DS threw bully’s phone in lake

That would be for a judge to determine. Its certainly an option for the other parent to take should they choose. It's highly unlikely that the phone is less than £35 but again that would be a decision for them.

As I said earlier approx 350k people go down this route a year so it would be foolish to assume there's not at least a possibility.

There are no grounds whatever for a civil case against OP. It was her son who threw the phone in the lake (which, by the way, is (if anything) theft, rather than criminal damage, absent recovery of the phone and evidence it has in fact been damaged).

Furthermore, the chances of a civil action are ridiculously low, not least because the cost of bringing a claim in the small claims court will probably outweigh the value of the phone...

Op said there has been bullying before regarding the main two, and they have form with bullying other kids. This girl filmed him being bullying while laughing and mocking him but let's give them the benefit of the doubt anyway

Why would the child admit to throwing her phone in a lake but lie about everything that had happened before. He'd have just not admitted it surely?

I don't know what happened to the days of telling your kid that if they were around when their mate stole something from a shop or beat someone up or bullied someone then they would likely and up in trouble too for being there and making the bad choice of hanging around or doing nothing

No wonder we have so many bloody awful children when so many people on here are trying to make excuses for a kid filming bullying on their phone

Even if GDPR did apply to individuals, the whole thing about bullies/aggressors/criminals is that they do not care about the law or rules.

Imagine how much money jeweller's shops could save on security if they only remembered to put up signs reminding everybody who comes in that stealing goods at gunpoint isn't actually legally permitted!

If he had defended himself without destroying this girl's property there wouldn't be two wrongs.

How exactly do you defend yourself against an aggressive act by allowing the bully to freely continue using the weapon/object with which they are committing the aggressive act?

Are you saying he should have carefully placed her phone down on a wall before thumping her in the face - or even just using his probably greater physical strength to restrain her? I can imagine how good that would look for him...

It's surprising how very thick an awful lot of otherwise cunning bullies can be.

Plus, some of them are so improperly brought up that they don't even have any realisation that what they're doing is wrong.

They may have parents who tell them to 'always stand up for yourself' and so they proudly film themselves 'proactively' doing what they believe is just that - by attacking a decent, quiet, nerdy kid who never would have done them any harm in the first place; in fact who stays well out of their way as they know how nasty they are.

The point I was making with my original post is that we don’t really know what happened. The girls mother has her side of the story, we have the boys.

It may be that it may of been a case of two groups of teenagers having a spat rather than it being one-sided. Not saying that it makes everything ok, or that I’m sorry the girl lost her phone if she was filming him.

Ok fair enough. But I don't understand what your point was then? Because to me it came across as you saying you didn't believe he could be a victim of bullying because of his reaction.

The bully's mother can claim the cost of a new phone on her insurance.

If she hasn't got it insured, she's a fool.

Have you never heard of a victim of bullying getting to a point where they've had enough and fights back? Because if that's what you're saying then I don't believe you

Thats not what I’m saying, no.

Well yes, maybe.

There are, however, limits on what you can do with the film or video. Publishing a video featuring an identifiable individual without their consent is likely to be a breach of GDPR.

GDPR doesn’t apply to individuals though. As a member of the public I can film anyone in public and publish that without their consent. GDPR would apply if I were filming on behalf of an organisation.

"Defending yourself from bullies isn't a wrong. However, destroying the bully's property is wrong."

That's what I was saying in my second point though, it doesn't matter if it's a wrong. Life isn't as black and white as that saying. Sometimes the second wrong does make a right, that's life.

"Someone who sticks up for themselves/fights back isn’t usually bullied. That’s not really the sort of reaction bully’s tend to thrive on 🤷‍♀️"

Have you never heard of a victim of bullying getting to a point where they've had enough and fights back? Because if that's what you're saying then I don't believe you @stopthepigeonstopthepigeon

Well maybe the little shits will leave him alone now then

Someone who sticks up for themselves/fights back isn’t usually bullied. That’s not really the sort of reaction bully’s tend to thrive on 🤷‍♀️

Defending yourself from bullies isn't a wrong. However, destroying the bully's property is wrong. In this case, where there will be conflicting accounts of what happened, the problem for OP's son is that he has committed a criminal offence. If he had defended himself without destroying this girl's property there wouldn't be two wrongs.

I never understand why people involved in bullying take videos when it's evidence of their own wrongdoing. Destroying the phone was wrong because if the film had got out there would be watertight proof of who was in the wrong. Always let idiots film their misdeeds.

"It is not BS. Two wrongs do not make a right. That doesn't mean people shouldn't fight back. People absolutely have the right to defend themselves. But doing something that makes you no better than them isn't the way to go."

Yes it's BS.

1. Defending yourself from bullies isn't a "wrong" so that old cliche doesn't apply.
2. Even if it were, who cares if a victim of bullying comes up smelling of roses? That's not the priority.

I mean, lots of kids are taught "don't hit back or you'll be in the same trouble as the person who hit first" and I don't think it's a healthy lesson at all. Defend yourself, put a stop to it if you're able to.

To say again, we only have OP's son's version of events. That may not be what really happened. The only thing we know for certain is that he grabbed this girl's phone and threw it in a lake.

I wish more victims would do this to bullies using their phones to humiliate them. I'm so glad smartphones weren't a thing when I was getting assaulted and verbally abused every day I attended school, the damaged little sadists would have definitely utilised them.

Wouldn't bother engaging with the mum unless she turns up on your doorstep, she most likely won't want to hear about what her darling daughter's been up to and will have decided that because her kid's a girl and your son's a boy that he must be the aggressor.

the girl may not have been filming at all and, even if she was, she may have intended it for OP's son to use as evidence.

Yeah, all of that could be true...

Interesting how none of the others tried to stop her, if they knew she wasn't one of them and she was gathering evidence to be used against them.

If someone breaks into your house brandishing a knife, you can use reasonable force to deal with the situation. Further, the law recognises that in the heat of the moment you may go further than is strictly necessary. That is a very different situation from this, where the girl may not have been filming at all and, even if she was, she may have intended it for OP's son to use as evidence. It may have been reasonable for him to grab the phone and delete the video. Throwing it in the lake, however, was not.

Honestly i think as adults we are able to rationalize a situation but children cannot, especially a child who is being mocked/bullied with a camera pointing at them and has a gut reaction.
Many of us im sure have done things in the heat of the moment that we regret.

Perhaps this girl didnt realize the extent of the damage she was causing by filming it.

If i was HER parent i would be telling her its a harsh lesson to learn, in life you have to advocate for others that cant, and stand up to what you believe is right, and whilst thats something that i dont expect children to be perfect at i would expect her not to whip her phone out and start filming someone else misery.

Indeed. And, as with all genuine retaliation, it would never have happened had the aggressor not started it.

There's a brilliant man in the US (not a teenager, granted) who specialises in fighting phone scammers. He uses a voice changer and acts to sound like a confused, vulnerable old lady. Then, when the scammer goes in for the kill, he remotely accesses the scammer's computer and deletes all of their files - all of their victim databases, system files, records, the lot - which obviously proves a massive setback to them in scamming further (genuinely) vulnerable people.

But going on some of the opinions on here, this hero of the people is actually a baddie who is every bit as wrong as the people who contact their victims seeking to steal all of their money and leaving them destitute, humiliated and devastated.

Somebody breaking into your house brandishing a knife may not actually intend to use it.

Or the householder could be completely lying and the 'visitor' was actually a meter reader who was running late and so stopped by for entirely innocent purposes at 3am - he needed a torch by that time, and the only one he had happened to be an additional built-in feature on a 12" dagger.

Either way, I presume it would be equally as wrong for the householder to grab the knife off him - or at least not to put it somewhere very safe, where it would stay pristine, and give him a cloakroom ticket to reclaim it at his convenience...

We've come way past the time when the only 'weapons' that people could use to do serious harm to victims were sharp or blunt heavy implements. As we tragically read upthread, somebody's life can be easily (quite literally) ruined or lost by an aggressor without any need for a gun or a knife.