Father’s $100 Fine for Burning Son’s Hand

Re “Burning Son’s Hand: $100 Fine,” April 23: An Orange County judge ruled that holding a 5-year-old’s hand over an open flame with intent to burn was OK due to the fact that a) the father’s intent was “discipline,” and b) it is Guatemalan custom. Surely the judge knows that children die each year due to extreme “discipline,” and their parents are held accountable.

But saying that such tactics are “customary” for Guatemalans is tantamount to saying, “They don’t know better.” He might as well have said, “Hey, they only hurt one of their own.” Let me ask the judge, if that father “didn’t know it was wrong” to burn his child’s hand, why did he caution the boy not to tell anyone?

Laura Karr

Lakewood

*

Superior Court Judge James O. Perez is not fit for the bench. Hesaid, “Maybe it will keep Junior from being one of our customers downstream,” and added that many juvenile criminals start out with petty thefts. Has he also noticed that many juvenile criminals come from a background of child abuse?

Judge Perez said, “Hopefully, the child has learned a lesson.” Is that lesson that holding someone’s hand over an open flame is preferable to stealing a stick of gum? The prosecutors said the father told the boy not to tell anyone about what happened. If this is the case, then clearly the father knew what he did was wrong. What human being would feel anything but resentment and rage at being deliberately burned? The child pays now and society pays later.

Marilyn Russell

Los Angeles

*

The lingering tragedy for the people of Orange County is that Judge Perez is being allowed to continue to carry out “justice” on behalf of its citizens.

Sybil Alicia MacDonald

Los Angeles