Grandmother Gloria Ballard is accused of spanking another person’s two-year-old child in a Cincinnati store.
Dannay Jones says that Ballard was telling her how to handle her son when she grabbed Sean Goode, put him over her knee and spanked him. She is now charged with assault.
This is strikingly similar to the charges against Roger Stephens.
For a video of her explanation, click here
There was no attorney listed for Ballard.
12 thoughts on “Mommy’s Little Helper: Cincinnati Woman Arrested for Spanking Two-Year-Old Son of a Stranger”
That is my favorite legal movie scene, and here is part I:
“You two ought to get married”
– Wilford Brimley in Absense of Malice
Mespo/BIL, We talked a little about this decision at our new birther thread this afternoon:
Video: Ohio Congresswoman Tells Supporter that Obama is Not a Citizen and Can’t Be President Published 1, September 9, 2009
JimBirth wants the judge impeached. Orly wants him tried for treason.
My personal favorite sentence: “Unlike in Alice in Wonderland, simply saying something is so does not make it so.”
The judge ruled the government could recover costs from the plaintiff. That is a stinger.
Not to imply I’m not interested in Vince’s opinion. No. I’d never say that.
We are on the same wave length. The buffer of my computer right this instance contains the shifting the burden of proof and Alice language but you are swift indeed.
I laughed and laughed. I can’t wait to see what ol’ Jimmy boy has to say about all that. I’m thinking his hair is catching fire right about now.
Totally off topic but I couldn’t resist quoting Judge Clay Land dismissing Orly Taitz complaint and putting her on terms for sanctions. It’s long but it’s fun:
“First, Plaintiff’s challenge to her deployment
order is frivolous. She has presented no credible evidence and has made no reliable factual allegations to support her unsubstantiated, conclusory allegations and conjecture that President Obama is ineligible to serve as President of the United States. Instead, she uses her Complaint as a platform for spouting political rhetoric, such as her claims that the President is “an illegal usurper, an unlawful pretender, [and] an unqualified imposter.” (Compl. ¶ 21.)
She continues with bare, conclusory allegations that the President is “an alien, possibly even an unnaturalized or even an unadmitted illegal alien . . . without so much as lawful residency in the United States.” (Id. ¶ 26.) Then, implying that the President is either a wandering nomad or a prolific identity fraud crook, she alleges that the President “might have used as many as 149 addresses and 39 social security numbers prior to assuming the office of President.” (Id. ¶ 110 (emphasis added).) Acknowledging the existence of a document that shows the President was born in Hawaii, Plaintiff alleges that
the document “cannot be verified as genuine, and should be presumed fraudulent.” (Id. ¶ 113 (emphasis added).) In further support of her claim, Plaintiff relies upon “the general opinion in the rest of the world” that “Barack Hussein Obama has, in essence, slipped through the guardrails to become President.” (Id. ¶ 128.) Moreover, as though the “general opinion in the rest of the world” were not enough, Plaintiff alleges in her Complaint that according to an “AOL poll 85% of Americans believe that Obama was not vetted, needs to be
vetted and his vital records need to be produced.” (Id. ¶ 154.)
Finally, in a remarkable shifting of the traditional legal burden of proof, Plaintiff unashamedly alleges that Defendant has the burden to prove his “natural born” status. (Id. ¶¶ 136-138, 148.) Thus, Plaintiff’s counsel, who champions herself as a defender of liberty and freedom, seeks to use the power of the judiciary to compel a citizen, albeit the President of the United States, to “prove his innocence” to “charges” that are based upon conjecture and speculation. Any middle school civics student would readily recognize the irony of abandoning fundamental principles upon which our Country was founded in order to purportedly “protect and preserve” those very principles.
Although the Court has determined that the appropriate analysis
here involves principles of abstention and not an examination of
whether Plaintiff’s complaint fails to state a claim under Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 12(b)(6), the Court does find the Rule 12(b)(6) analysis helpful in confirming the Court’s conclusion that Plaintiff’s claim has no merit. To state a claim upon which relief may be granted, Plaintiff must allege sufficient facts to state a claim to relief that is “plausible on its face.” Ashcroft v. Iqbal, 129 S.Ct. 1937, 1949 (2009) (internal quotation marks omitted). For a complaint to be facially plausible, the Court must be able “to draw
the reasonable inference that the defendant is liable for the
misconduct alleged” based upon a review of the factual content pled by the Plaintiff. Id. The factual allegations must be sufficient “to raise a right to relief above the speculative level.” Bell Atl. Corp. v. Twombly, 550 U.S. 544, 555 (2007). Plaintiff’s complaint is not plausible on its face. To the extent that it alleges any “facts,” the Complaint does not connect those facts to any actual violation of Plaintiff’s individual constitutional rights. Unlike in Alice in Wonderland, simply saying something is so does not make it
so. The weakness of Plaintiff’s claim certainly weighs heavily
against judicial review of the deployment order, and in fact, would One piece of “evidence” Plaintiff’s counsel relies upon deserves further discussion. Counsel has produced a document that she claims shows the President was born in Kenya, yet she has not authenticated that document. She has produced an affidavit from someone who allegedly obtained the document from a hospital in Mombasa, Kenya by paying “a cash
‘consideration” on the way, while [he] obtained the copy” of the document. (Smith Decl. ¶ 7, Sept. 3, 2009.) Counsel has not, however, produced an original certificate of authentication from the government agency that supposedly has official custody of the document. Therefore, the Court finds that the
alleged document is unreliable due to counsel’s failure to properly authenticate the document. See Fed. R. Evid. 901.
authorize dismissal of Plaintiff’s complaint for failure to state a claim.
“Middle schooler”… “Alice in Wonderland.” LOL. I love this guy.
Why is this only an outrage when strangers assault children?
How about when government does it, as I mentioned in this highly relevant comment on JT’s post regarding the Roger Stephens case?
Today, hungry young turk in the advertising world had that very same idea and pitched it for the boss’s newest client, e-HarmonicChemistry2Lazy2Date.com.
Tonight, he starts his new job as bartender.
Maybe they both like spankin’. I hear there is an attorney in NY that likes stock and trade. But then again, they may just be mean. But why couldn’t mommy watch her own kid?
Here’s to Grandmother Ballard learning HER lesson, so late that it comes.
She and Roger Stephens would make a cute couple. Maybe open a daycare center together.
Comments are closed.