Dad who confiscated daughter's iPhone acquitted on theft charge

Mask

"OneOfTheBest"
Platinum Member
Dad who confiscated daughter's iPhone acquitted on theft charge
Technically Incorrect offers a slightly twisted take on the tech that's taken over our lives.

jackson5.jpg

Ronald Jackson still has his daughter's phone.

WFAA screenshot by Chris Matyszczyk/CNET
Modern parenting requires all the skills of a lawyer, a psychologist and spy.

Few, therefore, are qualified.

It's rare, though, for a father to be taken to court because he took away his daughter's cell phone. No, she wasn't 18. She was 12.

This all happened in 2013, but the case was heard last week in a Texas court.

Police said Ronald Jackson of Grand Prairie, Texas, didn't like certain texts he found on his daughter's iPhone 4. So, to teach her a lesson, he took it away from her.

This is a fairly typical parenting tactic.

What is less typical is what happened a few hours later. Members of the Grand Prairie Police Department arrived at Jackson's house and demanded he give back the phone.

"She could prove it was hers. He openly admitted he took it," Grand Prairie Police Department spokesman Lyle Gensler told me.

"At that point, I decided the police don't interfere with my ability to parent my daughter," Jackson told WFAA-TV.

Still, three months later he received a citation for class C misdemeanor theft, the designation for property less than $50 in value.

Some might wonder why the police arrived so quickly. They might also wonder whether it was due to the fact that the mother of Jackson's daughter -- Michelle Steppe -- is married to a member of the Grand Prairie Police Department.

She and Jackson share a daughter, but were not together as a couple. She told the court that she owned the phone and paid the bills on it. However, the Washington Post reportsthat the phone was on Jackson's plan.

The matter rumbled on, until Jackson was arrested in April of last year on a slightly more serious class B misdemeanor theft charge. He demanded his day in court.

Neither side was willing to back down. In last week's two-day court hearing, Jackson's daughter and Steppe testified for the prosecution. The judge, though, didn't seem impressed.

Dallas County Criminal Court Judge Lisa Green told the jury that the state hadn't provided enough evidence that a theft had taken place. Jackson was therefore found not guilty.

For its part, the police department wishes the case wouldn't have gone this far. "We spent an enormous amount of time to try to get the phone back," Gensler said.

He said Jackson wouldn't budge. "He simply said no," Gensler said, adding that the department tried to keep the case out of the court system. Police were surprised the higher court took the case when the city court couldn't resolve it.

Clearly, the case had particularly personal overtones. However, Steppe told the Post: "I stand behind him taking the phone for punishment. I don't stand behind him not returning the phone to me when the visit was over."

Phones have become something of centerpiece of both parenting and education.

As kids (and, let's face it, everyone) have become more obsessed with their phones, parents and teachers have wondered what to do. Last year, for example, a Philadelphia school principal confiscated a student'siPhone 6 and explained forcefully to the student's father why she wouldn't give it back.

Parents have tried all sorts of tactics to teach kids lessons about technology. Perhaps the most famous was the dad who shot up his daughter's laptop after he didn't like her Facebook posts.

For Jackson, however, this hasn't ended. Not only does he say, according to WFAA, that he won't have anything more to do with his daughter and her mother, he's also considering taking civil rights action against the police and the attorney's office. The police say they're used to such threats.

As to what the police wish they had done differently, Gensler said: "Maybe we should have sat them [Jackson and Steppe] down together. Maybe we should have let both of them understand the consequences."

He added that the department hopes it never sees such a case again.

Jackson still has the phone. But it's an iPhone 4. What can he possibly need it for? Sometimes, family disputes go far too far. No wonder kids find solace in their phones.
 
Such bullshit.It was all the whore mothers doing.Fucked up dude saying hes tapping out on his parenting duties.
This is what happens when you have a bitch who births your seed and then tries everything in her power to make you suffer.
 
This shit is funny. In the original thread, there was some ire directed at the father. Based on the surname, many assumed that that these were black people. Now that we have an image to go with the photo, there's no one here saying it's the father's fault and none of those father at fault guys are to be found. Whites are not only wordmasters, but they are masters at influencing behavior in their victims to hate other victims.
 
This shit is funny. In the original thread, there was some ire directed at the father. Based on the surname, many assumed that that these were black people. Now that we have an image to go with the photo, there's no one here saying it's the father's fault and none of those father at fault guys are to be found. Whites are not only wordmasters, but they are masters at influencing behavior in their victims to hate other victims.
You are reaching too hard, the thread is new and only 5 people have responded so far. And yes it is the fathers fault, he should have given the phone back to the other parent.
 
No Dumbass the case started in 2013. Stop trying to sound smart when your really stupid. I remember the original thread.
I see you have taken a page for the old I'm too stupid to have a intelligent response so let me resort to name calling book.
 
So moms gave not 1 fuck about the content on her daughter's phone it was more important to her to prosecute the father for doing what she should have been in concert with. smdh

I can only imagine how many instances of a woman prioritizing her revenge on her ex over properly parenting the child.
 
So if you gave your kid a iPhone and your ex took it away, would you just let her keep it?

If she saw that my daughter was doing things unbecoming of a lady...yes I'd tell her to confiscate it until the punishment time is over. If I look at the bill and see the ex is downloading candy crush bonuses, then I'd have a problem.
 
A Department full of Dumbass cops and not one had the common fucking sense or ability to handle this matter without escalating to criminal charges and a trial.

What a disgrace.
 
If she saw that my daughter was doing things unbecoming of a lady...yes I'd tell her to confiscate it until the punishment time is over. If I look at the bill and see the ex is downloading candy crush bonuses, then I'd have a problem.
The issue is the father didn't give the mother the phone back when she asked for it. She bought it and was paying the bill.

If your son takes a game system YOU bought for him to his mother's while visiting and she bans him from it during that visit, does she get to keep the system? Hell no. You take the system YOU purchased back with you and extend the punishment or end it.

This was in 2013 and the father still has the phone.
 
Say if they all lived in the same household and the father wanted to keep the phone, it wouldn't be a big deal. If you want to be real about it, my wife takes the kids stuff away from him that I bought, and I honestly don't give a damn if she never gives it back to the kid if he's fucking up. This whole case is a big play on two egos. That's why the judge let that man go on about his life.
 
Reading is actually fundamental! The article clearly states, "However, the Washington Post reportsthat the phone was on Jackson's plan". The mother is on a power trip especially being married to a cop. She even lied to the court stating the phone was hers and she paid the bill. The phone was under his plan therefore it was his.

Damn you! Don't let things like facts and actually reading the article get in the way of people trying to save face.
 
Reading is actually fundamental! The article clearly states, "However, the Washington Post reportsthat the phone was on Jackson's plan". The mother is on a power trip especially being married to a cop. She even lied to the court stating the phone was hers and she paid the bill. The phone was under his plan therefore it was his.

:hithead: Oops...I didn't read this article. This story was just posted last week and I was going off the info from the article in that post which made it seem like the phone was the mother's. They left the plan thing out of that one.

Unlike other cats around here, I can admit when I'm wrong.
 
Back
Top