Journalist Arrested for Telling Son to Walk Home from McDonalds

Dave Lieber is a columnist for Fort Worth Star-Telegram who has found himself in a bizarre situation where he has been criminally charged for telling his 11-year-old son to walk home a few blocks from McDonalds. It began with an argument in McDonald’s and Lieber leaving his son to walk home. Lieber would return a short time later to find police speaking to his son and thought that the matter was closed by an amicable reunion and mutual apologies of the father and son. It wasn’t.

Lieber wrote about the experience in an August 15th column, describing how he returning after cooling off to find officers speaking with his son. He described his actions as “stupid and quite serious mistake” despite support from his readers who said that they have taken the same approach with disrespectful kids. That is when it got weird. Lieber, 51, was arrested by detectives of Watauga, Texas for child abandonment and endangerment, according to Detective Tiffany Ward.

State law defines abandonment as intentionally leaving a child younger than 15 “in any place under circumstances that expose the child to an unreasonable risk of harm.” Walking home a few blocks from McDonald’s is exposing a child to unreasonable risk of harm? How dangerous are the streets of Watauga? Yet, Lieber (who has been suspended by the newspaper) accepts that his actions “could have exposed my son to grave danger. I do know that. But in the moment of anger, I didn’t think clearly.”

I am probably the most protective, risk-adverse parent on Earth. My wife accuses me of wanting to turn the four kids into bubble babies. I would not use this type of punishment or scared straight technique. However, it is an example in my view of how we have criminalized every aspect of our lives, here.

For the full article, click here.

89 thoughts on “Journalist Arrested for Telling Son to Walk Home from McDonalds”

  1. In order to get owned he would have to have been correct.

    Since I am not Zakamir, that makes him wrong and both of you look like fools for boasting of something that is not true.

    But I don’t have to defend myself from two liars on a fabricated accusation because togther their brains aren’t capable of refuting a single position I’ve taken.

    And Mike spindell, you could be the most titled person in the world, but at the end of the day, you’re essentially just a liar. You were proven a liar and you still haven’t owned up to it.

    Apparently you are too much the coward to admit it still, so you’re taking refuge in someone elses ridiculous lie about me, trying to paint me with a dangerous and distorted character as Zakaimir, which is the refuge a coward and a scoundrel.

    If Professor Turley ever wants my identity all he has to do is ask or confirm my IP address. I am not anyone who would ever call myself Zakamir or say any of the racist comments he has made in here and you are a slimey belly crawling worm for suggesting it. I don’t know if you’re lying about your educations or not but if you really are in the positions of authority you claim, then God help us all.

    Because you are pathetic, simple minded witless debaters, who when cornered turn to lying like little children. You are pathetic, and I, unfortunately for your boasts, am not, nor ever was the character Zakamir, and your daring to try and link me with this fellow shows your utter lack of any moral character.

  2. “Peace out. Good night. No hard feelings. CroMM/Zak, but you just got owned.”

    Mojo,
    I think so.

  3. Mojo
    1, September 1, 2008 at 2:00 am

    Examine your own prior posts as Zakimar, son. It’s you alright. Examine your debates with Spindell. It’s you all over. Now in you’re in ‘accuse the other guy’ mode.

    Hey Spindell. That’s how we do that.

    Peace out. Good night. No hard feelings

    I don’t need to examine my own posts you dimwit, I know I am not ZakAmir and I don’t need your help discerning that fact.

    What you need to do boy, is get your pompous head out of your fat ass, and figure out that you made a mistake, and a fool out of yourself doing it.

  4. Mojo
    1, September 1, 2008 at 1:54 am

    When did you start to deliberately misspell Zakimar as Zakimir? You had it right the first time, when you first started to protest too much

    Oh now I am protesting too much?

    Some two bit hack with a big mouth and a handle named after Austin Powers balls waltzes in and starts attacking me out of the blue, suggesting I am Zakamir.

    When I point out that you lie like a little girl, acting like you didn’t mean that, then when you see its obvious to anyone else thats what you were implying, you admit your deception and then claim to “own” me.

    Well my cackling little hen, the only thing you own is the egg on your face.

  5. Examine your own prior posts as Zakimar, son. It’s you alright. Examine your debates with Spindell. It’s you all over. Now in you’re in ‘accuse the other guy’ mode.

    Hey Spindell. That’s how we do that.

    Peace out. Good night. No hard feelings. CroMM/Zak, but you just got owned.

  6. Mojo
    1, September 1, 2008 at 1:54 am

    When did you start to deliberately misspell Zakimar as Zakimir?
    You’re right about the onus. I own you, son

    No daughter, you don’t owe me. You owe everyone in here for wasting their time with this bs accusation, after Mystic River just left such a nice closing comment, that was I might add, on topic.

    You are wrong about me being ZakAmir, and nothing you say will change that fact.

  7. Perhaps you are Zakimir, trying to conceal your actual identity by trying to push suspicion off on someone else.

  8. When did you start to deliberately misspell Zakimar as Zakimir? You had it right the first time, when you first started to protest too much.

    Cro Zakimar …

    You’re right about the onus. I own you, son.

  9. JT can tell you that I am not Zakimir if you are so self deluded that you still think you are right, or that I, like you, would lie openly to win a debate.

    I am not Zakimir. I do not know Zakimir.

    And you are doing nothing but launching personal attacks, in lieu of debating the topics.

  10. Once more, I have no need to prove anything to you. I am not Zakimir. I do not know Zakimir.

    And you were caught lying, and now are trying personal attacks, accusing me of being someone I am confident Professor Turley’s IP logs will demonstrate, that I am not, to try and cover up your deception.

  11. From your last post:

    “But thank you, for demonstrating that when I catch someone lying …”

    And from Zakimar’s last post:

    “Thank you russ for making my mission complete …”

    ************

    Even the self-congratulatory tendencies are right on the money.

    Still waiting for any evidence of your existence prior to Zakimar’s dramatic exit.

  12. Because you find the coincidence that Zakimir decided to leave when I came in proof that I am Zakimir does not place the onus of any burden of proof on my shoulders.

    You can make all the false accusations you want but in lieu of any demonstrable evidence, other than his leaving around the I started posting, the onus of proof is on you, not me.

    Prove your ridiculous accusation.

  13. “So, now not only are you stupid enough to think I am Zakimar, which I can assure you I am not …”

    So assure me. Show me one of your posts prior to Aug. 18, when Zakimar left and you suddenly appeared. I’m sure with your excellent debating skill you must have engaged Zakimar (whom you already claim to know of.)

    Show us when you debated with Zakimar. Oh show us the way, great debater. Someone with as big a mouth as you must have taken on the great Zakimar …

    Just show me one post before Aug. 18.

    I’m waiting.

  14. But thank you, for demonstrating that when I catch someone lying, I am not “full of it”, as some like to muddy the waters by claiming.

    I know a liar when I see one, and you are a liar.

    And you’re also none too bright, because I am not Zakimir, never have been, nor do I even sound remotely close to him.

  15. So, now not only are you stupid enough to think I am Zakimar, which I can assure you I am not, but you had the stupidity to lie earlier, by trying to pretend that was not what you were implying.

    What you call “baiting”, everyone else calls lying.

  16. FROM THE PELOSI: OBAMA BLESSED BY GOD THREAD

    zakimar 1, August 18, 2008 at 8:34 pm

    There are a handful of people on this site I was watching to see if we ever agreed on a single thing and russ was on the top of that list. We FINALLY agreed on something, on how “sick” Pelosi is, although I would have used the word twisted.

    Thank you russ for making my mission complete so that I can now concentrate on the things that are much more important to me.

    To take a phrase from MASH, GOODBYE.

    AND THE VERY NEXT DAY THIS FELLOW CRO MAGNUM MAN SHOWS UP ON THE FAKE BIGFOOT STORY (did you take the photo as a cue for your moniker?):

    Cro Magnum Man 1, August 19, 2008 at 10:06 pm

    I’m sorry, when exactly did this story go from a couple of yokels that NO ONE BELIEVED, to these two making “clowns out of a couple of yankee liberal idiots”?

    No one believed them, so who are these “yankee liberal idiots” you’re referring to?

    Last I checked, the only ones who bought these two inbreds stories, were other inbreds…. hence, other neocons.

    SO, GOODBYE ZAKIMAR, AND HELLO CRO MAGNUM MAN. MAYBE JUST A COINCIDENCE, BUT THE ‘VOICE’ IS SO SIMILAR. IF YOU WOULD POINT OUT AN EARLIER POST THAN AUG. 18 FROM CRO MAG, I’LL EAT MY WORDS, APOLOGIZE PROFUSELY, AND BOW DOWN TO THE GREAT DEBATER.

    AND YES, OF COURSE I WAS BAITING YOU, YOU BIG APE.

  17. I grew up in that garden spot of the deep south known as the South Bronx. A walk to anyplace from where we lived was never less than an adventure and, despite the images from Paul Newman’s movie “Fort Apache The Bronx,” almost never very dangerous – at least as far as we were concerned.

    While daddy in Watauga outside Forth Worth may have behaved less than admirably, in the scheme of things, I’d have to agree with folks above that there sure are a lot of busy bodies trying to second guess what might happen to the little guy.

    Perhaps we need to use Drake’s Reality Scale. It’s a kind of ruler that can extend as far in either direction as you want. Toward one end is Conceivable and Fantasy and far on the other end is current reality (what is demonstrably happening). In between you may find imaginable, possible, probable, likely, etc.

    A lot of people (often those in positions of authority) confuse one end with the other end of the scale and create legal requirements to fix something that may ‘not even be possible’ (the negative side of conceivable).

    For their own benefit, some people deliberately use the confusion they create with such assertions about what might conceivable happen to create an outcome that can be very wrong.

    Remember the bloody glove etc., from the OJ murder trial? The defense laywers buffaloed everyone, including the judge, by getting the jury to confuse ‘conceivable’ with probable, possible, or even reasonable.

    Sometimes defining context is important to get things in perspective. As well as I can make it out from the above presentation, Daddy did nothing wrong. Many kids successfully navigate their world over much greater and more dangerous terrain without ill consequences.

    In the context it appears there was next to no risk to junior related to daddy’s actions. The youngster should have walked home. Now the ‘authorities’ have massively undermined the authority of a (by all accounts) caring father to direct and guide his son into manhood. Perhpas in Watauga people would have been happier if pop just picked up the boy and carried him home?

    Now is it conceivable that the consequences of the “authorities'” intervention may be much worse for the child and his relation with his father than might have happened under ‘benign neglect’ by those busy bodies??

    What webs we weave!

Comments are closed.