Reuben Riley fired from Wyoming coaching job for being "too physical"
Not sure if anyone saw this, but I think this absolutely sucks for Ruben. A Michigan guy just doing his job and some disrespectful student goes off and possibly ruins a great guy's career. Hopefully, there are some good MGO Lawyers out there to help Ruben get his job back. This just makes me sick.
January 29th, 2016 at 2:10 PM ^
There are brats in every generation. My son and my friends' sons would all know better than to take a swing at a teacher.
Unless your comment is in reference to the people who put all the responsibility here on the teacher. Then yeah.
January 29th, 2016 at 2:32 PM ^
I am 21 and I am not afraid to admit that there are a ton of pussies in my generation. It is because their parents worshiped them and told them they could do no wrong.
January 29th, 2016 at 2:19 PM ^
Sent from MGoBlog HD for iPhone & iPad
January 29th, 2016 at 2:11 PM ^
January 29th, 2016 at 2:13 PM ^
I am constantly surprised at the level at which parents support, enable and encourage behavior like this.
I am more than certain that the delay in reporting from what became as assault charge at after 8pm from an incident that happened six hours early was completely due to $$ signs dancing in a parents head. If my parents truly believed I had been assaulted at school by a teacher for no reason...the police would have been there 10 minutes after I told the story along with two highly pissed parents.
If my story would have included being told to leave the room twice and then following that up with taking swings at a teacher, I would have been suffering from foot up ass trauma and most likely a second round of head trauma, followed by being taken to the school to apologize for being a total dumbass.
January 29th, 2016 at 2:21 PM ^
January 29th, 2016 at 2:30 PM ^
Entitlement culture: I want to keep my job working around kids even though I'm too much of a wuss to be able to control myself around them enough to not violently slam them onto the ground when they're acting like a nuisance as some kids tend to do sometimes.
A grown man should be able to control himself at and act appropriately for the circumstances of his job. A grown man should should be able to act appropriately around kids, even when kids act out of line.
If a grown man thinks he doesn't have to do that to be able to keep a job around kids, that's an entitlement problem. That's someone who's too much of a wuss to be able to act like an adult. Real men don't let their emotions get the best of them (unless it's something like a death in the family). Real men don't fly off the handle and spaz out.
From you last paragraph, it sounds like you may have suffered violent beatings as a child. I'm sorry if that happened -- you did not deserve that abuse.
January 29th, 2016 at 2:33 PM ^
When a person is resisting arrest and attempting to assault a cop said cop has the right to take the person down...why is it any different in this situation?
January 29th, 2016 at 3:04 PM ^
Because law enforcement officials have special exemptions written into state law which provide them with allowances not provided to non-law enforcement.
January 29th, 2016 at 3:11 PM ^
January 29th, 2016 at 4:17 PM ^
The question will be whether his response was "objectively reasonable" and "necessary".
Those are the standards for simple assault and battery in Michigan (which is what Riley has been charged with).
January 29th, 2016 at 3:12 PM ^
Why is it different?
1) Taking a person down is different from press slamming onto a floor. The fact that someone may have license to take someone down isn't a license to do it however violently they feel like doing it. Be reasonable -- think with depth and nuance and instead of simply boxing things into two easy categories. This is Michigan, use that brain. Should a cop take someone down who is resisting arrest if it's not necessary to be able arrest them? Wouldn't that just be adding more possibilities of something going wrong and, thus, be a poor decision?
2) There isn't a crime being committed, as far as we know. We have someone saying the kid was "taking swings." We also have the kid saying he was being pushed down the hall. Which came first? Did either actaully happen? All there is is a video of the slam.
January 29th, 2016 at 2:38 PM ^
Sent from MGoBlog HD for iPhone & iPad
January 29th, 2016 at 3:00 PM ^
You sound angry.
January 29th, 2016 at 3:17 PM ^
Sent from MGoBlog HD for iPhone & iPad
January 29th, 2016 at 3:53 PM ^
I mean angry in general, not anything specific to my funny-sounding opinions.
January 29th, 2016 at 3:12 PM ^
1. I was never beaten or abused growing up, I did not have to be as I had respect for authority instilled in me from day 1.
2. Child abuse is not anything I would ever condone. I have a child and have never even so much as spanked her as my wife and I have always taught her how to respect others and be accountable to her actions. She fully understands consequences for actions and respect for authority.
3. I spent years training many of these types of indviduals as a military officer. All kids need redirection and understanding at times. However; the concept of abuse ends for me at the point the student attempted to physically strike the teacher. In today's world, someone willing to become physically violent over something as simple as being asked to leave a room has more issues which include potential mental health concerns. Those situations can very quickly and unexpectedly escalate into a knife being drawn, etc. A 15 yr old could easily significantly harm or injure an adult, so please do not equate this to make statements as if this was an elementary student.
I have been in situations and handled them where you have a 17-18 yr old recruit that needs to be restrained and removed physically and I have seen what can happen when they decide to hit another person and in a few cases where a weapon was introduced.
4. As an adult you should have leverage and conduct yourself accordingly. You should maintain a clear head and act with reactions appropriate to the level of the issue happening. It appears that was attempted on not once, not twice, but at least 3-4 occasions prior to this event. IMO Wyoming Schools should have also had others involved at the point this escalted to this level to help remove the student, but if some of the other comments on the story and on Facebook are correct, everyone else was afraid to approach this student, then the administration as a whole did a disservice to both student and teacher.
January 29th, 2016 at 2:14 PM ^
Sent from MGoBlog HD for iPhone & iPad
January 29th, 2016 at 2:17 PM ^
There's video of Riley slamming a 15 year old kid onto a gym floor. The kid suffered a head injury and had visible bruising on his back (as documented by medical professionals). That doesn't happen unless it's a violent slam.
The school district made their decision based on viewing the video. The police are investigating. Why not let them collect the evidence and make a professional determination instead of simply declaring this man innocent of potential child abuse?
The reaction of the child's mother to watching the video: "Nothing but tears came down my eyes, my face. I was just so hurt. Who would ever think their child [would be] in that situation?"
He may have been doing positive work for the school before this incident, but child abuse is something that absolutely cannot be condoned. It's a sick act. If you're working with high school kids, you have to be able to handle aggravation -- it's part of the job requirements. If you're too much of a wussy to be able to handle yourself civilly around a poorly behaved kid, it's not a job for you. If you don't have enough self-control to not violently slam a 15-year old acting like a nuisance onto the ground, it's not a job for you. Period. You shouldn't be around children.
I keep seeing comments about "the wussification of America," and certainly people condoning a grown adult man who can't control his emotions around kids to to the point where he endangers the safety of the kids is an example of that. Grow up, kids are gong to act like kids sometimes -- stop being a wuss about it and get some self-control.
January 29th, 2016 at 2:24 PM ^
Sent from MGoBlog HD for iPhone & iPad
January 29th, 2016 at 2:25 PM ^
Sent from MGoBlog HD for iPhone & iPad
January 29th, 2016 at 2:44 PM ^
It shouldn't take that much depth of thought to be able to understand there are alternatives to slamming kids on the ground when kids are acting like dicks. It really shouldn't.
Regardless of how bad the kid was acting, you don't violently assault a child unless it's needed to prevent some greater harm.
At what point do adults act like dicks? Real men are able to act approriately themselves in emotional situations; they don't spaz out and lose self control.
January 29th, 2016 at 2:52 PM ^
January 29th, 2016 at 3:05 PM ^
Exactly.
January 29th, 2016 at 3:07 PM ^
1) You don't attempt to force him to leave the room
2) You call law enforcement officials who have special exemptions to use of force laws and let them used their enhanced (and legal) powers to do the job.
It's like if someone is trespassing in your yard. You can ask them to leave - but if you attempt to physically force them instead of letting the legal authorities do it, you're likely to find yourself fighting an assault charge.
January 29th, 2016 at 3:15 PM ^
You serious Clark?
January 29th, 2016 at 3:20 PM ^
I'm one of those people that think it's never OK to discipline a child with violence, but calling the police to remove a disruptive kid from the classroom is fucking crazy.
I don't know enough about this situation to have a strong opinion, but if I had to guess this kid was acting like a total jackass, Reuben tried to escort him out of the room, kid took a swing, and Reuben restrained him (maybe injuring him in the process).
But it never should have gotten to this point. I'll bet dollars to donuts that this kid has been a pain in the ass for a long time and should have been suspended or expelled from school already.
January 29th, 2016 at 3:51 PM ^
I'm of the same opinion. I have never once physically disciplined my child (now a teen), other than on a couple of occasions having to grab him by the arm to get his attention. Nor was I disciplined that way as a kid, but I didn't need to be. The topic at hand is a completely different thing all together (or sure seems to be).
January 29th, 2016 at 4:07 PM ^
Kids are getting arrested and charged with crimes for some really stupid and minor things these days. Stuff that would have resulted in a detention or a couple days suspension when I was in school.
I live in Royal Oak. When we went to take a tour of the middle school (she was in Catholic school for K-5) I was stunned to find out that the school had a police liaison officer. Same thing with her high school. And this is in a middle class suburb.
If two kids get into a fight it's now entirely possible that one of them is going to be charged with assault and battery. Madness.
January 29th, 2016 at 4:34 PM ^
Believe me I know. I had to deal with a situation involving the police a few years ago with mine, over something that would have been at most after school detention when I was a kid. It was a push fight. I goddamn push fight. It's insane.
And now I'm angry about that b.s. all over again.
Thanks Obama.
January 29th, 2016 at 4:23 PM ^
If teachers and administration cannot get the kid to leave without physical coercion - you have two LEGAL options:
1) Call the parent and have them remove the child. Unlikely to work based on this parents comments.
2) Have law enforcement remove the child.
Anything that involves school staff physically interacting with a student where there is not an obvious "self defense" motive is fraught with legal dangers.
Like I said... it's like physically removing a trespasser from your property - they're breaking the trespassing law, but your attempt to force them to leave is at minimum simple assault and battery. Call the people who can LEGALLY use force.
January 29th, 2016 at 4:28 PM ^
Castle Doctrine and Stand Your Ground state. You can probably kill the trespasser and be in the clear legally.
January 29th, 2016 at 5:11 PM ^
Castle doctrine only says you don't have to retreat given the opportunity in cases where you “honestly and reasonably” believe you or another person are being threatened with death, severe injury or rape.
In any cases outside your home where you don't “honestly and reasonably” believe you or another person are being threatened with death, severe injury or rape - you still have to retreat if possible.
January 29th, 2016 at 5:21 PM ^
January 30th, 2016 at 11:05 AM ^
Unfortunately, he's right. I work in a public school and this is what we have to do. If a student was being unruly enough that they were asked to leave, and they refused, it goes up to administration. If a principal, counselor, or dean of students couldn't get the kid to leave, they pretty much have to go the route of the local authorities who do have more "protections" under the law to use force. (This of course is negated if the student in question becomes violent towards anyone in the room; but right or wrong, a simple refusal to leave after being disruptive cannot be met with force.)
I had a 15 year old once throw a punch at me in a classroom. (If you've ever seen, "Coach Carter" it was almost identical to that. I moved my head out of the way and locked his arm behind his back. Instead of running him into a padded wall, we both lost balance and went to the floor with me on top of him where I held him while kids ran out the door to find our principal.) I was immediately put on paid leave and wasn't even allowed to finish the school day. Over the next week and a half, I had to justify pretty much every word I said leading to the punch, my tone of voice, even demonstrate my body language as the "other side of the table" tried to find ANYTHING to which they could latch and accuse me of being the aggressor. Reuben Riley is learning what a lot of us have learned, that regardless of what happened, when you use force against a kid in a public school, you're assumed guilty until proven innocent.
We in the public schools know this is the case. We can debate it at home all we want or on message boards, but the fact of the matter is that unless you're picked up by a Michigan State recruit and slammed in the hallway, you are wrong to use physical force against a child, even when you may be right.
January 29th, 2016 at 2:59 PM ^
Sent from MGoBlog HD for iPhone & iPad
January 29th, 2016 at 2:30 PM ^
You would like everyone to stop saying he is innocent of child abuse until the police prove that he is inoccent.
Isn't that kind of the opposite of "innoccent until proven guilty"??????
January 29th, 2016 at 2:39 PM ^
There's a video with very solid and visible evidence of a violent assault of a child. As far as I can see, there isn't evidence that didn't happen. There isn't evidence the video is fake.
It's reasonable, in view of the available evidence, to presume that it occurred. It's not reasonable, in view of the available evidence, to presume an assualt of a child did not occur.
This isn't a situation where all there is is a "he said/she said." It's ignorance (whether intentional or not) to treat it like that type of situation. There's a video. The school district made their decision based on the content of the visual recording of what actually occurred.
January 29th, 2016 at 2:54 PM ^
January 29th, 2016 at 3:04 PM ^
There were witnesses who said the student escalated the situation and attacked Riley. He should have been put on leave until this was settled.
January 29th, 2016 at 3:12 PM ^
All that matter is if the video showed something that made Riley's use of force "objectively reasonable and necessary".
January 29th, 2016 at 3:35 PM ^
The school district made their decision based on the evidence available to them. If he had pulled a knife, the decisionmakers would have been made aware of that, and, really, don't you think that would have been mentioned in the article? My assumptions are reasonable. You appear to be assuming that the school district ignored the account from the girl in the hallway. What reasons do you have to assume that?
There's as much evidence that the kid was taking swings in the hallway as there is that he was being shoved down the hallway. It's suspect for you to avoid acknowledging the second part of that in trying to make your point. I'm not avoiding acknowledging that some girl said she saw him "taking swings." Also, why are you assuming that there wasn't video from the hallway that was also considered by the school district? Pretty sure they have surveillance cameras in the hallways too nowadays.
You're the one making unreasonable unassumptions and selectively picking and choosing from the publicly available information instead of considering all of it.
January 29th, 2016 at 2:31 PM ^
January 29th, 2016 at 2:40 PM ^
January 29th, 2016 at 2:51 PM ^
"Only reaction," huh? Also, is there conclusive evidence the kid took a violent swing? Maybe he was trying to push him off. Maybe he was responding to being shoved down the hall in the first place. Maybe it didn't happen at all.
A better cop wouldn't jump to conclusions based on assumptions that they've simply accepted as facts in their head according to their predetermined assessment of the situation.
January 29th, 2016 at 2:57 PM ^
January 29th, 2016 at 3:44 PM ^
Typical delusional cop.
1. "The mother's only reaction was supposed tears." You explicitly concluded this to be the mother's "only" reaction. Not a generality.
2. "her son is such an a-hole." Yeah buddy, this is an explicit conclusion you made. Not a generality.
I believe if an adult male slams a 15 year old onto the ground enough to cause head injury and leave visible brusing, he is in the wrong. My belief, not an assumption. I'm personally disappointed that someone with your position doesn't appear to share this belief.
January 29th, 2016 at 4:03 PM ^
January 29th, 2016 at 4:28 PM ^
Or are you saying that a teacher doesn't enjoy the same legal right to defend themselves as everyone else?
An individuals right to self defense in Michigan is limited to cases where "an honest and reasonable belief that imminent death of, sexual assault of, or great bodily harm to himself or herself or another individual will occur" and the force used must be "objectively reasonable" and "necessary".
January 29th, 2016 at 7:06 PM ^