Ticket for Sitting on a Park Bench Without Kids - Tilted Forum Project Discussion Community

f6twister · 09-28-2005, 08:14 AM

What ever happened to public access to the parks for everyone?

Quote:

Woman Ticketed For Sitting On Park Bench Without Kids

POSTED: 7:45 am EDT September 27, 2005
UPDATED: 11:15 am EDT September 28, 2005

NEW YORK -- It's an only in New York story.

A woman was given a ticket for sitting on a park bench because she doesn't have children.

The Rivington Playground on Manhattan's East Side has a small sign at the entrance that says adults are prohibited unless they are accompanied by a child.

Sandra Catena, 47, said she didn't see the sign when she sat down to wait for an arts festival to start.

Two police officers asked her if she was with a child. When she said no, they gave her a ticket that could bring a $1,000 fine and 90 days in jail.

The city parks department said the rule is designed to keep pedophiles out of city parks, but a parks spokesman told the Daily News that the department hoped police would use some common sense when enforcing the rule.

The spokesman told the newspaper that ticketing a woman in the park in the middle of the day is not the way you want to enforce the rule.

http://www.wnbc.com/news/5024493/detail.html

This is one of the more moronic things I've read in quite a while. Someone actually thought passing an ordinance prohibiting people without kids from sitting on a park bench was a good idea? This went exactly where I would expect this type of ordinance to go. I don't understand their logic of this preventing pedophiles from being in the park. The way I interpret their logic is that if you are at the park and don't have kids, you are a pedophile and dangerous. I would fight this ticket as far as possible.

Bill O'Rights · 09-28-2005, 08:26 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by f6twister

Someone actually thought passing an ordinance prohibiting people without kids from sitting on a park bench was a good idea?

Look past the initial ignorance of it. What it does, if used *ahem* properly...is provides a "tool", which the police may use to extricate the scuzzy looking guy in the trench coat from the park. Without this ordinance, said scuzzy guy has every right to sit there and ogle at little Suzy's pretty frilly panties all day long. It's an excuse to force someone to "Move it along.".
Unfortunately, in this case, it was "misused". At least I assume so.

BigBen · 09-28-2005, 08:31 AM

Brutal.

What disturbs me is that the rule was designed so that police officers had the discretion to enforce it or not.

Oh, so the cops only have to give the ticket to someone who looks like a pedophile? What does a pedophile look like? The cops get to throw their weight around and choose who to move along and who to ignore, who to cite for a 1,000 fine and who to let off with a warning.

This is not how I want to be governed. I want rules to apply to all people, regardless of what they look like and where they are sitting.

Fucking Secret Poletzei. I hate those swaggering ILS cops who have to prove they have something other than just their ego swinging between their legs.

ILS = Imaginary Lat Syndrome. Guys who look like they are carrying invisible watermelons under their arms.

fresnelly · 09-28-2005, 08:37 AM

The article implies that the Police officers immediately gave her the ticket without discussion or consideration. To my mind that would be the real complaint here. Did she become abusive and obstinate to the officer? Without those details, her case is hard to judge.

Many playgrounds here in Toronto have the same policy, and I think it's a fair one. Likely there other benches just outside the perimeter of the playground proper that she could have moved to.

canuckguy · 09-28-2005, 09:40 AM

You would think they would have given a warning to the woman first, and not a ticket. Regarding the rule in general, well I like it and wish the KIDS parks, not dog, or walking parks..etc KIDS parks, again not ALL parks, i am saying KIDS parks had these types of rules. Sorry for having to make those bold, it just seems most times these threads turn into the either people who have kids vs people who don't. or the people who will start up the not all sex offenders are pedo's. yes we understand that some sex offenders are the 18yr old who fucked his 15yr old girlfriend.
I am not sure how many of you go to public parks with your kids, but sometimes it can be a bit creepy. There is not a standard of what a pedo looks like, there not all painted green or were red hats, there all different. But if you have ever been to a kids pool or kids playground, sometimes you'll come across, a man, just sitting there by himself or with a camera, just sitting there staring. Fucking gives me the creeps, sure he could be a photographer for the local newspaper, whatever. Could be waiting for his grandchildren to show up, whatever. Could have just got out of a state pen for raping a child. So many possibles that i don't mind the rule as its original intend was to protect, sure that it might cause situations like the story above that are stupid. But any rule that may help protect kids is good in my book.

Astrocloud · 09-28-2005, 09:47 AM

My experience with the law is that cops are out to fulfill a ticket quota. If there is any way they can squeeze out an extra ticket -they will.

I like the idea of telling the scuzzy guy to get off the bench. But give the police a new law and chances are they won't care how the law was intended -they will just write the ticket.

Co-incedently my sister got a ticket for looking at a map while stopped at a streetlight. A cop gave her a ticket for it. When she went to court (as opposed to paying the fine via the mail) the judge threw it out. It seems that said law was intended for people who look at maps while driving and get into accidents.

shakran · 09-28-2005, 09:59 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Bill O'Rights

Look past the initial ignorance of it. What it does, if used *ahem* properly...is provides a "tool", which the police may use to extricate the scuzzy looking guy in the trench coat from the park. Without this ordinance, said scuzzy guy has every right to sit there and ogle at little Suzy's pretty frilly panties all day long. It's an excuse to force someone to "Move it along.".
Unfortunately, in this case, it was "misused". At least I assume so.

Which is the problem. Laws should be written so they cannot be "misused" in the way you state. This law was not misused. The law says no one w/o kids can be in the park. The cops enforced the law, which was their job. Nothing wrong with that. The moronic aspect of this situation lies in the lawmakers' camp. Not only is this law written in such a way as to virtually guarantee "misuse," but the law is also highly discriminatory and will most likely get shot down if challenged.

Why not pass a "no ogling" law instead - - so that the woman sitting on the park bench looking at the birds is still free to do so while the "scuzzy looking guy in the trench coat" is busy staring at Suzy's frilly panties gets busted.

Now, all that said, what this really comes down to is the government trying to take on the responsibilities of the parent. The kid shouldn't be in the park unsupervised, and if someone's ogling my little girl I'm damn sure gonna know about it. I don't need a cop to chase innocent women away from the park in order to assure the safety of my child.

Frankly were I that woman I'd sue. It's not only discriminatory, but her taxes paid for the park and the bench she sat on, and for them to deny her the right to use them simply because she committed the heinous crime of not having children is patently wrong.

flstf · 09-28-2005, 10:30 AM

In no way do I wish to make things easier for pedophiles but this law goes too far. I wonder if this woman is convicted if she will then have to report as a sex offender. I'm just kidding but the law assumes that since she is there without a child she must be up to something sinister.

StanT · 09-28-2005, 10:40 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Jethro Tull

Sitting on a park bench
eyeing little girls with bad intent.
Snot running down his nose
greasy fingers smearing shabby clothes.

Sorry, surely I'm not the only one that thought of the old Jethro Tull song Aqualung.

Sitting down and watching kids play should not be against the law. I'd go to court, it's a ridiculous law. Good intent, crappy implementation.

flstf · 09-28-2005, 10:54 AM

I was thinking more of The Rolling Stones' song.

Quote:

As Tears Go By

It is the evening of the day
I sit and watch the children play
Smiling faces I can see
But not for me
I sit and watch
As tears go by

My riches can't buy everything
I want to hear the children sing
All I hear is the sound
Of rain falling on the ground
I sit and watch
As tears go by

It is the evening of the day
I sit and watch the children play
Doin' things I used to do
They think are new
I sit and watch
As tears go by

Ustwo · 09-28-2005, 11:15 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by StanT

Sorry, surely I'm not the only one that thought of the old Jethro Tull song Aqualung.

Sitting down and watching kids play should not be against the law. I'd go to court, it's a ridiculous law. Good intent, crappy implementation.

That was the first thing that came to mind for me too.

On the other hand I think the law is fine as its a no win situation. Either they let the bums into childrens parks (bad), selectively enforce the law (bad to some), or enforce for everyone (bad to some others). Nothing like taking your kid to the park while getting eyed by someone who smells like pee and is picking through the trash looking for cold french fries.

flstf · 09-28-2005, 11:21 AM

Heres a picture of the "sex offender" proudly displaying her summons.

Redlemon · 09-28-2005, 11:29 AM

Longer version:
New York Daily News - City News - Daily News Exclusive: No kidding - no adults!

Quote:

A woman looking for a place to sit down on the lower East Side last weekend says she found herself in trouble with a couple of playground bullies - from the NYPD.

"It was a little scary," said Sandra Catena, who was issued a summons for being in the children-only Rivington Playground Saturday afternoon. "It was insane."

Dressed in a turtleneck, skirt and flip-flops, the 47-year-old professional belly dancer was waiting for an arts festival to start when she wandered into the playground. She didn't notice a small sign at the entrance that says: "Playground Rules Prohibit: Adults Except in the Company of Children."

Within minutes of sitting on a bench, she said, two 5th Precinct cops approached with hands resting on their guns.

"They walked toward me and said, 'Excuse me, are you accompanied by a child?' I said, 'No.' They said, 'You're breaking the law,'" Catena said. "Then he called backup. Do I look dangerous?"

One cop told her the judge probably will toss the ticket when she goes to court in November, she said, but that's small consolation - especially when she could get 90days in jail and a $1,000 fine.

The Parks Department designated some playgrounds offlimits for lone adults in 1996, a department source said.

An NYPD spokesman defended issuing the summons, saying the rule is designed to protect children from pedophiles. The Parks Department source said the rule is necessary, but suggested that discretion should have been used in this case.

"A woman walking into a playground in the middle of the day and ... and getting a ticket is not the way you'd want to enforce the rule," the source said.

It was equally outrageous to Meagan Shapiro, 40, who lives nearby and has taken her 18-month-old son Matan Ziv there several times a week for the past six months.

"I see people here all the time without kids," she said. "That's crazy."

I see, she's a professional belly dancer. Gotta keep them away from the kids!

/ ducks to avoid shoe thrown by Sultana...

Glory's Sun · 09-28-2005, 11:31 AM

she can come sit on my.. umm bench any day heh heh *snort*

/end jack

I can't say the rule/law is a bad one. I understand the logic, but don't understand why the cops just didn't warn her and let her go. It would have alot of time/trouble and money.

ObieX · 09-28-2005, 12:21 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by guccilvr

she can come sit on my.. umm bench any day heh heh *snort*

/end jack

They interviewed her on the news, i think she was in some form of exotic entertainment.. or close enough to it.. i forget exactly what it was.

Anyway, all she did was sit down while she waited for an interview across the street or something (or so she says). I recall her mentioning that she asked the cop if they could just give her a warning, but they said no they had to write her the ticket.

AngelicVampire · 09-28-2005, 12:21 PM

Why do governments keep trying to become parents? Surely I have the right to use public facilities provided for by my taxes? What if all the other benches are taken and in use, do you get dispensation to sit on these ones?

I am still not really sure why kids are seen as such a great thing, there are so many laws and stuff now that basically punish you for not having kids, surely raising children should be the responsiblity of the parents whose right it was to have these kids?

BigBen · 09-28-2005, 12:23 PM

Now I am going to try and restrain my fierce ball of rage right now:

What the fuck is the purpose of taking her picture? Does it add journalistic weight to the story?
Oh, she is attractive, therefore she must be innocent.
Why would the cops mind a person who looked like that?
This law was meant to stop pedophiles and creepy people. She doesn't look creepy.

STOP RIGHT THERE. We humble cyber-citizens of the TFP proclaim long and loud that we are inclusive, we are not racist, nor sexist, nor discriminatory in any way. Then you see a picture of the perpetrator and what happens? The whole perspective changes. In My Humble Opinion, she could very well be a pedophile.

What if she looked 'shifty'? What then?
I think this law (and the breaking of it) really says something about what we have let our society become. I think that taking her photo to make her look innocent is a shameful thing.

Not the poster of the picture. I am not trying to flame you, flstf. I think that the photographer should have stopped and asked "what does it matter what she looks like?"

Glory's Sun · 09-28-2005, 12:24 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by ObieX

They interviewed her on the news, i think she was in some form of exotic entertainment.. or close enough to it.. i forget exactly what it was.

the article says what she was

Quote:

Dressed in a turtleneck, skirt and flip-flops, the 47-year-old professional belly dancer was waiting for an arts festival to start when she wandered into the playground

Astrocloud · 09-28-2005, 12:29 PM

analog · 09-28-2005, 03:43 PM

This reminds me MrSelfDestruct's signature...

Quote:

There's no way to rule innocent men. The only power government has is the power to crack down on criminals. When there aren't enough criminals, one makes them. One declares so many things to be a crime that it becomes impossible for men to live without breaking laws.

So it's a public park... so they're saying that people without children don't have the same rights and access to public recreation areas as people with children? FUCKING WEAK. I'd like to see the actual statute on this, to read how it actually operates. This is total bullshit.

OH NOW I GET IT! This law makes sense because pedophiles don't have kids! Because people with kids aren't pedophiles, right? Because all pedophiles are childless... that's right. I completely forgot that there are no parents who are pedophiles. Shit, now it all comes together.

smooth · 09-28-2005, 05:36 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by BigBen931

Now I am going to try and restrain my fierce ball of rage right now:

What the fuck is the purpose of taking her picture? Does it add journalistic weight to the story?
Oh, she is attractive, therefore she must be innocent.
Why would the cops mind a person who looked like that?
This law was meant to stop pedophiles and creepy people. She doesn't look creepy.

STOP RIGHT THERE. We humble cyber-citizens of the TFP proclaim long and loud that we are inclusive, we are not racist, nor sexist, nor discriminatory in any way. Then you see a picture of the perpetrator and what happens? The whole perspective changes. In My Humble Opinion, she could very well be a pedophile.

What if she looked 'shifty'? What then?
I think this law (and the breaking of it) really says something about what we have let our society become. I think that taking her photo to make her look innocent is a shameful thing.

Not the poster of the picture. I am not trying to flame you, flstf. I think that the photographer should have stopped and asked "what does it matter what she looks like?"

I think the general consensus before the picture was that the law (or this particular enforcement of it) was over the limit.

Just cuz I wish she had been my teacher....

Yakk · 09-29-2005, 07:32 AM

Modern western society has chosen to make so many things against the law, it is nearly impossible to live without breaking one law or another.

Every law is an evil, in and of itself. A law can redeem it's inherit evil by doing significant good.

They might as well make it a law that nobody is allowed within those parks period, and give the police the power to fine anyone 1000$ for being there. Shucks, why not make it illegal to be anywhere, then let the police use their discretion. O_o

Leto · 09-29-2005, 08:39 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by smooth

Just cuz I wish she had been my teacher....

who is this picture of? she's beautiful....

Gatorade Frost · 09-29-2005, 08:45 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Leto

who is this picture of? she's beautiful....

I'm pretty sure she slept with one of her students and is now heading to jail.

flstf · 09-29-2005, 09:42 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by BigBen931

STOP RIGHT THERE. We humble cyber-citizens of the TFP proclaim long and loud that we are inclusive, we are not racist, nor sexist, nor discriminatory in any way. Then you see a picture of the perpetrator and what happens? The whole perspective changes. In My Humble Opinion, she could very well be a pedophile.

What if she looked 'shifty'? What then?
I think this law (and the breaking of it) really says something about what we have let our society become. I think that taking her photo to make her look innocent is a shameful thing.

Not the poster of the picture. I am not trying to flame you, flstf. I think that the photographer should have stopped and asked "what does it matter what she looks like?"

This law is probably supported by a lot of people. It's intent is to protect children from pedophiles. Most people probably think they are only arresting the bums, etc or like Ustwo said

Quote:

Nothing like taking your kid to the park while getting eyed by someone who smells like pee and is picking through the trash looking for cold french fries.

I think what the reporter/photographer is trying to show by publishing her picture, is that anyone (even their readers) who do not see/read the park rules and take a seat on one of the benches is subject to arrest and possible jail time. Also the woman was probably wanting the publicity.

smooth · 09-29-2005, 09:44 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Leto

who is this picture of? she's beautiful....

Debra Lafave

Reese · 09-29-2005, 10:08 AM

Quote:

Surely I have the right to use public facilities provided for by my taxes?

A larger percentage of your taxes go to funding prisons, and you'll get to use it if you sit on that bench. :P

Seriously though, I think a warning was more than enough, now if they cought her there again a few hours later.. that's a different story.

martinguerre · 09-29-2005, 10:16 AM

and how many stories have we heard where a pedophile uses their children to get close to others?

having a child in your custody does not make you a responsible adult.

Xazy · 09-29-2005, 10:21 AM

Some parks are made for children, the adults are there to supervise. It is not like there isn't 5 public parks within a mile from that area where she could be! While I have no children, I can understand how some parents can be concerned. This is the only park in the lower east side that i know of, that is like that.

Cynthetiq · 09-29-2005, 04:03 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Xazy

Some parks are made for children, the adults are there to supervise. It is not like there isn't 5 public parks within a mile from that area where she could be! While I have no children, I can understand how some parents can be concerned. This is the only park in the lower east side that i know of, that is like that.

actually I believe the seward playground is like that as well. i recall wandering through it when skogafoss and I were contemplating the move to LES and when I read the sign was a bit shocked but understood that there's only X space and it has to be divied up with amenties for everyone.

to further it, dog runs in the park state that if you don't have a dog you shouldn't be in the dog run. I don't know if it's law but it's definitely verbiage on a sign in Washington Square park and/or Madison Park.

09-28-2005, 08:31 AM	#3 (permalink)
BigBen Comedian Location: Use the search button	Brutal. What disturbs me is that the rule was designed so that police officers had the discretion to enforce it or not. Oh, so the cops only have to give the ticket to someone who looks like a pedophile? What does a pedophile look like? The cops get to throw their weight around and choose who to move along and who to ignore, who to cite for a 1,000 fine and who to let off with a warning. This is not how I want to be governed. I want rules to apply to all people, regardless of what they look like and where they are sitting. Fucking Secret Poletzei. I hate those swaggering ILS cops who have to prove they have something other than just their ego swinging between their legs. ILS = Imaginary Lat Syndrome. Guys who look like they are carrying invisible watermelons under their arms. __________________ 3.141592654 Hey, if you are impressed with my memorizing pi to 10 digits, you should see the size of my penis.

09-28-2005, 08:37 AM	#4 (permalink)
fresnelly Functionally Appropriate Location: Toronto	The article implies that the Police officers immediately gave her the ticket without discussion or consideration. To my mind that would be the real complaint here. Did she become abusive and obstinate to the officer? Without those details, her case is hard to judge. Many playgrounds here in Toronto have the same policy, and I think it's a fair one. Likely there other benches just outside the perimeter of the playground proper that she could have moved to. __________________ Building an artificial intelligence that appreciates Mozart is easy. Building an A.I. that appreciates a theme restaurant is the real challenge - Kit Roebuck - Nine Planets Without Intelligent Life Last edited by fresnelly; 09-28-2005 at 08:41 AM..

09-28-2005, 12:23 PM	#17 (permalink)
BigBen Comedian Location: Use the search button	Now I am going to try and restrain my fierce ball of rage right now: What the fuck is the purpose of taking her picture? Does it add journalistic weight to the story? Oh, she is attractive, therefore she must be innocent. Why would the cops mind a person who looked like that? This law was meant to stop pedophiles and creepy people. She doesn't look creepy. STOP RIGHT THERE. We humble cyber-citizens of the TFP proclaim long and loud that we are inclusive, we are not racist, nor sexist, nor discriminatory in any way. Then you see a picture of the perpetrator and what happens? The whole perspective changes. In My Humble Opinion, she could very well be a pedophile. What if she looked 'shifty'? What then? I think this law (and the breaking of it) really says something about what we have let our society become. I think that taking her photo to make her look innocent is a shameful thing. Not the poster of the picture. I am not trying to flame you, flstf. I think that the photographer should have stopped and asked "what does it matter what she looks like?" __________________ 3.141592654 Hey, if you are impressed with my memorizing pi to 10 digits, you should see the size of my penis.

09-29-2005, 07:32 AM	#22 (permalink)
Yakk Wehret Den Anfängen! Location: Ontario, Canada	Modern western society has chosen to make so many things against the law, it is nearly impossible to live without breaking one law or another. Every law is an evil, in and of itself. A law can redeem it's inherit evil by doing significant good. They might as well make it a law that nobody is allowed within those parks period, and give the police the power to fine anyone 1000$ for being there. Shucks, why not make it illegal to be anywhere, then let the police use their discretion. O_o __________________ Last edited by JHVH : 10-29-4004 BC at 09:00 PM. Reason: Time for a rest.

09-29-2005, 10:16 AM	#28 (permalink)
martinguerre whosoever Location: New England	and how many stories have we heard where a pedophile uses their children to get close to others? having a child in your custody does not make you a responsible adult. __________________ For God so loved creation, that God sent God's only Son that whosoever believed should not perish, but have everlasting life. -John 3:16

09-28-2005, 09:40 AM	#5 (permalink)
canuckguy I read your emails. Location: earth	You would think they would have given a warning to the woman first, and not a ticket. Regarding the rule in general, well I like it and wish the KIDS parks, not dog, or walking parks..etc KIDS parks, again not ALL parks, i am saying KIDS parks had these types of rules. Sorry for having to make those bold, it just seems most times these threads turn into the either people who have kids vs people who don't. or the people who will start up the not all sex offenders are pedo's. yes we understand that some sex offenders are the 18yr old who fucked his 15yr old girlfriend. I am not sure how many of you go to public parks with your kids, but sometimes it can be a bit creepy. There is not a standard of what a pedo looks like, there not all painted green or were red hats, there all different. But if you have ever been to a kids pool or kids playground, sometimes you'll come across, a man, just sitting there by himself or with a camera, just sitting there staring. Fucking gives me the creeps, sure he could be a photographer for the local newspaper, whatever. Could be waiting for his grandchildren to show up, whatever. Could have just got out of a state pen for raping a child. So many possibles that i don't mind the rule as its original intend was to protect, sure that it might cause situations like the story above that are stupid. But any rule that may help protect kids is good in my book.

09-28-2005, 09:47 AM	#6 (permalink)
Astrocloud Apocalypse Nerd	My experience with the law is that cops are out to fulfill a ticket quota. If there is any way they can squeeze out an extra ticket -they will. I like the idea of telling the scuzzy guy to get off the bench. But give the police a new law and chances are they won't care how the law was intended -they will just write the ticket. Co-incedently my sister got a ticket for looking at a map while stopped at a streetlight. A cop gave her a ticket for it. When she went to court (as opposed to paying the fine via the mail) the judge threw it out. It seems that said law was intended for people who look at maps while driving and get into accidents.

09-28-2005, 10:30 AM	#8 (permalink)
flstf Easy Rider Location: Moscow on the Ohio	In no way do I wish to make things easier for pedophiles but this law goes too far. I wonder if this woman is convicted if she will then have to report as a sex offender. I'm just kidding but the law assumes that since she is there without a child she must be up to something sinister.

09-28-2005, 11:21 AM	#12 (permalink)
flstf Easy Rider Location: Moscow on the Ohio	Heres a picture of the "sex offender" proudly displaying her summons.

09-28-2005, 11:31 AM	#14 (permalink)
Glory's Sun Registered User	she can come sit on my.. umm bench any day heh heh snort /end jack I can't say the rule/law is a bad one. I understand the logic, but don't understand why the cops just didn't warn her and let her go. It would have alot of time/trouble and money.

09-28-2005, 12:21 PM	#16 (permalink)
AngelicVampire Insane	Why do governments keep trying to become parents? Surely I have the right to use public facilities provided for by my taxes? What if all the other benches are taken and in use, do you get dispensation to sit on these ones? I am still not really sure why kids are seen as such a great thing, there are so many laws and stuff now that basically punish you for not having kids, surely raising children should be the responsiblity of the parents whose right it was to have these kids?

09-28-2005, 12:29 PM	#19 (permalink)
Astrocloud Apocalypse Nerd	<embed src="http://www.angelfire.com/music5/emptyhearts/music/TULLaqualung.asx" autostart="TRUE" hide="TRUE"> I couldn't resist.

09-29-2005, 10:21 AM	#29 (permalink)
Xazy People in masks cannot be trusted Location: NYC	Some parks are made for children, the adults are there to supervise. It is not like there isn't 5 public parks within a mile from that area where she could be! While I have no children, I can understand how some parents can be concerned. This is the only park in the lower east side that i know of, that is like that.