 |
by Donna Douglas and Stoney McCart |
"I was walking on this street and there was this K-car parked right there in my path and I just walked over it, right over the hood and roof. I didn't feel nothing, I just walked over it."
Garth, age 16, was surprised each time the police came to charge him, right from his very first act of vandalism during his public school graduation party.
"I never liked my teacher, or the principal either. So my friend and I jacked up the teacher's car and left it on blocks. Then we wrecked the school washroom, the sinks, the doors."
"I thought I was getting back at the people who owned the school. I thought the principal would have to pay," he says.
With Mickey, age 15, the vandalism at an agricultural supply outlet was premeditated. It was also the second offense, though he and his friends were never caught for their first "horsing around" session in the barn.
"It was daytime on a weekend and we went in under the fence and started fooling around, throwing bags of fertilizer and stuff. Then my friend jumped on a forklift and started smashing into bags. He even moved the bags around so there would be more room to drive the forklift.
"We went back that night," recalls Mickey. "It was dark, we couldn't see. It was my turn to drive the forklift and when I went to park it, it wouldn't stop; it slid on the fertilizer and banged through a wall."
Chuck was one of Mickey's friends who participated on that weekend. He maintains he walked away from the destruction before it occurred, though he was still convicted.
"I didn't feel like getting caught. I probably knew what they were going to do." Chuck was sentenced to two years probation for his part in the crime.
In Eugene's case, he was the only 16 year-old among a group of six teenagers who were doing a school project by working at political headquarters during a provincial election.
"We'd be walking home at night. We all had sling shots. My friend started it by shooting a marble through a car window. It doesn't crash, you know. It just shatters all white and forms a pattern.
"We did this for three or four weeks before we got caught. It took a month after we quit to catch us. I quit because it was getting out of hand."
That slingshot spree damaged over 30 cars, and (excluding the deductible insurance premiums which the car owners had to pay) caused $13,000 in damage. Because Eugene was 16, he ended up with an adult conviction which will stay with him.
Fifteen year-old Ray now has three convictions to his record. "My friend and I were going to the dump to look for bike parts. We passed this school and just started breaking windows. I felt good while the rocks were actually hitting the windows, but I felt mad at myself afterwards."
Ray admits to that thrill of hitting the mark, of watching the shattering glass make a pattern. One week later, he and his friend were charged. Two or three months later, Ray followed a friend into a vacant house, a home whose owners were out of town. He says his friend started a fire, and they kicked in a door. Ray says he was charged because he was an accessory. His third charge involves possession of stolen goods.
Chuck, age 14, public school student
-charged and convicted in 1981 of break and enter with intent to commit wilful damage. Damage to scores of bags of fertilizer, to a forklift and one wall of a building.
-arrested with five others.
-sentence - 2 years probation
Garth, age 16, school dropout
-charged in 1980 with public mischief for damage to his public school and a teacher's car. Washroom vandalized, car tires removed. Charges dropped. Outcome - $785 restitution
-charged and convicted in 1981 of a) possession of stolen goods, coat, boots, watch b) break and enter and theft, involving four different thefts of bicycles
-sentence - 1 year probation, restitution of $134 for bikes $23.94 for shoes
-charged in 1981 and convicted in 1982 of wilful damage. Walked on a car, damaging hood and roof.
-sentence -$600 restitution, to be made through the courts
Mickey, age 15, high school student
-convicted in July 1981 with two charges of theft of money from a private home, belonging to the parents of a friend
-sentence - restitution of $81
-convicted in 1981 of break and enter with intent to vandalize. Destroyed 50-100 lb bags of fertilizer
Gary, age 15, high school student
-convicted in 1980 for break and enter, and theft, along with a friend (Mickey, above)
-sentence - restitution of $81
Eugene, age 17, high school student
-convicted in 1981 as an adult under the Criminal Code for mischief. With three friends, caused over $13,000 damage to more than 30 car windows with slingshots and marbles.
-sentence - 1 year probation, $320 restitution
Ray, age 15, high school student
-convicted in 1981 of mischief for breaking windows in a public school on the other side of town
-charged along with a friend.
-sentence - 6 months probation,
40 hours community service
-convicted three months later with break and enter. Broke into a vacant house, charged as an accessory. Broke door, set fire with a friend.
-sentence - concurrent probation
-convicted shortly after with possession of stolen goods.
-sentence - probation extended by 6 months, pay restitution or work off the money owed
While vandalism today isn't any worse than it was 20 years ago, it remains a perplexing crime. The kid who sits beside you on the bus... the kid next to you at school... or you? Why?
TG questioned the convicted vandals themselves. All but one of these young people is a juvenile, which means their convictions disappear from the record books once they turn 16. You see their profiles in a box on this page. Ray identifies angry feelings during his slingshot spree. He had just lost his parttime job, his grandfather was really sick. He wasn't bored. He wasn't hanging around aimlessly; he was going to the dump to look for bike parts.
Garth explains his K-car vandalism with a shrug. "It was just there in my way and I decided to walk over it."
For Eugene, it was boredom partially; it was also going along with his friends. He admits now that the enthusiastic destruction by one of his friends eventually disgusted him enough to choose not to do it.
For Chuck, it was going along with his friends; it was being tough.
Juvenile probation officer Jean Harris says vandalism often starts as a prank which gets out of control. Learning to draw the line and evaluate consequences of prankish behaviour almost seems part of the growing up process in Canadian society.
Before anyone gets too indignant about vandalism and sounds off about throwing a rock through a window, he or she should examine his or her own behaviour.
The Beaulieu Commission's Report on Vandalism, released October 1981, surveyed students and asked them whether or not they had been involved in some form of vandalism in the previous 12 months. In high schools, 89 percent indicated they had performed acts of vandalism; in elementary schools the figure was 90 percent. The activities ranged from scratching a desk at school to breaking windows to damaging cars.
When 9 out of 10 students damage property of others, the Commission concluded that vandalism is part of our culture. And it's probably true. Look what society tolerates during Grey Cup celebrations or from angry athletes who smash their tennis racquets.
While most people can't give precise reasons for their actions, the experts have a number of terms for what goes on inside someone's head.
Jim Tittimore, psychometrist with the Frontenac County Board of Education, counsels youngsters throughout public and high school.
He says kids destroy wantonly "on a whim, as emotional expression or outburst, or because of peer pressure."
Harris points out that girls rarely react to pressure by striking out in vandalism crimes. "Boys tend to lash out at society or those who are hurting them. Girls, if they're angry or resentful, lash out internally, hurting themselves more than others."
Peer pressure is stronger with boys than girls, and it forces them to go with a group. "Boys have larger numbers of friends, and an image to live up to. They also have society's acceptance of aggression," says Harris.
She identifies several factors leading to vandalism.
"A lot of vandals are from middle class homes; our society is replacement oriented, we don't value property highly," she says. Vandalism often starts as a prank that gets out of control.
Howard Ellis, family counselor with Tamarac, an Ontario social care service, identifies unreality as one cause leading to vandalism, as well as peer pressure, anger and boredom. He also identifies lack of values and moral indifference to the system as personality traits common to the young vandal.
Dr. Peter Marshall, child psychologist in private practice, says a minority of kids are frustrated. "Kids get positive strokes out of being deviant. They get peer recognition for a number of offenses." He says when a kid doesn't think highly of himself, standing up for his own opinion is practically impossible.
He also says a kid will continue to repeat unless the underlying cause of the first crime is dealt with.
"A hostile, pent-up, aggressive kid... vandalizing one building isn't going to deal with it. You have to deal with the cause."
Family Court Judge Douglas Morton, former Toronto area Member of Parliament, former private practice lawyer, and now one of the country's most respected juvenile judiciaries, says "only 5 to 10 percent of today's kids get into trouble with the courts. And 80 percent of first time offenders don't come back. The rest of today's kids are more direct, more honest, better educated than we were."
He identifies several danger points often leading to crime. "Things I want to know... are they in school? Is there a single parent under a lot of stress? Are the parents fighting? Has there been a major emotional upheaval?"
Yet, for the juvenile vandals T.G. interviewed, none blamed their parents or home environment. Most of them identified a certain thrill in the act.
"We went back at night because it was my turn to drive the forklift," says Mickey. "It was pretty fun at the time. I felt a rush when it was my turn to drive the forklift."
Garth remembers feeling really good during the vandalism of his public school washroom. And it felt good to dispose of his teacher's tires. As he looks back on all the crimes he's been convicted for (plus those he hasn't), his comment is the same: 'I never thought of other people."
Only one of those T.G. interviewed ever identified that what he did was wrong.
Right, or wrong?
Most people, if you give them a multiple choice list of things that are right or wrong, can tick them off.
But individuals who wantonly destroy something seem unable to transfer the rules to their own behavior.
"Kids get into the trap of reinforcing the way people see them," says Marshall. "Some families really do teach over the years that society has rules, but if you can get away with them, that's fine."
The Beaulieu Commission Report agrees that adult acceptance of destruction of property during things like Grey Cup weekend, or when mom and dad have a "wild" party, all contribute to a juvenile perception that rules are made to be broken.
The report blames the community for its quiet acceptance of vandal-ism. Neighbors have to report suspects and descriptions; people have to care.
Marshall identifies lack of parenting skills as one cause of those missing values between right and wrong.
"Kids have a right to demand consistent rules and to know what the rules are before they're invoked," says Howard Ellis.
Each youngster interviewed said parental reaction initially was anger. But that anger was never followed through; it simmered down and disappeared.
For Chuck, parental anger was quick. "I didn't tell my mom for a day or so. She had a fit. She did a lot of yelling. My grandma and sister were all yelling. And then nothing else was said."
And yet, parents continue to protect their youngsters during that first offense. Policewoman Barbara Jenkins says it's common for parents to get their kids 'off the hook' during first criminal charges. Does it work?
Garth's parents paid the sizeable restitution for his public school vandalism, settling out of court. Garth didn't even remember being charged for that incident until reminded.
Parents who protect their kids to soften the blow are contributing to their next offense. "They think, if I pay for him it won't happen again,"' says Ellis.
While ultimately individuals must learn to select from right or wrong, the absence of values in a family makes it difficult.
"If there are no values in the family, then kids will follow anywhere or anyone," Ellis says.
As a counselor, he sees many families who won't accept some responsibility for helping a kid change. "Some families resist. They bring the kid in here and say to me 'here, fix him up.' Without a perception of what's right and wrong, an ability to foresee consequences, to see the harm done to a victim, kids don't stand a chance of turning themselves around."
Helping a young person restructure values takes a lot of dedicated effort and time, according to Jim Tittimore. "You've got to restructure a kid's environment and the way they see things... all we have time for is a band-aid approach," he says.
"You stand a better chance of turning a kid around if they have to confront the victim," he says.
Interestingly enough, each convicted vandal said the same thing about his sentence. It was light. It hasn't really changed his life. And it isn't really a deterrent for the next crime. All reiterated that it's "what might happen next time" that they find deterring. Reform school, training schools, group homes, minimum security camps, a reassignment of living environments - all are seen as a threat.
"If I had it to do over again," says Chuck, "I'd probably drive the forklift. But it's stupid. You're going to get caught. We were all worried about 'getting it.' Next time it'll be worse."
Jean Harris defines the options which come with being caught.
1.You may not be charged, but pay back the victim.
2.You may be sentenced and have to make restitution.
3.You may get sentenced and the judge can insist on restitution and a fine and community service work and probation, or a combination of these. Your probation is a sentence which allows you to stay in the community with restrictions on your movements and actions.
4.You may be assigned a different environment, like reform school. Howard Ellis, Peter Marshall and Jim Tittimore agree that the present sentences don't go far enough. Community service programs and restitution are great, but they need to go farther.
Marshall calls on the courts to make the criminal have direct contact in restitution with his victim. "It helps to learn the consequence of action. It can have an impact to face the victim and make contact."
None of the vandals interviewed wanted to have personal contact with their victims. Mickey, who five months ago was to pay restitution for his part in the forklift operation, has not yet found a job, after only two applications. But, "They're going to get their money," he says defi-antly. When it was suggested he work off his debt by working at the place he vandalized, he responded, "No way. The guy would kill me."
"Make the punishment fit the crime. If they destroy property, they should go fix it up. Only trouble is it takes a lot of work to enforce it," says Marshall.
"It's pretty dumb to hurt something that's not yours," reflects Eugene. "But since they were doing it and they were friends, I thought I should do it. It's a lot of trouble for a few kicks."
Eugene's ability to differentiate between right and wrong keeps him from committing again. He no longer participates in any kind of vandalism - even throwing snowballs at passing cars. While he remains friends with the boys he was convicted with, he has also developed other friends and other interests.
Peter Marshall sums it up:
"You've got some choices. You can be out of control with a senseless instinct, or you can be your own person and make responsible decisions."
PREVENTING VANDALISM - CAN IT BE DONE?
Entire student populations can force a change in the occurrence of vandalism.
As a group, school students have incredible power. That power can be used many ways. The Beaulieu report on vandalism discusses some success in urban centers and in the United States with a "pay back" plan. Student leaders and school officials negotiate over the year's budget dollars for vandalism. Students police their own school and the student body receives whatever money isn't spent on vandalism at the end of the school year.
There are no more powerful agents than students. "The student body does more than authority figures for unwritten rules for behavior," says Dr. Peter Marshall, child psychologist. "If a group of students have decided en masse that certain behavior isn't acceptable, then you can change the whole peer group code.
Responsibility starts with the individual, whether it's the vandal, the friend, or a student whose locker has been ripped apart. It takes leadership to organize a student body to exert pressure, but it can be done.
If you are a young person on the verge of committing damage, or with someone who is about to, think about it.
Disassociate yourself. You're automatically guilty by association. Take a second look. How would you feel if your bike was stolen, your parents' garage set on fire, or your first car destroyed? Empathy can go a long way.
Where do you fit?
If this issue's feature on vandalism hits home, we'd be interested in your comments. Has your school developed a program that worked? Have you ceased damaging property and can tell others why? Comments or ideas that are of interest to other T.G. readers will benefit everybody.
Please contact the Editors, Teen Generation, 1 Millgate Crescent Willowdale, Ontario, M2K iLS.
tgmag@tgmag.ca