DS threw bully’s phone in lake

[CandidBeaker]

DS, 13, and his friend were being bullied by some other children in the park yesterday and a girl was filming him having his books thrown on the floor so he grabbed the phone from her and threw it into the lake. She hit him and then they all ran over to the lake and DS and his friend came home.

I received an angry voicemail from her mum this morning demanding that I pay for a replacement. I was fuming. I’m not paying for a new phone when she was the one who caused it herself by joining in harassing my son. It’s called karma. If she thinks I’m buying a new one she can fuck off. AIBU?

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 🤷‍♀️

Well maybe the little shits will leave him alone now then

"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

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.

Well yes, maybe.

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.

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.

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 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.

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.

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...

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!

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

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...

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.