I am really confused by the negative reactions because it seems like Ahmed's family is following the American Way by suing for $15 million.
But seriously, isn't this how it always has been with incidents like this? If they want to sue they don't want to sue for $2 million because the school will probably tryo to settle for ~$500K. If you set it at $15 million, it anchors the price point higher and they may get $3 million to make it go away.
I think Ahmed and his family forfeit their right to the "American way" when they decided to move to Qatar after receiving an outpouring of support from the American public (including meeting Obama).
Public agencies face a different process. One can't just sue such an agency for damages directly; one makes a financial claim against the agency instead. Then, if the claim is denied and not settled, then one can sue.
Just because it's a stereotypical "American Way", doesn't mean it's right. The negative reactions may come from the fact that rent-seeking is harmful to society. Moreover, this particular case is an abuse of public goodwill, and many of the commenters expressing negative sentiments probably fell for the hoax and were supporting this kid publicly.
But it wasn't a hoax dude. It actually happened. He got arrested for pretty much _no_ reason whatsoever.
There are two separate events
1. Ahmed was arrested for a pretty dumb thing and most likely because he was a brown kid it made it easier for them to assume it was a bomb or hoax bomb. Whatever they want to call it. I'd have to see how often "hoax bombs" were actually used to arrest someone before I say they racially profiled him for sure, but my gut feeling is that there isn't a high incidence of hoax bomb arrests.
2. Ahmed's family is suing for $15 million. Not Ahmed, who probably has little choice in the matter.
I am sure suing for so much money has brought bad publicity for them, but at the same time that issue is separate from the incident of him being arrested, which happened.
Using the term rent-seeking is a bit over the top unless you really believe this entire thing was staged.
> Using the term rent-seeking is a bit over the top unless you really believe this entire thing was staged.
I'm currently inclining to believe that, but that's beside the point. The whole nation stood in their defense, they got so high up the chain that even POTUS got interested personally, and now they're suing for $15 million?! Rent-seeking is a little light word for that IMO.
It is rent-seeking I guess if you think they will actually get $15 million, and don't think they deserve a dime.
I think there should be some kinda of punitive damage for the school because of their actions. I don't think it's $15 million. I also don't think a jury will award $15 million. And more likely the case may be thrown out or the school district will just settle to make it go away.
People in this thread are acting as though they were already awarded $15 million. I always assumed a jury ends up deciding the damages, if any, in civil cases like this. It's not an automatic $15 million if they prove their case just because that's what they asked for in compensation.
> People in this thread are acting as though they were already awarded $15 million.
I don't think so. Personally, if they got awarded $15 million, I would be pissed off at the jury. I'm angry at the kid's family for having the chutzpah to ask for that much money.
"But it wasn't a hoax dude. It actually happened. He got arrested for pretty much _no_ reason whatsoever."
The whole "homemade clock" claim is what was a hoax, regardless of any subsequent panic about its application. (If you aren't clear on the backstory, look it up. It's just a mass-production A/C-powered clock taken out of its case. For example, see: http://www.ebay.com/itm/MICRONTA-Large-Red-Display-Digital-A...)
Regarding the reaction: hindsight is a handy thing, but we live in an era where schools routinely go into complete lockdown if some kid or staffer thinks he might have spotted a weapon.
When you read the article carefully, some things pop out:
1) BBC makes no mention here of the whole "homebuilt" concept itself being a hoax, e.g. a "homemade" clock (why the suitcase?) that was really just a disassembled, mass-production A/C-powered clock).
2) Lawyer letter stating, "Irving Police officials immediately determined that the clock was harmless" is false. Beat cops aren't qualified to make any such analysis; even things as innocuous as an unattended backpack get further analysis by specifically trained personnel.
3) "Ahmed's father ... once stood as a presidential candidate against (Sudanese President) Bashir." That's a pretty strong theoretical motive for a publicity stunt.
In any case, they leveraged the fauxtrage into a full scholarship to The Qatar Foundation for Education, Science and Community... so, mission accomplished.
Another article, however, claims the following:
"(Teacher) did escort Ahmed to the office, where the letter alleges that five police officers, the principal and the assistant principal performed an "interrogation." During that time, he was allegedly not permitted to contact his parents and was forced to sign a letter of confession under the threat of expulsion." Now, if that is true, that warrants investigation and corrective action on its own, completely unrelated to religion, national origin, or who "made" the item, or why.
Meanwhile, this article says that his older sister claims to have been suspended 5-6 years earlier over alleged threats to blow up her school:
'The sister claimed after the arrest that she had been suspended from a school for several days. “I got suspended from school for three days from this stupid same district, from this girl saying I wanted to blow up the school, something I had nothing to do with,” she said, without providing evidence or proof.
The episode occurred around 2009, she said. The scare happened in “my first year of attempting middle school in America. I knew English, but the culture was different, the people were different,” Eyman said.
“I got suspended and I didn’t do anything about it,” she said.'
If the things you stated are true: that Ahmed did not make the clock, that Ahmed's father is a politician (I guess your implication is that politicians will throw their children under the bus for publicity?), and that the sister was also suspended 6 years prior, I still don't see an implication that the dad set it up.
If you combine those facts to believe Ahmed's father completely set this up, then you can also just combine these facts to determine that people in that school district of Texas are probably just racists (the sister didn't do anything and got suspended, the brother did something that may have been grounds for suspension, but got arrested). People are willing to crucify Ahmed (who again I doubt had much choice if he was set up to do this) for the former, but no one cares about the possibility of the latter. I'm guessing the truth lies between these two extremes.
But again, if Ahmed's father set him up for this, then there should have been an investigation. And if he had been found guilty of forcing his son to stage some fake clock/bomb thing, well I'll go and sharpen my pitchfork for it. But as far as I can tell, kid was _arrested_ for what amounts to a clock he didn't make.
> 2) Lawyer letter stating, "Irving Police officials immediately determined that the clock was harmless" is false. Beat cops aren't qualified to make any such analysis; even things as innocuous as an unattended backpack get further analysis by specifically trained personnel.
If they did think it was a bomb, or didn't think it was but had no authority/knowledge to assess that it was a bomb, then it is even worse because it means there was a possible bomb on campus and they failed to evacuate the school. I think that was part of the anger that people felt about this case. Were they really thinking about the welfare of the rest of the children on campus or did they know it wasn't a bomb so were just kinda harassing Ahmed because they wanted to?
But seriously, isn't this how it always has been with incidents like this? If they want to sue they don't want to sue for $2 million because the school will probably tryo to settle for ~$500K. If you set it at $15 million, it anchors the price point higher and they may get $3 million to make it go away.