The chat was allegedly created by a group of 8th-grade students and involved some of the juveniles expressing “hateful and racist comments" and a mock slave auction.

The chat was allegedly created by a group of 8th-grade students and involved some of the juveniles expressing “hateful and racist comments" and a mock slave auction.

Six juveniles in Massachusetts were charged in a racial online bullying incident that involved “heinous” language, threats of “violence toward people of color” and a mock slave auction, the district attorney for Hampden County said.

Students from Southwick, about 104 miles southwest of Boston, allegedly participated in a “hateful, racist online” Snapchat discussion between Feb. 8 and Feb. 9, Hampden District Attorney Anthony Gulluni said in a statement on Facebook.

Gulluni said he became aware of the incident on Feb. 15 and immediately called on the Massachusetts State Police Detective Unit to investigate.

On Thursday, at the conclusion of the investigation, the district attorney authorized members of the Detective Unit and the Chief of the Juvenile Court Unit to pursue criminal charges against the juveniles.

  • JoBo
    31·
    8 months ago

    Oh no, suspended for bullying. So cruel, making them face the consequences of their actions. You should go on hunger strike or something, to highlight the plight of these poor little angels.

    • yetAnotherUser@feddit.de
      12·
      8 months ago

      You’re arguing in bad faith and putting words in my mouth

      Suspending students from school for weeks, while protecting the victims temporarily from contact, has the side effect of withholding education from children. Surely they won’t miss anything important while suspended for 4-8 weeks, it’s not like education (or rather the lack thereof) and crime has a strong correlation.

      Any justice system should have these priorities:

      1. Protecting current victim(s)
      2. Preventing future victimizations.
      3. Rehabilitating the perpetrator(s)

      The U.S. justice system sole priority is bloodlust. That’s part of the reason police brutality goes largely ignored: it only affects “criminals” and they deserve it anyway.

      Now: how does the “tough on crime” attitude of the prosecution as reflected in the article protect current or future victims for more than a few months?