Anti-war judge rejects foster teen's bid to join military

cnredd · #1 (**permalink**) 03-09-2008, 03:46 AM

Quote:

Shawn Sage long dreamed of joining the military, and watching "Full Metal Jacket" last year really sold him on becoming a Marine.

But last fall, a Los Angeles Superior Court commissioner dashed the foster teen's hopes of early enlistment for Marine sniper duty, plus a potential $10,000 signing bonus.

In denying the Royal High School student delayed entry into the Marine Corps, Children's Court Commissioner Marilyn Mackel reportedly told Sage and a recruiter that she didn't approve of the Iraq war, didn't trust recruiters and didn't support the military.

"The judge said she didn't support the Iraq war for any reason why we're over there," said Marine recruiter Sgt. Guillermo Medrano of the Simi Valley USMC recruiting office.

"She just said all recruiters were the same - that they `all tap dance and tell me what I want to hear.' She said she didn't want him to fight in it."

Sage, 17, said he begged for Mackel's permission.

"Foster children shouldn't be denied (an) ability to enlist in the service just because they're foster kids," he said. "Foster kids shouldn't have to go to court to gain approval to serve one's country."...

...By "DEPing in," students can enlist at 17, get their high school diploma, then lock in a military job such as Force Recon - or scout snipers. They also qualify for a signing bonus.

"We just gave out the last one for recon today to another kid for $10,000," USMC Master Sgt. Edgar Carpenter of the Marine Recruiting Office in Simi Valley said Wednesday.

"The Delayed Entry Program supports everything a parent would try to do: We make them stay out of trouble; get them in physical condition; and get them indoctrinated into the Marine Corps culture."

Only Mackel - and it appears a court bailiff as well - objected to the program, despite pleas from Sage and Medrano.

"I tried. I said, `Please.' I begged. He tried, he said, `Please' and begged," Sage said. "But she refused."

Mackel said she denied delayed enlistment to an eager Navy recruit as well, Medrano said.

She expressed concern that recruiters treat recruits "like another warm body," he said. "She said, `All you care about is your numbers."'

At this point, the 10-year Marine said the court bailiff raised his hand and addressed the young Sage.

"My son's in the Army," he said. "He did the Delayed Entry Program. They don't care about you. They're just there for the numbers.

"I said, `No, I'm not them," Medrano said. "I care about Shawn (and) about every single person I put into the Marine Corps. I follow them. I take care of my kids. I treat them like my Marines.

"It just felt like, wow. I even told Shawn, I said, `Dude, it feels like we've been burned at the stake at the Salem witch trial.' She just had some kind of animosity toward military personnel."...

...Sage, who lives in Simi Valley but is originally from Florida, was abandoned by both parents when he was 2 and now lives in a foster home with his brother.

He had wanted to join the military ever since he'd met a service rep at school at age 7 - first the Air Force, then the Navy, finally the Marines.

His foster parents, as well as his social worker, supported his decision to enlist early. Despite being denied, he still shows up for USMC physical training.

"Did they ever kick my butt," he said proudly. "They still do."

When he graduates and turns 18 in June, it'll be all Semper Fi, bonus or no signing bonus, whether he's allowed early deployment or not.

As winner of Smyth's "there oughta be a law" contest, he will be flown to Sacramento to testify before the Assembly.

"I didn't do it for the signing bonus, because I'm a motivated kid," he said. "I am hoping to join the military before I graduate. I want to serve my country."

I screw over a citizen's dream because "I" don't agree with dicisions made by elected officials...

Why she still has a job; I don't know...

Spencer Collins · #2 (**permalink**) 03-09-2008, 04:35 AM

The judges personal opinion on the war is immaterial or at least it should be! Enforcing the law is one thing but this judge went far beyond that..

Yagmi · #3 (**permalink**) 03-09-2008, 09:47 AM

She, the judge, has stepped WAY over her boundries.... She should be asked to step away from the judge pulpit and never return. Every case she has ever been the judge on should be able to be retried now, because she has shown how she judges............not by the law, just by her personal preferences.

tristanrobin · #4 (**permalink**) 03-09-2008, 10:11 AM

A. I think this ruling is not a good one - which is why we have an appeals process in our judicial system. Judges' rulings which are unpopular do not step down from their jobs, they are appealed.

B. In the absence of a parent, the child is the ward of the state. It is the job of the judge to act in the best interest of the child. This judge did not believe that the child enlisting was in the child's best interest. She did her job. This is not over-stepping her boundaries. The child when to the state - the ad hoc parent - and asked permission. Permission was denied. I disagree with the ruling and it should certainly be appealed - as the thousands of other cases which are appealed.

C. Not every parent allows their child to quit school and join the service who wants to do so. There are many parents who believe that such decisions should be made AFTER the child has graduated from high school.

It's just a difference of opinion, not an unfair nor unjust decision.

Yagmi · #5 (**permalink**) 03-09-2008, 11:32 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by tristanrobin

A. I think this ruling is not a good one - which is why we have an appeals process in our judicial system. Judges' rulings which are unpopular do not step down from their jobs, they are appealed.

B. In the absence of a parent, the child is the ward of the state. It is the job of the judge to act in the best interest of the child. This judge did not believe that the child enlisting was in the child's best interest. She did her job. This is not over-stepping her boundaries. The child when to the state - the ad hoc parent - and asked permission. Permission was denied. I disagree with the ruling and it should certainly be appealed - as the thousands of other cases which are appealed.

C. Not every parent allows their child to quit school and join the service who wants to do so. There are many parents who believe that such decisions should be made AFTER the child has graduated from high school.

It's just a difference of opinion, not an unfair nor unjust decision.

It wasn't the best interest of the child, in any way... it was a judge trying to make a political statement, based only on her own personal beliefs.

cnredd · #6 (**permalink**) 03-09-2008, 11:42 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by tristanrobin

It is the job of the judge to act in the best interest of the child.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Yagmi

It wasn't the best interest of the child, in any way... it was a judge trying to make a political statement, based only on her own personal beliefs.

I agree...

The end result I disagree with and tristan doesn't...I can agree to disagree on that...

But "the best interests of the child" was NOT THE ROUTE to get to the end result...Personal opinion was...And that goes against the very idea of having judges in the first place...

There's a reason the word "impartiality" is supposed to be equated with judges...

chuck7251 · #7 (**permalink**) 03-09-2008, 09:38 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by tristanrobin

C. Not every parent allows their child to quit school and join the service who wants to do so. There are many parents who believe that such decisions should be made AFTER the child has graduated from high school.

It's just a difference of opinion, not an unfair nor unjust decision.

No child should be allowed to quit school to join the military, a diploma or at least GED should be mandatory...

how ever, this child was not trying to quit school.

dabateman · #8 (**permalink**) 03-09-2008, 10:18 PM

If you must be 18 to enter into a legal contract, then that is the age. Not 17 years and 9 months. This kid needs to wait until he is of legal age to enter into a contract through his own will.

cnredd · #9 (**permalink**) 03-09-2008, 10:24 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by dabateman

If you must be 18 to enter into a legal contract, then that is the age. Not 17 years and 9 months. This kid needs to wait until he is of legal age to enter into a contract through his own will.

No...

Before the age of 18, he/she can with the consent of the parent...since no parent is available, the authority goes with the state...

If the state finds a VIABLE reason for answering in the negative, so be it...

But if you think the judge saying "I don't like the Iraq war" is considered "viable", then please excuse me if I disagree vehemently...

dabateman · #10 (**permalink**) 03-09-2008, 10:29 PM

The state should not be in the business of making such decisions as the state is a biased actor. Again, if we were to follow contract law, we wouldn't have this issue. Getting into the military is a big decision, bigger than getting a cellphone or leasing a car and you must be 18 to do the latter two. Quit making exceptions to the rule.

Thread Tools
Show Printable Version Email this Page
Display Modes
Linear Mode Switch to Hybrid Mode Switch to Threaded Mode

The Following User Says Thank You to tristanrobin For This Useful Post:
crazyflamingos