|
|
|
|
crimpandgo
May 19, 2005, 7:52 PM
Post #201 of 315
(40159 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Apr 15, 2004
Posts: 1005
|
In reply to: what if the pics showed the parents snorting cocaine near their kids? would that be enough to call the authorities? what if the pictures showed the kids being sexually exploited? would that be sufficient? These pictures, and the descriptions that go with them, indicate that theparents are placing their children in harm's way. This is wrong, wrong, wrong; I don't care how you were raised or how crappy your folks were. Like I have said a few times, if there is nothing bad going on, then the professionals in Ventura County whose job it is to investigate situations of possible child endangerment will decide that nothing requires their intervention. If that is the case, no skin off anyone's nose, no harm, no foul. I truly hope this is the case. However, if they do find evidence of wanton endangerment, and do find sufficient cause to place the children in protective custody, then thank goodness myself and others involved in this thread had the guts to do something instead of just watch from the sidelines. What if our actions result in the prevention of a child's death? Will we be justified then? What if we read in the paper tommorow about Raven falling to her death while doing one of these solos? Should we have done something when we could? I'm not going to wait until one of them dies to do something. My point is, by referring this family to CPS, I have by no means garunteed that the family will be broken up. All I have done is to alert an agency whose job it is to FIND OUT FOR SURE. What is wrong with finding out for sure? If there's no smoke, there's no fire. One more time for clarification- If there's no smoke, there's no fire. I do not know for sure; I have merely stumbled upon suspicious evidence (and photos with descriptions are reasonable sources of suspicion) and passed that evidence along. Regardless of how big an asshole you think I am by doing this, it is actually my job. As a paramedic, I am required by law to report suspected cases of child abuse, neglect, and endangerment. Its not my passion, I don't go on witch hunts to try and split up families, its not a hobby of mine-IT'S MY JOB! If I treat a child with burns that look like they were done with the butt of a cigarette, I make a report of it. If I find suspicious bruising on a child, I report it. If I find that a parent has been deliberately placing their child in a recklessly dangerous situation-including things as simple as not requiring their child to wear a seat belt while driving or life-jacket while boating, I am BOUND BY LAW TO REPORT IT! I don't physically break up the family, I simply pass along pertinant information. If there is no reason to remove the children into protective custody, then they will not be removed. Trust that the professionals who work for CPS will do their job and ascertain this for themselves.
You are assuming that folks at the CPS are the best to judge whether is family situation if appropriate. The problem with our system is that folks get in the "loop" and it can be difficult to get back out. Even if nothing was done wrong in the first place. A friend of mine ended up in jail for a short time because he was mistaken for another person. After dealing with the situation, you quickly realize that the "system" is a slow moving process that does not often work in your favor and certainly doesn't really care if you are innocent. often times the prosecuting officer is more concerned with getting their name in the paper.
Make sure you know your facts before crying wolf, because once in the system. the person you are accusing often will have to prove their innocence instead of you proving their guilt. My experiences with jury's supports this feeling. People judge situations based on their past experiences and personal biases not necessarily on the facts at hand. This thread proves the point.
You asked if a picture of parents doing coke with their kids be enough to turn them in. ... The answer would be NO. The picture could be doctered, placed on the internet by another person. MAKE sure You have proof before you accuse someone of wrong doing. A vistit from the Law tends to stay with someone for a long time and can most assuradly ruin any chance they have of a normal life.
|
|
|
|
|
amber
May 19, 2005, 7:52 PM
Post #202 of 315
(40159 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Oct 15, 2004
Posts: 708
|
okay, i havent read the whole damn thread, but from what i read blonde girl and bonger have both made excellent points. though, killclimbz sums it up best -
In reply to: I have to say that this thread has become more about us sticking our collective "noses" in some one else's business. The kid is defnitely doing a 4th class scramble and this guy is definitely a poser at best.
now, my .02 .. ;)
from what i can infer, this is most likely just a good ol fashioned, pachouli-wearin, no-meat-eatin, hemp-lovin, hippie-style california family. nbd there.
though, the hippiesque part of me wants to point out the moral injustice by sensationalizing a kid scrambling on some 4th class choss, or crumbly/rotten rock for material gain.
i've taken my share of risks, ignored my share of sound advice, endangered my own life, and not really known when to be scared of what. when i read the bit about raven not being scared, i remembered a terrible fall on my first 'real' aid climb. i wasnt too scared either, until i was dangling from a piece of rope that i couldnt hold onto, 500' off the deck. reality check.
then, i realized loud and clear why an old boyfriend had jumped my shit about my willingness to risk life and limb to feel alive. before shit hit the fan, i took his advice the wrong way and didnt appreciate his efforts to try and talk some sense through this thick skull of mine. since then, well, i have eaten my shit-sandwich and have backed off of adventure stuff until i feel more confident in assessing/dealing with the risks. i've also found more simple ways of rejoicing life. imho, sitting by a creek and meditating brings you just as close to that sense of spirituality - but i digress.
storm - think about our perspective. we are a community of people who thrive on risks. we study them in hopes to understand them so that we can protect ourselves from them as much as possible. we have lost our brethren to them.
in fact, i dont think it's possible to find a group who values nature or adventure moreso than the folks that post to this site. we're also egomaniacs and self-righteous at times - and we lose our tempers when we see someone doing something unnecessarily dangerous because we deeply understand how a single, small step at the wrong moment in time can cost a life.
from what has been posted, you have taken the simple task of scrambling around rock fields and altered camera angles to sensationalize something that you feel was completely safe for your child. sure, marketing folk play with camera angles all the time, just the way that they teach kids that marshmallows are a "fat free food" - is that really the kind of person who you are? is that the foundation that you want for your film, something which you proclaim is highlighting your lifestyle, the core of your being? sensationalizing, dramatizing, making things seem to be something that they're not?
we react harshly because, perhaps without intent, you are exploiting our lifestyle and arguably your daughter for personal gain, to make money off of a film, which, from what you've told us so far, isnt really about the good stuff, but is reconstituted with fillers and empty carbs, or tricky camera angles and half-hearted disclaimers, as the case may be.
[edited for spelling because i was lazy and didnt use preview]
|
|
|
|
|
micahmcguire
May 19, 2005, 7:56 PM
Post #203 of 315
(40159 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Apr 18, 2002
Posts: 889
|
For now, Chugiak Volunteer Fire Department. I will hopefully begin at Anchorage Fire Department when they do their next round of tests.
Here are the statutes as they apply to Alaska Law
AS 47.17.020. Persons Required to Report.
(a) The following persons who, in the performance of their occupational duties, or with respect to (8) of this subsection, in the performance of their appointed duties, have reasonable cause to suspect that a child has suffered harm as a result of child abuse or neglect shall immediately report the harm to the nearest office of the department:
(1) practitioners of the healing arts; HEY-THAT'S ME!!!
(2) school teachers and school administrative staff members of public and private schools;
(3) peace officers and officers of the Department of Corrections;
(4) administrative officers of institutions;
(5) child care providers;
(6) paid employees of domestic violence and sexual assault programs, and crisis intervention and prevention programs as defined in AS 18.66.990;
(7) paid employees of an organization that provides counseling or treatment to individuals seeking to control their use of drugs or alcohol;
(8) members of a child fatality review team established under AS 12.65.015(e) or 12.65.120 or the multidisciplinary child protection team created under AS 47.14.300
etc.....
AK statute regarding protective injunctions:
AS 47.17.069. Protective Injunctions.
(a) A court may enjoin or limit a person from contact with a child if the attorney general establishes by a preponderance of the evidence that the person
(1) has sexually abused a child;
(2) has physically abused a child; or
(3) has engaged in conduct that constitutes a clear and present danger to the mental, emotional, or physical welfare of a child. HEY-THAT'S THEM!!!
(b) This section does not limit the authority of the attorney general or the court to act to protect a child.
happy dingus?:
|
|
|
|
|
corpse
May 19, 2005, 7:57 PM
Post #204 of 315
(40159 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Jan 17, 2003
Posts: 822
|
In reply to: Bungee jumping is a rite of passage?
If the tower is made of sticks, I guess it is :)
|
|
|
|
|
dingus
May 19, 2005, 8:00 PM
Post #205 of 315
(40159 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Dec 16, 2002
Posts: 17398
|
In reply to: For now, Chugiak Volunteer Fire Department. happy dingus?:
Thanks Barney Fife. If I was the kind of dick to go after someone in the world for the incredibly stupid shit they post online, I would seek them out.
DMT
|
|
|
|
|
alpinerock
May 19, 2005, 8:12 PM
Post #206 of 315
(40159 views)
Shortcut
Registered: May 17, 2003
Posts: 600
|
In reply to: We never intended to put this out to the climbing community as a serious climb. One of our raw-vegan visitors who must also be a climber did that. Regarding camera angles check out the one on the front page of this very site today http://www.rockclimbing.com where the camera is actually upside down! It is not uncommon to take pictures at an angle especially during climbs. I think that people here are over-reacting because they don't realize that this is a diet website about a flim and not a climbing website about freestyling. Peace, Jinjee
Spoken like a true student of the master... i love taking pictures upside down! especially of freestyling!
|
|
|
|
|
davidji
May 19, 2005, 8:16 PM
Post #207 of 315
(40159 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Jan 30, 2003
Posts: 1776
|
In reply to: (3) has engaged in conduct that constitutes a clear and present danger to the mental, emotional, or physical welfare of a child. HEY-THAT'S THEM!!!
How about a 2-second following distance? HEY-THAT'S EVEN MORE DANGEROUS, AND IT'S PROBABLY STILL MOST OF US.
People die out there on the roads. Shouldn't we start saving lives by siezing kids when parents don't drive safely? We could have an entire generation raised in group homes--and of course foster care, since foster parents often don't need to meet the same standards as the home the child was siezed from.
I think your judgement is flawed in applying the line I quoted to Storm's situation. All it takes is an overly-agressive case-worker with similarly flawed judgement, and you guys could really screw up someone's family.
|
|
|
|
|
xclimber
May 19, 2005, 8:22 PM
Post #208 of 315
(40159 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Jan 17, 2003
Posts: 426
|
In reply to: Today (May 16, 2004) an organization in Southern California posted some chilling photos. See: http://www.thegardendiet.com/images/climb The narrative with the photos describes the situation. They depict a young woman free-soloing a 70-foot near vertical rock wall, with her daughter, aged 10 or less, free soloing with her. The rock looks rotten and the route looks about 5.5 or so. The mom and little girl were encouraged to free-solo by the father/husband, a man named "storm" who leads seminars and retreats about raw food vegan diets. He apparently has been climbing for 25 years. He also has apparently positioned himself as something of a guru, passing this type of climb off as a mystical/spiritual event. To my mind, this is an outrageous example of child endangerment.
Maybe all climbing is too dangerous and it should be illegal... Where do you draw the line?
Ever heard of Cicada Jenerik? Should we arrest her parents? God Forbid.
|
|
|
|
|
ctclimbz
May 19, 2005, 8:35 PM
Post #209 of 315
(40159 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Oct 24, 2003
Posts: 137
|
In reply to: In reply to: In reply to: Bungee jumping is a rite of passage? dude, trust me, those guys ain't bungee jumping. It's a piece of vine.
"From April to June land diving takes place on southern Pentecost Island. Men dive off bush timber platforms with flexible vines tied to their ankles in this religious and fertility rite. The divers' hair scrapes the earth at high speed to fertilise it and ensure a successful yam harvest. The government was compelled to cancel all land diving for a year in 1995 to allow the ceremony's cultural worth to be re-established after it had become swamped by tourists." - from Lonelyplanet.com
Think you're a badass? How about jumping off of a rickety tower with a flimsy vine, approximately the right length to keep you off the ground, tied to your ankles. Great pic BVB
|
|
|
|
|
jt512
May 19, 2005, 8:44 PM
Post #210 of 315
(40159 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Apr 12, 2001
Posts: 21904
|
I thought I was reading a post by "Ambler" until I got to this line:
In reply to: then, i realized loud and clear why an old boyfriend...
In reply to: ...from what has been posted, you have taken the simple task of scrambling around rock fields and altered camera angles to sensationalize something that you feel was completely safe for your child. sure, marketing folk play with camera angles all the time, just the way that they teach kids that marshmallows are a "fat free food" - is that really the kind of person who you are? is that the foundation that you want for your film, something which you proclaim is highlighting your lifestyle, the core of your being? sensationalizing, dramatizing, making things seem to be something that they're not?
The father is a megalomaniac and a hypocrite; a self-ordained guru of nutrition, medicine, rock climbing, and Truth. But when it comes right down to it, he'll exploit his own loved ones to make a buck, and won't hesitate to lie about their accomplishments in the process. Coercing a child into free soloing chossy 4th or 5th class terrain is child endangerment (I was a sworn mandatory reporter in a previous job). When I saw the original pictures, my initial reaction was to contact a friend of mine who is both a rock climber and a well-known prosecuting attorney for CPS in a nearby county. In all likelihood, if she had deemed that action was warranted, she would have gotten Ventura Co. CPS to act. In the end, I didn't contact my friend because I realized that the angle of the climb was not honestly depicted, that it was unclear whether the children were actually being endangered or whether the father was just a lying windbag, and my mistrust of the judgment of CPS won out over my mistrust of the father, albeit by a hair.
-Jay
|
|
|
|
|
pmyche
May 19, 2005, 9:41 PM
Post #211 of 315
(40159 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Jan 21, 2004
Posts: 1160
|
Sounds like a bunch of folks got trolled by a wannabe climber who pulled the oldest (and most cliche) climbing photo trick of all time.
"Regarding camera angles check out the one on the front page of this very site today http://www.rockclimbing.com where the camera is actually upside down! It is not uncommon to take pictures at an angle especially during climbs."
With no way to know what photo is being referenced above, I'll state: When one is viewing straight down, which way is "up?" In that case, "up" has no relationship to the framing of the photo--it's behind the photographer, so there's no way to accurately portray in that situation. The more horizontally (and more in line with the climbing surface) the subject is shot, the less this phenomenon occurs (read: the more one can tilt the camera to increase the apparent steepness of the climb).
In the case of the shots in question, it's paaainfully obvious (to me and some others) that this wanker tried to make it look steeper than it is. Though I haven't read every post here or the "article" in question, it seems this dood is overflowing with hyperbole. Good job generating publicity--you got me too!
|
|
|
|
|
slcliffdiver
May 19, 2005, 9:41 PM
Post #212 of 315
(40159 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Mar 18, 2002
Posts: 489
|
People had wildly differnt perspectives on how much danger the kids where in and fairly wildly different perspectives on how damaging calling cps would be. What I don't see is a lack of heart or concern on either side. I'll take people with heart every day over people who don't give a damn. I think it's easier to gain wisdom than heart.
I think alot of the anomosity and ill wishes between posters is somewhat misdirected.
|
|
|
|
|
nedsurf
May 19, 2005, 9:46 PM
Post #213 of 315
(40159 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Nov 9, 2004
Posts: 387
|
I've lived in Cali. for extended periods twice in my life. It is these type of people that eventually erode my love for the west coast and make me run back to the clogged cities of the north east where everyone hates each other.
I'm pretty sure that he is probably not a dedicated climber on this site, so I am not writing to anyone who falls for this crap. I wonder if this "guru" :roll: will start a cult. Cool-aid anyone. When will those california flower children learn to be skeptical of those purporting to know "the way"...sigh.
Well, off to take a subway seat from a cripple. I'm glad that east coast people know "the way".
|
|
|
|
|
amber
May 19, 2005, 10:10 PM
Post #214 of 315
(40159 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Oct 15, 2004
Posts: 708
|
In reply to:
I thought I was reading a post by "Ambler" until I got to this line:
In reply to: then, i realized loud and clear why an old boyfriend...
In reply to: The father is a megalomaniac and a hypocrite; a self-ordained guru of nutrition, medicine, rock climbing, and Truth. But ..
pfft, sounds like a regular ol' rc.com drama queen to me, but your words are much fancier.
|
|
|
|
|
pmyche
May 19, 2005, 10:14 PM
Post #215 of 315
(40159 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Jan 21, 2004
Posts: 1160
|
Nedsurf...there are kooks of all description wherever you go, be it city, country, NE, SW. Keep your bullshit filter on full blast at all times, and enjoy the good eveywhere. Cheers...
|
|
|
|
|
erisspirit
May 19, 2005, 10:30 PM
Post #216 of 315
(40159 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Dec 15, 2004
Posts: 3770
|
In reply to: I wonder if this "guru" :roll: will start a cult. Cool-aid anyone. When will those california flower children learn to be skeptical of those purporting to know "the way"...sigh. Well, off to take a subway seat from a cripple. I'm glad that east coast people know "the way".
The mass suicide Kool Aid cult (THE PEOPLE'S TEMPLE,
LED BY JAMES WARREN (JIM) JONES) was not Californian. :roll: they started in Indianapolis and later MOVED to California so uhhh don't blame Cali hippies on that one
|
|
|
|
|
kixrox
May 19, 2005, 11:14 PM
Post #217 of 315
(40159 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Dec 20, 2002
Posts: 86
|
the admins and sponsors of this site shoud be appalled that a thread here has resulted in the harrassment of an innocent loving family based upon skewed and convenient interpretations of postings on their site.
You are not a community.
this place is disgusting.
|
|
|
|
|
bvb
May 19, 2005, 11:20 PM
Post #218 of 315
(40159 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Mar 3, 2003
Posts: 954
|
In reply to: You are not a community. this place is disgusting. |
|
|
|
|
pru
May 19, 2005, 11:30 PM
Post #219 of 315
(40159 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Apr 1, 2003
Posts: 68
|
In reply to: the admins and sponsors of this site shoud be appalled that a thread here has resulted in the harrassment of an innocent loving family based upon skewed and convenient interpretations of postings on their site. You are not a community. this place is disgusting.
You people should be ashamed of your worthless selves.
|
|
|
|
|
sa
May 20, 2005, 12:06 AM
Post #220 of 315
(40159 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Sep 10, 2004
Posts: 20
|
I guess I'm what you folks would call a lurker. I've been on the site for less than a year but don't post much because, unless I'm looking for specific information, it's generally not worth my time.
Dingus, I have read your posts before. Sometimes I agree, sometimes not. This time, however, you have hit the nail square on the head. I, too, hope the people who are trying to destroy this family get what they deserve.
I am going home to take a shower, but I fear it will take a while to wash the stink of rc.com off of my hands.
|
|
|
|
|
jv
May 20, 2005, 12:35 AM
Post #221 of 315
(40159 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Sep 26, 2003
Posts: 363
|
In reply to: The father is a megalomaniac and a hypocrite; a self-ordained guru of nutrition, medicine, rock climbing, and Truth. But when it comes right down to it, he'll exploit his own loved ones to make a buck, and won't hesitate to lie about their accomplishments in the process. Coercing a child into free soloing chossy 4th or 5th class terrain is child endangerment (I was a sworn mandatory reporter in a previous job). When I saw the original pictures, my initial reaction was to contact a friend of mine who is both a rock climber and a well-known prosecuting attorney for CPS in a nearby county. In all likelihood, if she had deemed that action was warranted, she would have gotten Ventura Co. CPS to act. In the end, I didn't contact my friend because I realized that the angle of the climb was not honestly depicted, that it was unclear whether the children were actually being endangered or whether the father was just a lying windbag, and my mistrust of the judgment of CPS won out over my mistrust of the father, albeit by a hair. -Jay
Subjective
I agree with Jay's assessment, though I was not tempted to contact anyone. I think the first and last pictures, the only ones from the side, were deliberately tipped to make the angle look steeper purely to stroke dad's ego.
Objective
It occurred to me that from a legal standpoint, if the child falls and dies, the father, and perhaps both parents, could be prosecuted for negligent homicide/involuntary manslaughter. The pictures and text from the website would come in as evidence, blown up and displayed prominently for the jury to ponder. Whereas if she died while roped up, no criminal charges.
JV
|
|
|
|
|
cintune
May 20, 2005, 1:00 AM
Post #222 of 315
(40159 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Nov 10, 2004
Posts: 1293
|
Good God, people. If the girl and her mom were sent ropeless up Half Dome, I'd be all for an intervention, but they weren't. The fact that "Storm" decided to tweak the reality by tilting his pics has certainly come round to bite him in the ass; it outs him as a poser, but not an imminent threat to his child. Getting the State involved positively reeks. The State has (or should have) its hands full with real cases of abuse. This incident, while perhaps not exactly commendable parenting, boils down to nothing more than a witch hunt. The overprotective meddlers on this site are skirting liability for defamation of character, in my opinion. If they have kids of their own, they should by all means do or not do whatever they think right, but if the original poster had had an ounce of decency and a genuine concern for the kid's well being, he should have contacted the parents directly with his concerns, like a man, and not splashed it all over this forum first in search of some kind of pathetic validation. Who's next?
|
|
|
|
|
erawtica
May 20, 2005, 1:04 AM
Post #223 of 315
(40159 views)
Shortcut
Registered: May 20, 2005
Posts: 6
|
I've met and stayed with Jinjee, Storm and the kids. The one thing I do know is that, life is dangerous. What they did compared to what most of you do with your kids? lmao
I truly wish I had them as parents when I was growing up. I LOVED the wilderness. I LOVED climbing trees, rocks, hills, etc. That's what kids "should" be doing ~ not eating junk food out of a box, dealing with their folk's neurosis', watching t.v. and living on computers and waiting until they are old enough to drive a car because they need some excitement in their lives.
Durng the weekend with the family, I saw Jinjee one month after having her son Adagio. She looked terrific. I met the other three kids all of whom are in great health.
Storm a megalomaniac? Oh my. You know not of what you speak. He was soooo laid back. IF you wanted to learn something new; IF you wanted to do something more, you got it. I will tell you what I saw ~ a loving, caring family who chose to live an alternative lifestyle where, if folk choose, they can see another way to live.
A healthy way to live. One that brings joy, self-esteem, gratitude and love.
Because someone doesn't know the "correct" terminology for something that makes them less-than proficient? Maybe this someone is out "doing" and not just on some board learning all the words to throw around to satisfy an ego.
Call child welfare or whatever they are called now. They'll laugh in your faces.
erawtica
|
|
|
|
|
rgold
May 20, 2005, 1:26 AM
Post #224 of 315
(40159 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Dec 3, 2002
Posts: 1804
|
The question of the tilting of the photos has now been raised multiple times. I wondered about this before posting anything and made my own corrected versions. Since the subject keeps coming up, I decided, I hope not too unwisely, to post what I have. In each case, I have aligned the left edge of the frame with a group of trees. The trees used can no longer be seen in two of the pictures because of the cropping necessitated by the rotation. I have tried to select one or more big trees, not too close to the base. Trees on a hillside may tilt out a little; this would cause the depicted angles of the pictures here to be lower than they are in reality, but I think these results are a reasonable view of the real situation.
The top photograph is the lowest of the three, next highest is the lower left, and highest is the lower right.
Anyone who has read my posts knows that I strongly disapprove of both the coercion of the subjects into this endeavor and the reaction to call the cops.
http://www.rockclimbing.com/...p.cgi?Detailed=54500
|
|
|
|
|
bvb
May 20, 2005, 1:51 AM
Post #225 of 315
(39413 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Mar 3, 2003
Posts: 954
|
if any of you would like to see a corrected photo, you can see it right now, right here.
http://the-edg.net/rotated.jpg
LMFAO
the sad thing is that anyboby who actually climbs does not need to see a "corrected" photo to calculate the angle of the rock -- the can simply suss it by looking at the angle of dangle in the pics.
and notice how mom ain't even hanging on to anything -- she's pushing away from this 35 degree staircase with her palms.
when you guys get going, it's like lord of the flies around here.
i mean, fuck.
|
|
|
|
|
|
