7 of 12 jurors on the first trial voted for acquittal, so its not impossible, I was suggesting it as a possibility. Obviously Brandon shot Larry in cold blood, that's not being debated. What's being debated is whether a very troubled 14-year child should be tried as an adult. Obviously the majority of jurors didn't think so.

There is a real problem with prosecuting Hate Crime laws, and this documentary shows just some of them. It seems the prosecution's biggest hurdle was not being able to stack the jury with ultra PC types who buy into these laws. Most people don't like them.

There is a spirited, on-going debate in legal circles as to whether Hate Crime laws are even constitutional. A lot of AGs, DAs don't like bringing such charges because they tend to "raise the bar" for conviction in so many cases.

"For dark is the suede that mows like a harvest"

reply

I believe the jury was split 7/5 on first degree murder versus voluntary manslaughter. None voted for acquittal.

Watch Me Win

reply

'Acquittal' of the much more severe charge, but yeah, not the correct terminology. A conviction for voluntary manslaughter, for a minor would bring a "slap on the hand" sentence.

So, the mistrial with the "negotiated sentence" was probably the best outcome.

The defense attorney who got the Brandon tattoo was king of disturbing. So, Brandon becomes a martyr to a bunch of skin head wannabe white supremacist types? Another horrible outcome of this tragedy.

"For dark is the suede that mows like a harvest"

reply

It seems the prosecution's biggest hurdle was not being able to stack the jury with ultra PC types who buy into these laws. Most people don't like them.

No. The prosecutions biggest hurdle was weeding out the anti-gay bigots. The persecutor, Ms. Fox admitted in the film that she didn't do a good job of picking unbiased jurors.

The fact that you're blathering on about hate crime laws shows where your mind is on this case.

reply

Wrong again. Hate Crime laws are well intentioned, but just a bad idea.

The issue of Hate Crimes is a the core of this story.

I see the typical brain-washed PC crowd here, no surprise. Any speech that doesn't go stride for stride with the narrative of this documentary must be anti gay, pro-Brandon.....

FYI, the prosecutor doesn't get to select the jury, its a process where both sides get to select jurors and are allowed to reject some chosen by the other side. Sadly, there were some moron/bigots on the jury. But sometimes that's the outcome. Its not a perfect system.



"For dark is the suede that mows like a harvest"

reply

Clearly, Larry did not deserve to die. Hopefully EVERYONE can easily understand this. Dressing and acting so feminine during school hours should not have been allowed or accepted. Everybody has the right to be who they want to be; HOWEVER, there are rules we all have to abide by whether we are at home, at school, or at work. Outside of school, would have been perfectly OK for him to "be himself", explore his idenitity, and what not. But not in school. He should have known this.

The teacher that provided Larry with the dress meant no harm. Was she right? Of course not, but she was trying to help him figure out his identity, as it was implied he was having such a hard time doing so. This teacher made a mistake, she did not deserve to be fired. She did not commit a crime.

Yes, Brandon was 14, BUT knew very well from right and wrong. I am willing to bet he knew damn right well that shooting another person, resulting in death is a crime, and it is wrong, and people are put in prison for this. Whether or not they tried him as an adult is not the issue. People feeling sorry for him is sickening. He murdered someone. He brought a gun to school, and shot another human being....if he was old enough to make the decision to take a gun, point it at someone, and shoot them, then he deserves to be in prison. He does not deserve to be felt sorry for. He had many other ways to deal with Larry asking him to be his valentine. Tell a teacher, take him aside and say it's not cool, knock him on his ass off school property, have his mother call the school.....but to point a gun at the back of his head and shoot him...That is murder. It's a sad time in america when people feel sorry for, or support murderers....no matter their age.

reply

I agree to a point, the one thing I stress is that both Larry and Brandon were too young to be held fully accountable. Do we hold 14-tear old kids accountable for their actions in the same way we do adults? Of course not.

You say Larry should have known better than to dress and act the way he did in school? While some teachers were working with him to change his behavior, others, like the woman who gave him the dress, were giving him a mixed message. She meant to harm, but she may well have contributed to Larry's murder. She was fired justifiably, and should have been included in the lawsuit filed by Larry's biological parents.

It seems the school officials should have intervened for Larry's safety. Larry was almost begging for some sort of confrontation, but he was too young and naïve to realize how serious it could be. I don't buy the argument that Larry was bullying Brandon with his sexual advances.

Brandon was a victim of terrible parents, but not a victim in this case. I believe his sentence was appropriate. I do feel sorry for him, but at the same time, he's a dangerous individual who needs to be locked up.

Save me from the people who would save me from myself

reply

Do we hold 14-tear old kids accountable for their actions in the same way we do adults? Of course not.

It depends on the crime. When a fourteen year old shoots another person in the back of the head twice... yes, this "child" should be tried as an adult.

While some teachers were working with him to change his behavior, others, like the woman who gave him the dress, were giving him a mixed message. She meant to harm, but she may well have contributed to Larry's murder. She was fired justifiably, and should have been included in the lawsuit filed by Larry's biological parents.

Rubbish. Who do you really think is responsible for the "mixed messages"? It was obvious Larry was surrounded by adults who strongly disapproved of his behavior largely because of how uncomfortable it made them feel. The teacher who gave him the dress was likely one the few sympathetic adults in his life. We can argue all day if her good intentions were misguided, but whether her actions directly led to his death is only speculation.

I am not going to whitewash the situation. Even if you took out the transgender issue out of the equation, Larry was a troubled kid with behavioral issues who needed much more guidance than he received.

It seems the school officials should have intervened for Larry's safety. Larry was almost begging for some sort of confrontation, but he was too young and naïve to realize how serious it could be. I don't buy the argument that Larry was bullying Brandon with his sexual advances.

I agree on both points here.

reply

A few points, a 14-year old can only be tried as an adult under the hate crime laws charged by the prosecution. I think there is a sizeable portion of any jury pool who won't like this, and I agree with them. I think the prosecutor was out to make a name for herself, and to make an example of Brandon. Juries don't like defendants being made an example of either.

The juvenile statutes may be far too lenient, but that's not the defendant's fault. That said, I believe the negotiated sentence was appropriate. So, as dysfunctional as the California legal system is, the desirable outcome was reached.

Larry had behavioral problems and some of the teachers were trying to help him. His problem was behaving and dressing in an inappropriate manner. But, when another teacher gives him a dress, how does he process this? Again, he is just a young kid, like Brandon. Children that age are incredibly impressionable and looking to adults for cues and guidance. I don't think its a stretch to say that the teacher giving him a dress was at the very least a terrible idea.

One of the biggest problems in America today is that kids are becoming sexualized at an increasingly younger age. I think this applies to all varieties of sexuality. If someone is TG, good for them. They will have a lifetime to do as they please. But at age 14, its incredibly inappropriate to act out in a school environment. This is where the system failed Larry terribly. You may call it speculation, but I believe the school and some of the adults are partially responsible for Larry's death.

Save me from the people who would save me from myself

reply

I believe the school and some of the adults are partially responsible for Larry's death.


"Larry, you cannot express yourself in this manner or you might be killed."

"Killed by who?"

"Another student, here at school"

"Oh- I better be carfeful then since you have killers on campus, and obviously we are ok with the system failing them"

See how that doesn't work in any lucid meditation on the issue? It is easy to say, but when you take it to the next logical step- the thinking it through part that evades so many- it falls apart.

Give thinking about it a shot. Close your eyes if you have to.



Watch Me Win

reply

Do you know how to think like a 14-year old kid?

You miss my point, I believe Larry should have been sent home or suspended or whatever. This, for his own safety.

Save me from the people who would save me from myself

reply

I believe Larry should have been sent home or suspended or whatever

This was discussed. The school would have been liable for discrimination.


Watch Me Win

reply

Yes, California has a deeply flawed system. The school administrators should have intervened and sent Larry home, in the interest of Larry's safety IMO. Saving a kid's life is worth being liable for discrimination. There a few choice quotes from school admins along these lines.

But a different mentality ruled the day, 'we'll treat the school environment as a tolerant one, even though we know its not' to paraphrase. Remember how nobody was surprised that the murder victim was Larry?

That's why I say this could have only happened in California, and that the system failed Larry.

Save me from the people who would save me from myself

reply

So the day he was murdered he was wearing gender inappropriate clothing?
I remember seeing footage of him that day and it does not appear that he was.

Send him home every day until he transforms into a different person? There's an idea.


Watch Me Win

reply

No, send him home until he corrects his behavior, no kid that age should be allowed to be dressing as a TG at school. His teachers had identified a behavioral problem and were working with him to correct it, it states this clearly. Remember the older teacher who says if Larry were her student, he wouldn't have been murdered?

So what we see is that some teachers clearly see behavioral problems, yet the system ties their hands when it comes to disciplining him. That's a failed system.

Save me from the people who would save me from myself

reply


Remember the older teacher who says if Larry were her student, he wouldn't have been murdered?

Yeah, and her lack of wealth makes me suspect she doesn't really have the clairvoyance she would need to make such a statement. If she did, she'd be rich from sports gambling or the stock market.

That's a failed system.

Ok, but we don't even get there until we recognize the system's multiple failures concerning Brandon.

It's like going on about sandbags failing while ignoring the dam that burst.


Watch Me Win

reply

A few points, a 14-year old can only be tried as an adult under the hate crime laws charged by the prosecution. I think there is a sizeable portion of any jury pool who won't like this, and I agree with them. I think the prosecutor was out to make a name for herself, and to make an example of Brandon. Juries don't like defendants being made an example of either.

Again, I am just expressing an opinion about the punishment fitting the crime. I realize there are many people who feel that litigating "hate crimes" is akin to prosecuting "thought crimes". However, even under current "hate crime" law, the circumstances surrounding Larry King's murder should have made this an open and shut case. Brandon McInerney shot King in front of a classroom full of witnesses, and it was no secret why he shot him. I don't care if the juror's disapproved that McInerney was allegedly being made to be an example by the prosecutor. Their job is deliberate the crime in front of them not to debate their own beliefs.

Larry had behavioral problems and some of the teachers were trying to help him. His problem was behaving and dressing in an inappropriate manner. But, when another teacher gives him a dress, how does he process this? Again, he is just a young kid, like Brandon. Children that age are incredibly impressionable and looking to adults for cues and guidance. I don't think its a stretch to say that the teacher giving him a dress was at the very least a terrible idea.

Comments such as this as well the comments from some of the jurors and educators in the film betray a staggering level of willful ignorance of transgender issues. There lies the problem. There are many who do not want to know that people like King even exist. Again, the teacher who gave him the dress knew how he was being treated by other teachers and was only acting out of sympathy. It's not like putting on girl's clothes was a foreign concept to King. Personally, I would not call it a "terrible idea", and the fact she was forced to resign is utter bullsh*t.

I will go on record by saying that King's desire to be identified as a young woman should have been accompanied by counseling to help him make that transition. But let's get real here, King was made to be a social pariah prior to him dressing up in girl's clothes by merely being a very effeminate boy.

reply

On your first point, you are correct. In a perfect world, if the jurors had followed the letter of the law, it should have been open and shut. But the trial by jury process, by its very nature is imperfect. But its still the system by which we conduct criminal trials.

In this case, several of the jurors just didn't like the hate crime law, so they refused to convict on Murder one. In a potential second trial, the same thing may well have happened. This is why a settlement was reached.

On your second point, please don't lump me in with the bigoted jurors, if you read what I've said on this board, I'm clearly not agreeing with them. I don't believe Brandon was bullied by Larry. I believe Brandon's 21 year sentence was appropriate.

It is stated in the documentary that most teachers at the school thought Larry had a behavioral problem, and they were working with him to correct the behavior. A public middle school environment is not the place to openly display one's sexuality, whatever it may be. If two hetero kids were to act out sexually, they should be disciplined or suspended. Larry didn't know any better, but the adults should have.

We can disagree about the woman who gave Larry the dress. I think she's a flake and a moron. The type who wants to be seen as the cool teacher, not one who has the best interest and safety of the kids in mind.

I'm tired of discussing this, its one of the most tragic and depressing stories I've ever heard.

Save me from the people who would save me from myself

reply

Expressing gender identity is NOT the same as expressing sexuality. And therein lies the biggest issue I have with all this. As one of Larry's classmates said, Larry was not gay, Larry was transgender. Big difference.

reply

Dressing and acting so feminine during school hours should not have been allowed or accepted. Everybody has the right to be who they want to be; HOWEVER, there are rules we all have to abide by whether we are at home, at school, or at work. Outside of school, would have been perfectly OK for him to "be himself", explore his idenitity, and what not. But not in school.
So in your world, people can be themselves, but only when and where you deem it acceptable.

How, exactly, is that being oneself?

By your "logic," anyone who doesn't fit a standard that *you* deem correct should closet the "offending" part of themselves. Well, I grew up in a community of educated professionals who valued scholastic achievement more than athletic achievement; should the talented athletes at my high school have hidden their abilities? Should the less-intellectual students have accepted taunts (about their low grades and scores) as their lot in life?

What about people like Steve Jobs and Bill Gates, who probably attended schools where athletics was highly valued? They have literally transformed life as we know it -- yet had they been told, "Don't be yourself during school hours!," the world would never have known their phenomenal contributions.

Sexuality, like intelligence or artistic/athletic ability, IS INBORN. There is no reason -- apart from gross prejudice -- for prohibiting Larry from dressing as he wanted to dress, provided that he obeyed the school's code (which he did!). Prohibit sexual activity on a school campus, yes -- but saying he can't wear earrings and makeup? That's ridiculous.

Your username (gildasparkles) suggests that you're female. If so: Do you want to be told that you can wear only burqas or other sack-like garments that cover you from head to toe? Do you want to be denied a credit card simply because you're female? Prohibited from holding a job while you're pregnant? Prohibited from holding a job at all, prohibited from voting, prohibited from retaining your own property after marriage? (And if you're a man: Do you want to be denied parental leave after your child is born? Do you want to be denied certain jobs that have traditionally been considered "for women only"? Do you want to be stigmatized for being a good cook, or for being a stay-at-home dad while your CEO wife earns the big bucks for the family?) I'm guessing that you don't -- I'm guessing that you enjoy the rights of being yourself in this modern world. Well, every trans or gay or bi person is entitled to the same -- the freedom to be him-/herself without fear of abridged rights or physical harm.

reply

@cahs437

"Harsh sentence for a minor?" Excuse me, but that minor killed another boy right there in the school. If that dosen't prove that he was dangerous as hell and needed to be locked up, I don't know what the hell does. I'm disgusted that people actually seem to think he had a right to do what he did to Lawrence King. A NORMAL kid would have just gotten into a fight with Larry, and that would have been party the end of it. But it seems like whenever someone shoots someone now, people fall all over themselves trying to say it's justifiable merely because the shooter had a gun. I swear, people have lost their damn minds when it comes to talking about guns----it's like, having a gun is an excuse to justify doing all kind of stupid s***, like stalking an unarmed teen,jumping on him and shooting him just because you couldn't win a fight you started in the first place. or shooting a young father dead in a movie theatre just because he pissed you off texting his 3 year old daughter. God help us. No wonder other countries look at us like we're insane when it comes to guns,because we *beep* are.

And,no, that teacher who gave Larry the dress wasn't a "flake" of a "moron", and she didn't deserved to be fired,either, because she did nothing wrong. She was being a caring human being to Larry, something he probably didn't get a lot of at that achool. There wssn't a damn thing wrong with that at all.

reply

How many 14-year old kids get 25 year sentences for anything? Its quite rare. No need to state the obvious over and over, Brandon murdered Larry in cold blood, at school. These facts have never been debatable. What's being discussed in this thread are the mitigating circumstances. I suggest you read through the entire thread.

As far as the teacher who gave Larry the dress, I'll just make one observation. She was immediately fired by the school administration. In the State of California, it is notoriously difficult to fire public employees. Any fired employee has all types of legal recourse. The termination of a worker is a long, drawn out process. For this reason, inept workers are often promoted rather than fired.

So, the fact that they fired her immediately, and that she had no legal recourse, indicates that what she did was seriously wrong, and a potential disaster for the Oxnard School system. The school administration knew a huge lawsuit was coming and the sooner they cut ties with this woman, the better. What this woman did was actually quite egregious, with relation to the school's strict dress code. These are just the facts.

The sentiments that this woman was really cool for helping the poor little TG kid, blah blah blah, are just very misguided. I'm trying to view these events objectively, something the filmmakers failed at.



I'm a civilian, I'm not a trout

reply

How many 14-year old kids get 25 year sentences for anything?
Minors who commit premeditated murder get commensurate sentences. And it was premeditated murder: The day before Brandon shot Larry, he told one of Larry's friends that she wasn't going to see Larry again after the next day. In addition, Brandon told police that on the morning of the shooting, he initially forgot the gun but then went back inside, got it, and was driven to school by his father.
P R E M E D I T A T E D.

What's being discussed in this thread are the mitigating circumstances.
There are no mitigating circumstances. Brandon was uncomfortable because a gay or bi or trans boy expressed romantic interest in him. Well, boo hoo. And guess what? Every girl/woman I know has received, at least once in her life, unwanted advances from a man she found distasteful. The law does not allow these women to assault, let alone kill, these men for their unwelcome advances!

And, even tho I find your willfully ignorant responses disgusting and horrifyingly destructive to the common good, I would never dream of harming your person or your property. Nor does the law allow me to.

That Brandon was (probably still is) a bigot is sad -- but it isn't a mitigating circ.

"All you need to start an asylum is an empty room and the right kind of people."

reply

There most certainly are mitigating circumstances. The behavior of the teacher who gave Larry the dress is a mitigating circumstance. The fact that Brandon was 14 and had a background of abuse is as well.

The problem with the doc, the DA, and people like you is that you want to use this case to further your own agenda. You also want Brandon made an example of. But where is the justice for Brandon? Adults murder people in this country every day and get reduced sentences through plea deals and often end up back on the streets in a few years.

This is the folly of idea of 'hate crimes'. I believe most hate crime laws to be unconstitutional.

Bottom line, Brandon was sent away for 25 years, and that's a perfectly reasonable sentence. I can see the argument that its actually excessive.

Your assuming that because I don't agree with hate crime legislation, I'm some sort of right-wing bigot. You couldn't be more wrong. I carry the ACLU card.


I'll take Punctuality

reply

I'm disgusted that people actually seem to think he had a right to do what he did to Lawrence King.


When did anyone say he had the right to kill Larry? Straw man anyone?

reply

No, not a straw man.

reply

In a school where school uniforms were mandated to prevent things like this from happening, Larry was allowed to skirt the rules.
Untrue. The docu makes clear, via interviews with the VP, that the rules SPECIFIED that gender bias was not permitted, meaning that within the uniform guidelines, girls could wear whatever boys wore (such as pants) and vice versa. She makes clear that the code did not prohibit girls from wearing makeup and therefore could not prohibit a boy from wearing makeup.

This school was obviously a racial powder keg, so there needed to be zero tolerance for dress code violations,
What is this passion for distortion?
1. Larry was bi-racial, and he looked as tho one parent was Hispanic -- at a school with a predominantly Hispanic population.
2. The girl who spoke of being called the n-word made clear that she sought adult intervention and that the school took care of it. Nothing in the docu says or implies that anti-black sentiment was prevalent at the school, and it *certainly* didn't imply that the school was a "racial powder keg."
3. Larry did not violate the dress code! The VP checked with the school system to find out whether Larry's accessories and makeup were permissible -- and they were, as I explained above.

STOP
BLAMING
THE
VICTIM,
YOU HATE-MONGER.

reply

Again, you're having problems with reading comprehension.

I'm not blaming the victim, I'm blaming the school and the flaky teacher who gave the kid the dress. They're the ones who failed Larry.

I'll take Punctuality

reply

No, sorry, that's bullsh^t. The kid was obviously gay and transgendered, however he was dressed. Everybody knew it. Yeah, the one teacher crossed a professional line by giving him a dress, but the other homophobic idiot teacher that they interviewed actually made me ASHAMED to have once been a US public school teacher. And she didn't get fired for either being a homophobe or a frickin' moron.

Adults need to teach kids that homosexuality is not a threat to them. Period. It isn't about "political correctness". It shouldn't bother you that SOMEONE ELSE has a different sexual orientation than you do. It's also a general American problem that we focus so much on the sin of LUST (even though the 8th grade victim here was probably a virgin), yet we are perfectly fine with WRATH, which is at least as bad of sin.

It's incredibly naive to think this problem can be corrected by a dress code. It's like expecting rape or teen pregnancy to go down if we simply stop teenage girls from dressing revealingly.

"Let be be finale of seem/ The only emperor is the Emperor of Ice Cream"

reply

No, sorry, that's bullsh^t. The kid was obviously gay and transgendered, however he was dressed.


Yeah, the one teacher crossed a professional line by giving him a dress,


You seem to be contradicting yourself.

All you say about homosexuality is fine and true if we are dealing with adults, we're not, were dealing with children. Children are malleable and lack basic knowledge of the way things work. That's exactly why the law protects them.

I'm not saying Larry doesn't have the right to identify as a TG because he's a kid, but I do think its a big mistake to hold Brandon to adult standards here. My biggest problem with the entire thing was the DAs desire to try him as an adult. It cannot be justified. It shows why hate crime laws are not just.

Yeah, the one teacher crossed a professional line by giving him a dress, but the other homophobic idiot teacher that they interviewed actually made me ASHAMED to have once been a US public school teacher. And she didn't get fired for either being a homophobe or a frickin' moron.


That's your opinion, but there are no grounds to fire her because you think she's a homophobe or a moron.

The entire incident IS about political correctness run amok. Most of your post is about the way things 'ought' to be. I too wish the world was a more perfect place, but it is what it is.

My posts on this board have absolutely nothing to do with whether homosexuality is right or wrong, yet I feel I'm being labeled as a homophobe. My point is that you can't bend the rule of law because you feel so strongly about an issue, everyone has the right to due process and reasonable sentencing. Brandon was the one who the system failed.

reply

My posts on this board have absolutely nothing to do with whether homosexuality is right or wrong, yet I feel I'm being labeled as a homophobe.


People can only deduct this from your own posts

reply

Here's the problem, the people responding to my posts aren't reading very carefully, or, they're comprehending what they want to and ignoring the rest.

I'll make a big leap here, this PC run amok mentality is why Trump is our next president, and NO, I didn't vote for him.

Because I think Brandon had the right to due process and a fair sentence, that makes me a homophobe. Because I point out that this was an over-zealous prosecutor as well as a teacher who's irresponsible actions may have contributed, that makes me a bigot.

Honestly, this is the OJ verdict mentality. If a white police officer kills a black man, he's guilty, no matter what the evidence. No due process, the mob on the street is judge and jury.

If a white male is accused of rape on a college campus, his life is destroyed, lock him up, throw away the key, no due process.

In Larry and Brandon's case, we liberals feel so strongly about TG issues that 14-year old Brandon is guilty and gets a long, adult sentence, no mitigating factors should considered.

See?...hoping against hope.

reply

Sure all the others see it wrong (or misread your posts), you see it right :-$

reply