School Bullying

Maybe mom has a Miley Cyrus fixation...

That isn't her mother. It allegedly her aunt. (I don't think there is any real relation.)

These folks call themselves "The Valley Mafia". Most are *women* (I use the term very loosely) who have several "baby daddies" who are either current cons or ex cons and either have been or are involved in illegal drug use and or other illegal activity. I don't understand the "tongue" thing but I don't understand "duck lip" images and why they are so popular on social media either.

Last night I received upwards of 6 different msgs from the "Valley Mafia" including threats, accusing me of bashing a 12 year old and I'd like to be clear...I am not bashing a 12 year old child but I have bashed the actions of 12 year olds who think it's perfectly acceptable to sucker punch another child and then brag about their escapades on social media. I don't blame the 12 year olds as much as I do the adult role models whom these children are modeling their behavior after. At least 3 of the messages were from the actual 12 year olds involved (occurring after midnight last night) and the other 3 were from "Valley Mafia" *women* (again the term used very loosely) which included perceived threats to f*-up my world.

I also want to be clear that Bailey (the girl sucker punched) is probably not completely innocent. I know the girls were friends, they quarreled, probably called each other a few names and parted friendship. I raised a child, I know that kids are not always going to get along and that they bicker and fight with one another. That's normal, hormonal, childish behavior and something parents and teachers deal with on a daily basis. I'm not saying it's right but it's what children do. It's our job as as parents teach them effective ways to deal with those issues that don't include physical violence.

What is NOT NORMAL behavior is teaching your child that it's acceptable behavior to sucker punch someone you disagree with as an effective means of stopping a dispute and that is the message the "Valley Mafia" is giving to those little girls. Telling these kids their actions were justified or that they were "just defending" themselves is BS. The most cowardly act on earth is to walk up behind someone and sucker punch them and that goes for children as well as adults. Children and adults have the inherent right to protect themselves from a perceived threat...blindly sucker punching someone who never saw it coming is not a "perceived" threat!

Sounds as if this has now turned the corner and uncovered more Walton County Issues for law enforcement to look into.

A women's gang (club) called the "Valley Mafia"...

I hope you've reported these threats to WCSO.

That isn't her mother. It allegedly her aunt. (I don't think there is any real relation.)

Regardless...she's the alleged "responsible" adult in that shot, and she's letting the kid drive. They can't claim the car wasn't moving. The background is blurry...

I'm starting to understand why some of the gentlemen in the aforementioned valley find goats more appealing than the alternative.

Regardless...she's the alleged "responsible" adult in that shot, and she's letting the kid drive. They can't claim the car wasn't moving. The background is blurry...

I agree. The car is moving. A 12 year old is driving. According to the passenger "they were driving down old dirt roads making memories like we all use to do with our daddies".

John G...I don't know that its a woman's gang per say (on some of the social media sites that is how they refer to themselves) but I do know that most of them are from the valley and PDL area who are all friends with one another either by being in school together (a couple actually went to school with my daughter) or through other associations. No, I have not gone to the police. I'm a firm believer that you give people enough rope, they will eventually hang themselves. 12 year olds making online threats to do me bodily harm don't frighten me nor do angry women who find that type of behavior justifiable. I will say that if they show up in my driveway there may well be a "Come to Jesus meeting" involving the police.

For those who haven't viewed the video from Bailey's website (it's still down) here is another link...

Another local youth prison bound.

FYI. The Valley Mafia use to be known as the Valley Boyz. You also have the Hogans Loop Disciples that are in the middle of the valley and Redbay. Just like Mossyhead area has the notorious Mossyhead Smiley's.

FYI. The Valley Mafia use to be known as the Valley Boyz. You also have the Hogans Loop Disciples that are in the middle of the valley and Redbay. Just like Mossyhead area has the notorious Mossyhead Smiley's.

Well...that explains the nut jobs and the influences in some of these children's lives. How tragically sad.

The link has changed to the Sucker Punch video

I was not able to delete the other as too much time elapsed.

WMBB NEWS STORY

Battling bullying

An incident in the Walton County School District went viral online in the worst way. A video circulated on social media showing a middle school student attacked by another. Both the school district and the mother of the victim want to make sure this never happens to another child.

"The video - for me - was extremely hard to watch," said Trela Ingalls. "I couldn't finish it."

Ingalls' daughter is a student at Walton Middle School. Cell phone video shows another girl hitting Ingalls' daughter in the head. Perhaps more shocking, the April 21st incident was shared on social media.

"I wanted to put her in my pocket and just take her with me from then on because you as a parent want to be the one to protect your child," said Ingalls.

Walton County Superintendent Carlene Anderson couldn't talk the specifics but said this degree of bullying is rare in Walton County's schools.

"It's not a zero tolerance policy, even though we have zero tolerance for it," said Anderson. "In its worst cases, it could become a zero tolerance policy."

In this case, by Florida statue it's not technically considered bullying but an attack. However, the video can fall under cyber-bullying.

"Most heinous are the videos that are posted - pretty much get around the world before we even know it," said Anderson.

Ingalls and her daughter are working to fight the bullying stigma.

"Things do happen behind teachers backs, and no matter what's going on - no matter what the situation is - that you need to be louder that the situation," said Ingalls. "Speak up so that somebody knows what's going on because a lot of times bullying is silent."

Superintendent Anderson asks parents be familiar with the bullying policy to better understand the process and in turn help their child if they are a victim of bullying. Parents can find it on the Walton County School District website.

The Children's Online Privacy Protection Act ("COPPA") and the implementing FTC trade regulation rule require that a Web site that collects information from children under thirteen must generally:

provide parents with notice (both online and in a way reasonably calculated to reach parents) of the information it collects from children, how it uses the information, and with whom it shares the information;obtain verifiable parental consent for collection, use and disclosure of personally- identifiable data from minors;provide parents wit h reasonable means to review the collected data and to refuse to allow its further use or maintenance;give parents the option to allow collection and use of the child's personal information for the specific site without consenting to disclosure to third parties;not condition a child's participation in a game, the offering of a prize, or another activity on the child disclosing more personal information than is reasonably necessary to participate in that activity; andestablish and maintain reasonable procedures to protect the confidentiality, security and integrity of personal information collected from children.- See more at: Privacy Law in Q1 2002 - FindLaw

The Children's Online Privacy Protection Act ("COPPA") and the implementing FTC trade regulation rule require that a Web site that collects information from children under thirteen must generally:

provide parents with notice (both online and in a way reasonably calculated to reach parents) of the information it collects from children, how it uses the information, and with whom it shares the information;obtain verifiable parental consent for collection, use and disclosure of personally- identifiable data from minors;provide parents wit h reasonable means to review the collected data and to refuse to allow its further use or maintenance;give parents the option to allow collection and use of the child's personal information for the specific site without consenting to disclosure to third parties;not condition a child's participation in a game, the offering of a prize, or another activity on the child disclosing more personal information than is reasonably necessary to participate in that activity; andestablish and maintain reasonable procedures to protect the confidentiality, security and integrity of personal information collected from children.- See more at: Privacy Law in Q1 2002 - FindLaw

wat?

Queen Carlene really gives some thoughtful insight in the WMBB article.

Telling the public outright lies about not have this level of bullying! Lie. Lie. Lie.

Her quote should have been, "... these incidents occur all the time, unfortunately a stupid kid video taped it and a brave parent just so happened to post the incident online and now its got broad media attention. Damn I wish that didn't happen..."

Her quote about "zero tolerance" is the thing fundraising T-Shirts should be made from... It's so confusing and ignorant. It's great!

If parents wonder why their children act this way and why the "lunictics run the asylum(s)" look no further than current school Superintendent and her inability to address the ongoing drug and bully problems in our schools.

The Children's Online Privacy Protection Act ("COPPA") and the implementing FTC trade regulation rule require that a Web site that collects information from children under thirteen must generally:

provide parents with notice (both online and in a way reasonably calculated to reach parents) of the information it collects from children, how it uses the information, and with whom it shares the information;obtain verifiable parental consent for collection, use and disclosure of personally- identifiable data from minors;provide parents wit h reasonable means to review the collected data and to refuse to allow its further use or maintenance;give parents the option to allow collection and use of the child's personal information for the specific site without consenting to disclosure to third parties;not condition a child's participation in a game, the offering of a prize, or another activity on the child disclosing more personal information than is reasonably necessary to participate in that activity; andestablish and maintain reasonable procedures to protect the confidentiality, security and integrity of personal information collected from children.- See more at: Privacy Law in Q1 2002 - FindLaw

I'm not a lawyer and don't profess to be but one would think that privacy rights went out the window when the attacker and friends uploaded the video themselves to an Instagram account with the hashtag #baileygothera$$beat. I also think privacy is a 2 way street. The victim had a right not to be sucker punched and have the video uploaded against her will and consent. The subsequent video that was uploaded to social media was done so with the victims mother and the victim agreeing to place the video on the bullying site which the Defuniak Herald originally published and is also pictured by WMBB. It should also be said that neither the sucker puncher or the victim are identifiable in the video and the perpetrators claimed "the victory" by identifying themselves when they took to social media admitting to being on out of school suspension/expulsion for their participation.

As for the other parents...well you have to wonder why the parents aren't aware of what their children are doing online (some still seem oblivious) and allowed their 12 year old children to create a social media account(s) (there is more than one account and more than one 12 year old involved) which is a VIOLATION of the Terms of Service for FB and at least 2 of those accounts maybe 3 have been deactivated by FB. The sucker punchers account was deactivated by the "parents". I think that children(s) privacy also goes out the window when said "children" contact or send unsolicited messages with threats to do bodily harm to adults and actively participate on social media with other "alleged" adults who have also made threats and defended the actions of the sucker puncher. I guess I should also note that the VICTIM has never had a social media account and she isn't responsible for any of those images being published...those can all be laid directly at the feet of the alleged adults and 12 year old bullies.

Queen Carlene really gives some thoughtful insight in the WMBB article.

You are not the only one to suggest that she made a complete A$$ out of herself.

Telling the public outright lies about not have this level of bullying! Lie. Lie. Lie.

Yes that is an outright lie. School board policy actually does address crimes committed by children and ZERO tolerance. The 2nd Amendment to the constitution also provides that you have an absolute right to protect yourself from harm. However, every court in this nation has historically upheld as a crime the act of sucker punching someone because it does not adequately give the victim time to defend themselves. A CRIME was committed at WMS and that is the issue the mother of the victim is still trying to get the school board to address.

Her quote should have been, "... these incidents occur all the time, unfortunately a stupid kid video taped it and a brave parent just so happened to post the incident online and now its got broad media attention.

The video went viral and there is more than one parent who shared it. I wouldn't go so far as to say that incidents of this severity happen all the time in the Walton County School District because I don't know that that statement is true. I do however know that other parents have voiced their concerns on the website created for the victim and on social media about their own children being bullied in Walton County and they do have concerns that the problems are not being adequately addressed. I have also made it a point not to call names or bash the perpetrators (children) or refer to them as "stupid kids". I admit their behavior leaves allot to be desired and I have made it my every point to bash their actions. There is a substantial difference!

I'm not a lawyer and don't profess to be but one would think that privacy rights went out the window when the attacker and friends uploaded the video themselves to an Instagram account with the hashtag #baileygothera$$beat. I also think privacy is a 2 way street. The victim had a right not to be sucker punched and have the video uploaded against her will and consent. The subsequent video that was uploaded to social media was done so with the victims mother and the victim agreeing to place the video on the bullying site which the Defuniak Herald originally published and is also pictured by WMBB. It should also be said that neither the sucker puncher or the victim are identifiable in the video and the perpetrators claimed "the victory" by identifying themselves when they took to social media admitting to being on out of school suspension/expulsion for their participation.

As for the other parents...well you have to wonder why the parents aren't aware of what their children are doing online (some still seem oblivious) and allowed their 12 year old children to create a social media account(s) (there is more than one account and more than one 12 year old involved) which is a VIOLATION of the Terms of Service for FB and at least 2 of those accounts maybe 3 have been deactivated by FB. The sucker punchers account was deactivated by the "parents". I think that children(s) privacy also goes out the window when said "children" contact or send unsolicited messages with threats to do bodily harm to adults and actively participate on social media with other "alleged" adults who have also made threats and defended the actions of the sucker puncher. I guess I should also note that the VICTIM has never had a social media account and she isn't responsible for any of those images being published...those can all be laid directly at the feet of the alleged adults and 12 year old bullies.

Not sure about that. Yes they spread it, but now walking everything back and closing accounts. So did they give up rights to privacy now?

Not sure about that. Yes they spread it, but now walking everything back and closing accounts. So did they give up rights to privacy now?

Again, neither the victim nor the sucker puncher and her cohorts in crime are identifiable in that video. Only the sucker punchers family deactivated her account but not before publicly admitting she was the sucker puncher, the others were deactivated by FB for violations of TOS age requirements.

Had the sucker puncher and or friends and family wanted privacy chances are they would not have used social media as an opportunity to blame the victim for being sucker punched.

P.S. Fox...That these 12 year old's now want to backtrack actions that they themselves downloaded to social media is not my problem! You can't have your cake and eat it too....either you are loud and proud of what you've done or you're not!! If they are ashamed of their actions they should be loud and proud about that also. What they have said and done in defense of their actions should be a concern to EVERY parent in this district as well as the Walton County School System and the police.

The Children's Online Privacy Protection Act ("COPPA") and the implementing FTC trade regulation rule require that a Web site that collects information from children under thirteen must generally:

provide parents with notice (both online and in a way reasonably calculated to reach parents) of the information it collects from children, how it uses the information, and with whom it shares the information;obtain verifiable parental consent for collection, use and disclosure of personally- identifiable data from minors;provide parents wit h reasonable means to review the collected data and to refuse to allow its further use or maintenance

I also believe that parents have an ABSOLUTE OBLIGATION/RESPONSIBILITY TO SOCIETY to ensure that they monitor their children(s) behavior online and to ENSURE that said children are not acting like online terrorists! Since that didn't happen, you are hard pressed to convince me that some of these children are protected under the law you cited.

Again, I'm not an attorney but I do believe there is one hell of an argument to be made when dealing with this type of behavior.

Sheriff Adkinson did one of his live sessions today and while he did not comment on the specifics of this particular incident basically what he did say was, that the Sheriff's Office has a great SRO team that works closely with students to ensure that they know that this type of behavior isn't acceptable, that there are consequences for their actions, that there should not just be punitive actions and that the SRO's work with kids in ways that changes the behavior.

In this case (one of the most violent in the Walton County School system that I can recall) changing the behavior was an epic failure in the almost 2 weeks that followed. <--- That comment is not directed at the Sheriff or SRO team personally but more at the adults and children that took to social media after the incident occurred and continued to victimize the victim with vicious attacks that she somehow deserved what she got and that the perpetrator was "just defending" herself.

I do think it's possible to change children(s) behavior but I also believe that's its a parents job to teach their children that it is never OK to sucker punch someone. Its a crime! Had that happened this thread may never have existed.

Let me also add that for the most part the behavior of the perps (including the perps friends/parents actions) have died down in the last 2 days...perhaps because 3 of the children no longer have social media access (at least not under the names they have previously used) 1 (one) actually did create another account yesterday by using a different name when she couldn't log into hers which was promptly reported as a violation of FB TOS. I think they have also finally realized that their comments provoked allot of people in Defuniak to stand up against their nonsense.

And for all you folks gossiping and rumoring about who "Misty" is, yes, I am Lynda Diann and yes, I did upload the video to YouTube and to my own FB page. Yes, I am partly responsible for the video going viral and setting my page to public and for contacting some of the media but I had a whole lot of awesome people in this community that I have known since my daughter was a student in the Walton County School System helping me. I make NO apologies for anything I've done and who I am really is irrelevant but I thought I should put the gossiping and rumoring to rest.

It takes a village!

Misty, you have always had my support (and others) with this outing of school violence in Walton County. I think it's terrible that you were threatened and that this was exposed through social media.

While we do have good SROs, they are only as good as they are allowed to be and I've heard report after report about how the School District likes to "keep everything in house", from tales of torrid teacher Affairs, drug abuse and most recently, violence.

You and I will continue to differ on Sheriff Mike. His people are good and try their best. He, on the other hand is a masterful politician and knows the Walton Two Step good enough to win Dancing With The Stars!

Has a charge been brought against the assailant? Is this going to be another incident like the elderly Pastor that was attacked?

The more the schools try to cover up what actually goes on inside the four walls, the more critizm and push back they will get.

While we do have good SROs, they are only as good as they are allowed to be and I've heard report after report about how the School District likes to "keep everything in house"

When this first occurred there was EVERY effort by the School District and Law Enforcement to keep this quiet and in all probability, it would have remained one of the District's dirty little secrets if the father of the victim (her parents are divorced) and school staff and the police had been able to keep the victims mother and friends from going public. The first attempt to go public was the web site mentioned by WMBB and actually posted by the Defuniak Herald which was later removed by the Herald after the victims father demanded it be taken down, first by the Herald and later by intimidating a local, small business owner with the threat of a law suit. There was also some effort to keep the victims mother from clearly understanding her rights to file criminal charges by the same aforementioned parties. The School Administration also told Staff that they were not to discuss the incident with anyone! (It was actually a teacher at WMS who told me personally that the perpetrator had been expelled and others involved had been severely dealt with.) When it became apparent that "severely dealt with" was a joke and the perpetrators took to social media to blame the victim for being sucker punched is actually when I got involved. A law suit didn't intimidate me (you can't get blood from a turnip) and I am not held to the same standards as the Herald. There were T-shirts made and the victims father implied that the shirts were an effort to profit off his child. The shirts were actually designed last year after the victim wrote a paper about bullying which was going to be added to the website to "stop" bullying. I was asked to upload the video, set my profile to public and ask folks to share the video. The rest as they say, is history. With the help of lots of folks and sending the video to media outlets as well, the video went viral. It was no longer the school districts dirty little secret.

To answer your question, yes the mother has filed criminal charges but myself and others feel that with the expulsion of the perpetrator the State won't bring charges on the recommendation of the Sheriff and school administration. Officials involved have not kept the victims mother informed as to if or when the perp will be formally charged. I also contacted the police regarding the threats and I have admitted my participation. While I don't feel there is a need at this point to file charges (the perps really have not done anything except run their mouths with verbal threats and harassment) I was told that they would get with the Sheriff and wanted to see the images and actions I have of these individuals. That didn't happen either...but in fairness their social media actions have died down in the last 2 days.

Now, myself and others believe that the hope (by law enforcement and school officials) is this will all die down and go away. Sadly, the message that sends to our kids is that it's OK to commit a CRIME because the worst that can happen is that you'll be sent to the academy.

To answer your question, yes the mother has filed criminal charges but myself and others feel that with the expulsion of the perpetrator the State won't bring charges on the recommendation of the Sheriff and school administration. Officials involved have not kept the victims mother informed as to if or when the perp will be formally charged. I also contacted the police regarding the threats and I have admitted my participation. While I don't feel there is a need at this point to file charges (the perps really have not done anything except run their mouths with verbal threats and harassment) I was told that they would get with the Sheriff and wanted to see the images and actions I have of these individuals. That didn't happen either...but in fairness their social media actions have died down in the last 2 days.

Thanks for the info.

Why would "they" have to get with the Sheriff about anything? Don't "they" have a badge and the full authority of the State of Florida? Or is the office run with a Micromanagement Style?

See this is a political issue now and Mike has to get involved and run damage control.

Does the sheriff review all cases? No, he doesn't. I guess we don't have anyone that can make their own decisions up there when it comes to taking an incident report or making an arrest. It has to go through multiple levels of bureaucracy and jump numerous hoops.

Its all about control and being able to control who gets a report, who gets arrested...

Why would "they" have to get with the Sheriff about anything? Don't "they" have a badge and the full authority of the State of Florida?

I assume because the SO has jurisdiction and has SRO's in all Walton County Schools. I really don't know. It's my understanding the complainant was told an SRO would be taking her complaint and that's what occurred. One would think that the mother could have walked into the PD and ask to file a complaint as every citizen has a right to do but in this instance when she went to the PD she was told an SRO would handle it.

Does the sheriff review all cases?

John please don't ask me a question and then answer the question.
Again, I assume because the SO has jurisdiction and has SRO's in all Walton County Schools.

Its all about control and being able to control who gets a report, who gets arrested...

Here's my opinion...which is all it is. I'm not a lawyer or a law enforcement ofc. The City of Defuniak encompasses 14 square miles. I don't know if the schools within that area are a part of the 14 miles or if jurisdiction for them is held by Walton County regardless of where the 14 mile perimeter is. I assume it was transferred to an SRO because the Sheriff has jurisdiction over all of Walton County. I think (again, just my opinion) it was damage control and pressure by school officials and the SO to keep this from becoming public. I do know for a fact that the school district did not want this made public or discussed by Staff with anyone. I've already said what I believe the Sheriff's recommendation will be to the DA. If actual ZERO tolerance were in place it would have meant the perpetrator would have faced the juvenile justice system which would have meant probation at best because it was a first offense, the records of which would be expunged at 18 if there were no more altercations. Worst case scenario, incarceration in a juvenile facility. I believe probation is warranted, I don't believe that's going to happen.