Monday, March 29, 2010
Wednesday, March 10, 2010
Ryan Patrick Halligan
Ryan Patrick Halligan (December 18, 1989 – October 7, 2003) was an Essex Junction, Vermont teenager who died by suicide at the age of 13 after bullying from his classmates in real life and cyber-bullying online. According to the Associated Press, Halligan was repeatedly sent instant messages from middle school classmates accusing him of being gay, and was "threatened, taunted and insulted incessantly".[1]His father, John P. Halligan, a former IBM engineer, subsequently lobbied for laws to be passed in Vermont to improve how schools address bullying and suicide prevention. He has also given speeches at schools in other states about the story of his son.Ryan's case has been cited by legislators in various states proposing legislation to curb cyber-bullying.[1] In Vermont, laws were subsequently enacted to address the cyberbullying problem and the risk of teen suicides, in response.[2] In 2008, his suicide and its causes were examined in a segment of the PBS Frontline television program entitled "Growing Up Online".Ryan Halligan was born on December 18, 1989 in Poughkeepsie, New York, the son of John P. and Kelly Halligan. His family moved to Essex Junction, Vermont, where Halligan attended elementary school and, later, middle school. He was described by his father as a "gentle, very sensitive soul", who experienced some developmental delays affecting speech and physical coordination in his early school years. Although he overcame those difficulties by the fourth grade, "He still struggled; school was never easy to him, but he always showed up with a smile on his face, eager to do his best", said his father.[3]In his 1999–2000 school year, Halligan suffered bullying at the hands of a group of students at his school because of his learning disorder. The family stated in a short documentary that Ryan enrolled in counseling, with little success. In December 2002, the youngster told his father that the bullying had started again and asked for a Taebo Kick Boxing set for Christmas in order to learn how to defend himself against the bullies.[3] Following a fight in February 2003 which was broken up by the assistant principal, the bully stopped bothering Ryan. Towards the end of 7th grade, Ryan told his father that he and the bully had become friends. However, after Ryan told him something embarrassing that happened once, the bully used the information to spread a rumor that Ryan was gay.[4]According to his father and news reports, Ryan spent much of his time online during the summer of 2003, particularly on AIM and other instant messaging services. During the summer, he was cyber-bullied by schoolmates who taunted him, thinking he was gay.[3] He unintentionally archived these conversations on his hard drive when he installed DeadAIM, a freeware program. His dad also found in this folder of archived conversations transcripts of online exchanges in which a girl whom Ryan had a crush on pretended to like him but later told him at school that he was a "loser". He found out she only pretended to like him in order to retrieve personal information about him. Their private exchanges were copied and pasted into other IMs among his schoolmates to embarrass and humiliate him. After he went up to the girl and she called him a loser, he said "It's girls like you who make me want to kill myself".[3]On October 7, 2003, when John Halligan, Ryan's father, was away on business, and everyone else in the Halligan family was sleeping early in the morning, Ryan went into his family's bathroom and hanged himself. He was discovered by his sister who was the first one up that morning
Although Halligan left no suicide note, his father, John P. Halligan, learned of the cyberbullying when he accessed his son's computer.[3] He began to lobby for legislation in Vermont to improve how schools address bullying and suicide prevention. He has also given speeches to schools in various states about the story of his son and the devastating effects of cyberbullying among teens.Vermont subsequently enacted a Bullying Prevention Policy Law in May 2004 and later adopted a Suicide Prevention Law (Act 114) in 2005 closely following a draft submitted by Halligan's father. The law provides measures to assist teachers and others to recognize and respond to depression and suicide risks among teens.[2] Halligan's case has also been cited by legislators in other states proposing legislation to curb cyber-bullying.[1]Halligan's story was featured on a Frontline television program entitled "Growing Up Online", produced in January, 2008, by WGBH-TV in Boston and distributed nationwide over PBS. In it, his father recounts his shock upon discovering the extent of the abuse his son endured, saying he believes that bullying on the internet "amplified and accelerated the hurt and pain he was trying to deal with, that started in the real world".[5]
Born Ryan Patrick Halligan
December 18, 1989(1989-12-18)
Poughkeepsie, New York
Died October 7, 2003 (aged 13)
Essex Junction, Vermont
Cause of death Suicide by hanging
Nationality American
Ethnicity White
Occupation Student
Parents John P. Halligan
Kelly Halligan
Monday, March 8, 2010
Tuesday, March 2, 2010
Michael Peter Fay
Michael Peter Fay (born May 30, 1975) is an American who briefly shot to worldwide fame when he was sentenced to caning in Singapore as an 18-year-old in 1994 for theft and vandalism. Caning is a routine court sentence in Singapore but most Americans were unfamiliar with it, and Fay's case was the first caning involving an American citizen.The number of cane strokes in his sentence was reduced from six to four after US officials requested leniency.Michael Fay was born in St. Louis, Missouri. His mother Randy divorced his father George when he was eight. In his childhood, Michael was diagnosed with attention-deficit hyperactivity disorder, a fact that his lawyer would later claim made Fay not responsible for his actions.Although Fay mostly lived with his natural father after the divorce, he later moved to Singapore to live with his mother and his stepfather Marco Chan. Michael was enrolled in the Singapore American School.
Singapore's The Straits Times newspaper in 1993 ran stories about car vandalism in Singapore. Unknown individuals, thought at first to be residents of the HDB flats in which 85% of the local population lives, damaged their neighbours' cars with hot tar, paint remover, and hatchets. Taxi drivers complained that their tires were slashed. In the city center and the condos, where the better-off 15% of the local population and foreigners live, cars were found with deep scratches and dents. One man interviewed by the Straits Times complained that he had to refinish his car six times in six months. In the fall of 1993 a vandal took red spray paint to six cars in a garage off Orchard Lane, making the vandalism highly visible. The next night someone sprayed a line of red paint right through the official seal of a judge's car that had been left out on the street.
The police eventually arrested a 16-year-old suspect, Andy Shiu Chi Ho from Hong Kong. He was not caught vandalizing cars, but was charged with driving his father's car without a license. After questioning Shiu, the police questioned several expatriate students from the Singapore American School, including Michael Fay, and later charged them with more than fifty counts of vandalism. Fay pleaded guilty to vandalizing the cars in addition to stealing road signs, as he was advised that such a plea would preclude caning. Fay later maintained that his confession was false; that he never vandalized any cars and that the only crime he committed was stealing signs.[1][2] Under the 1966 Singapore Vandalism Act, originally passed to curb the spread of political graffiti in Singapore and which specifically covered vandalism of government property,[3] he was sentenced on March 3, 1994 to four months in jail, a fine of 3,500 Singapore dollars (US$2,214 or £1,514 at the time), and six strokes of the cane.[4] Shiu, who pleaded not guilty, was eventually sentenced to eight months in prison and twelve strokes of the cane.[5]Fay's lawyers appealed, arguing that the Vandalism Act provides caning only for indelible forms of graffiti vandalism and that the spray-painted cars were cheaply restored to their original condition. Although the appeal failed,[6] Singapore President Ong Teng Cheong commuted Fay's caning from six to four strokes as a gesture of respect toward US President Bill Clinton, who had made a request for clemency on Fay's behalf.[7] (Shiu's sentence was later also reduced, from twelve strokes to six, after a clemency appeal to the Singapore President.)Michael Fay duly received four strokes of the cane across his bare buttocks on May 5, 1994 at Queenstown Remand Centre.
The official position of the United States government was that while it recognized Singapore's right to try and punish Fay with due process of law, it deemed the punishment of caning to be excessive for a teenager committing a non-violent crime. The United States embassy in Singapore pointed out that the graffiti damage that Fay made on the cars was not permanent, but caning would leave Fay with physical as well as long-term emotional scars.[3]U.S. President Bill Clinton called the punishment extreme and mistaken, continuing to pressure the Singaporean government to grant Fay clemency from caning. Two dozen U.S. senators signed a letter to the Singaporean government also appealing for clemency. After Fay's punishment was carried out, the United States Trade Representative said that he would try to prevent the World Trade Organization's first ministerial meeting from taking place in Singapore. The Singaporean government pointed out that Singaporeans who break the law faced the same punishments as Fay, and suggested that the United States should pay more attention to its domestic problems, such as American law and order, rather than telling other countries what to do.Following Fay's sentence, the case received wide coverage by the U.S. and world media and dozens of reporters were sent to Singapore to cover the case.[10] The New York Times ran several editorials and op-eds that condemned the punishment and called the American public to flood the Singaporean embassy in the United States with protests. Some of the coverage was factually incorrect: for instance, Newsday carried an interview with a person who claimed to have witnessed a public caning in Singapore, despite the fact that Singapore has never carried out canings in public. Some commentaries treated the Michael Fay affair as a clash of civilizations between Asian values and the differing view of human rights common in liberal western cultures.The extent of public opposition to the caning within the United States is unclear, as opinion polls produced by different news organizations contradicted each other.[11] Nevertheless, a significant number of vocal Americans were in favor of the caning, reasoning that Singapore had a right to use corporal punishment if it chooses, or that the United States did not mete out severe enough punishment to its own juvenile offenders.[12] Others pointed out that once Americans go abroad they are subject to the laws and penal codes of whatever country they visit.[13] The Embassy of Singapore to the United States said it received numerous calls from Americans strongly supporting Fay's punishment. Many political commentators expressed support for the punishment and some polls showed a majority of Americans favored it.The media coverage of the case continued for several years.[14][15][16]
Immediately on his release from prison in June 1994, Fay returned to the United States to live with his biological father.[17] He gave several television interviews, including one for no fee (together with his US lawyer) on CNN with Larry King on June 29, 1994, in which he admitting taking road signs but denied vandalizing cars. In this interview, a transcript of which is online,[18] he also claimed that he was ill-treated during questioning, and described his caning and its results in detail. He explained why he had shaken hands with the caning operative after his four strokes had been administered.It was also in this interview that Michael revealed that, at the end of his punishment, his buttocks were bleeding only slightly, that he needed no immediate medical treatment, and that he was able to walk, albeit with "a lot of pain".This, together with the information that Michael sat down when he met a US consular official the day after his caning,[19] contrasts with some of the more lurid descriptions of Singapore caning ("bits of flesh fly with each stroke", etc.) that had been carried in the western press after the sentence was first announced.[20] These had been taken from descriptions (originally derived from a 1974 press conference)[21] of a much larger number of cuts than Michael Fay was ever going to receive for his relatively minor offense, compared with the maximum of 24 strokes that can be ordered for serious crimes like rape and robbery.While there was talk of a book or movie deal (neither of which ever materialized), Fay maintained that he would never sell his story for profit. Later in 1994, Fay suffered burns to his hands and face after a butane incident.[22][23][24] He was subsequently admitted to the Hazelden rehabilitation program for butane abuse.[22] He claimed that sniffing butane "made him forget what happened in Singapore."[25] In 1996, he was cited in Florida for a number of violations, including careless driving, reckless driving, not reporting a crash and having an open bottle of alcohol in a car.[26] Later, in 1998, still in Florida, Fay was arrested for possession of marijuana and drug paraphernalia, charges to which he confessed but was not found guilty[27] because of technical errors in his arrest.[28]
Born May 30, 1975 (1975-05-30) (age 34)
St. Louis, Missouri, U.S.
Charge(s) theft, vandalism
Penalty four months in jail
S$3,500
four strokes of the cane
Parents: George and Randy Fay
Singapore's The Straits Times newspaper in 1993 ran stories about car vandalism in Singapore. Unknown individuals, thought at first to be residents of the HDB flats in which 85% of the local population lives, damaged their neighbours' cars with hot tar, paint remover, and hatchets. Taxi drivers complained that their tires were slashed. In the city center and the condos, where the better-off 15% of the local population and foreigners live, cars were found with deep scratches and dents. One man interviewed by the Straits Times complained that he had to refinish his car six times in six months. In the fall of 1993 a vandal took red spray paint to six cars in a garage off Orchard Lane, making the vandalism highly visible. The next night someone sprayed a line of red paint right through the official seal of a judge's car that had been left out on the street.
The police eventually arrested a 16-year-old suspect, Andy Shiu Chi Ho from Hong Kong. He was not caught vandalizing cars, but was charged with driving his father's car without a license. After questioning Shiu, the police questioned several expatriate students from the Singapore American School, including Michael Fay, and later charged them with more than fifty counts of vandalism. Fay pleaded guilty to vandalizing the cars in addition to stealing road signs, as he was advised that such a plea would preclude caning. Fay later maintained that his confession was false; that he never vandalized any cars and that the only crime he committed was stealing signs.[1][2] Under the 1966 Singapore Vandalism Act, originally passed to curb the spread of political graffiti in Singapore and which specifically covered vandalism of government property,[3] he was sentenced on March 3, 1994 to four months in jail, a fine of 3,500 Singapore dollars (US$2,214 or £1,514 at the time), and six strokes of the cane.[4] Shiu, who pleaded not guilty, was eventually sentenced to eight months in prison and twelve strokes of the cane.[5]Fay's lawyers appealed, arguing that the Vandalism Act provides caning only for indelible forms of graffiti vandalism and that the spray-painted cars were cheaply restored to their original condition. Although the appeal failed,[6] Singapore President Ong Teng Cheong commuted Fay's caning from six to four strokes as a gesture of respect toward US President Bill Clinton, who had made a request for clemency on Fay's behalf.[7] (Shiu's sentence was later also reduced, from twelve strokes to six, after a clemency appeal to the Singapore President.)Michael Fay duly received four strokes of the cane across his bare buttocks on May 5, 1994 at Queenstown Remand Centre.
The official position of the United States government was that while it recognized Singapore's right to try and punish Fay with due process of law, it deemed the punishment of caning to be excessive for a teenager committing a non-violent crime. The United States embassy in Singapore pointed out that the graffiti damage that Fay made on the cars was not permanent, but caning would leave Fay with physical as well as long-term emotional scars.[3]U.S. President Bill Clinton called the punishment extreme and mistaken, continuing to pressure the Singaporean government to grant Fay clemency from caning. Two dozen U.S. senators signed a letter to the Singaporean government also appealing for clemency. After Fay's punishment was carried out, the United States Trade Representative said that he would try to prevent the World Trade Organization's first ministerial meeting from taking place in Singapore. The Singaporean government pointed out that Singaporeans who break the law faced the same punishments as Fay, and suggested that the United States should pay more attention to its domestic problems, such as American law and order, rather than telling other countries what to do.Following Fay's sentence, the case received wide coverage by the U.S. and world media and dozens of reporters were sent to Singapore to cover the case.[10] The New York Times ran several editorials and op-eds that condemned the punishment and called the American public to flood the Singaporean embassy in the United States with protests. Some of the coverage was factually incorrect: for instance, Newsday carried an interview with a person who claimed to have witnessed a public caning in Singapore, despite the fact that Singapore has never carried out canings in public. Some commentaries treated the Michael Fay affair as a clash of civilizations between Asian values and the differing view of human rights common in liberal western cultures.The extent of public opposition to the caning within the United States is unclear, as opinion polls produced by different news organizations contradicted each other.[11] Nevertheless, a significant number of vocal Americans were in favor of the caning, reasoning that Singapore had a right to use corporal punishment if it chooses, or that the United States did not mete out severe enough punishment to its own juvenile offenders.[12] Others pointed out that once Americans go abroad they are subject to the laws and penal codes of whatever country they visit.[13] The Embassy of Singapore to the United States said it received numerous calls from Americans strongly supporting Fay's punishment. Many political commentators expressed support for the punishment and some polls showed a majority of Americans favored it.The media coverage of the case continued for several years.[14][15][16]
Immediately on his release from prison in June 1994, Fay returned to the United States to live with his biological father.[17] He gave several television interviews, including one for no fee (together with his US lawyer) on CNN with Larry King on June 29, 1994, in which he admitting taking road signs but denied vandalizing cars. In this interview, a transcript of which is online,[18] he also claimed that he was ill-treated during questioning, and described his caning and its results in detail. He explained why he had shaken hands with the caning operative after his four strokes had been administered.It was also in this interview that Michael revealed that, at the end of his punishment, his buttocks were bleeding only slightly, that he needed no immediate medical treatment, and that he was able to walk, albeit with "a lot of pain".This, together with the information that Michael sat down when he met a US consular official the day after his caning,[19] contrasts with some of the more lurid descriptions of Singapore caning ("bits of flesh fly with each stroke", etc.) that had been carried in the western press after the sentence was first announced.[20] These had been taken from descriptions (originally derived from a 1974 press conference)[21] of a much larger number of cuts than Michael Fay was ever going to receive for his relatively minor offense, compared with the maximum of 24 strokes that can be ordered for serious crimes like rape and robbery.While there was talk of a book or movie deal (neither of which ever materialized), Fay maintained that he would never sell his story for profit. Later in 1994, Fay suffered burns to his hands and face after a butane incident.[22][23][24] He was subsequently admitted to the Hazelden rehabilitation program for butane abuse.[22] He claimed that sniffing butane "made him forget what happened in Singapore."[25] In 1996, he was cited in Florida for a number of violations, including careless driving, reckless driving, not reporting a crash and having an open bottle of alcohol in a car.[26] Later, in 1998, still in Florida, Fay was arrested for possession of marijuana and drug paraphernalia, charges to which he confessed but was not found guilty[27] because of technical errors in his arrest.[28]
Born May 30, 1975 (1975-05-30) (age 34)
St. Louis, Missouri, U.S.
Charge(s) theft, vandalism
Penalty four months in jail
S$3,500
four strokes of the cane
Parents: George and Randy Fay
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
