More danger than anyone could imagine:As I was getting on the freeway (the busiest freeway in the USA) I noticed a small child between the lanes. I slowed down, to keep the kid safe, and the kids started screaming. "why is she doing that?" It was 3.30 yesterday afternoon and traffic is insane. I can't imagine any valid reason to have your child out of the car. Even if you have a flat tire, keep yourself and your children in the car. It appears that she was changing his shirt. She was on the right shoulder and I was getting on the freeway, that's why I was able to slow down, almost stop and the kids took the picture from the backseat.So yes, there was traffic on the left, and traffic on the right of her.It's the right shoulder but there is a freeway onramp to her right.Do I make sense? It's all so nonsensical, I can see why you'd be confused. Any rational person wouldn't DO this. I am still appalled, I can't imagine what other decisions this woman makes with a child.
Photo taken on 10/8/08
Click on photo to view larger size.
96 comments:
That image is way too dark for me to tell what is going on. What's happening?
lll i dont know much but it looks like someone is changing a child right on the freaking highway!
OP Here. As I was getting on the freeway (the busiest freeway in the USA) I noticed a small child between the lanes.
I slowed down, to keep the kid safe, and the kids started screaming. "why is she doing that?" It was 3.30 yesterday afternoon and traffic is insane. I can't imagine any valid reason to have your child out of the car.
Even if you have a flat tire, keep yourself and your children in the car.
It appears that she was changing his shirt. It's an iPhone photo taken in Studio City California.
I am still appalled, I can't imagine what other decisions this woman makes with a child.
OP, I'm sorry but I don't understand. You can't stop on the highway unless you are in the breakdown lane. This picture was taken on the passenger side of the car.
Now I agree that you should never remove your child from a car while on the highway, but I just don't understand where this woman was stopped. I'm not trying to be nitpicky I'm just wondering how you took this picture if the woman was parked in the breakdown lane of a highway. You can't possibly mean that the woman stopped her car in the middle of the highway and took her child out of the car while traffic was driving by.
???
I am also confused by this entire thing. Was she in a middle lane? I can't imagine what could possibly have been on his shirt, short of acid, that would necessitate changing it on the freeway. And even at that, couldn't she pull over, unbuckle his seatbelt and pull the shirt off while he was still in the car?
Did you get the license number? That might be worth a call to CPS, even after the fact, so they could talk to her and see whether she has enough scommon sense to be with a child.
I am thinking nothing short of drugs could impair a normal person's judgment to this degree.
I'm incredibly confused. Did she stop in the left hand shoulder or something?
Stupid me. I clicked it to view the larger picture. Obviously it's not the shoulder. OP, do you mean to say this woman actually stopped in the middle of the road???? What the....That's beyond insane. Holy crap.
OP Here again.
I'm sorry ladies, she was on the right shoulder and I was getting on the freeway, that's why I was able to slow down, almost stop and the kids took the picture from the backseat.
So yes, there was traffic on the left, and traffic on the right of her.
It's the right shoulder but there is a freeway onramp to her right.
Do I make sense? It's all so nonsensical, I can see why you'd be confused. Any rational person wouldn't DO this.
Was this woman changing her kid on the highway? As in the middle of they highway? She's clearly seeing that you are taking this picture what was her responce? I say you should send this story to cnn. This woman should be in jail for child endangerement. This is not only illegal but stupid. How was it that he was between lanes when she was changing him anyways? Pls explain the story in better detail.
I don't get why she would do this. It really makes no sense. What a freaking idiot. how unsafe!! I'm glad you got a picture, because if the kid's parents were to go on here then it'd be good for them to see this went down. Thanks for the post.
OP, thanks for clearing that up. That's friggen BIZARRE! I wonder what the hell was going through her mind...
Scary.
I think I get what you're saying OP. Seeing the Orange Traffic barrel on the other side of the car (you can just see it from the back of her car).... and she was parked in the MIDDLE of the ramp - with Hwy traffic to HER left, and ramp traffic to HER right... and she was inside that little inverted V where the traffic merges.
Is that correct??!
Looking at it closer, I might be wrong about the barrel because of the glare from the camera (her tail light?)... but still, am I correct in identifying where she was parked?
So dangerous...
MPP yes, exactly correct.
xoxo
OPP
I think this is the mom! Skanky white shorts and all. What is this? Daisy duke season? And why is her child sucking on a lollipop in the backseat? She might as well give him a quarter to choke on. Do you know that a majority of car accidents with unresponsive children are from children with food stuck in their throats? Usually hard candy and lollipops. Just throwing it out there but hey its her child, her choice and her risk.
I truly hope she gets reported for this.
OP
Wow, that is truly insane!
I don't even know what to say...
To the OP
I believe this is someone you obviously have some sort of grudge with and would do this to them. This is obviously a fake sighting
Janet English, its not a crime to give your kids candy or even your charges kids (if okayed with parents). I let my charges eat in the car all the time, the parents are okay with it and I honestly think that in this day and age everyone seems to have sticks up their bums about things like that.
the real issue here is the fact that this lady is for some reason changing this kid's clothing in the middle of a highway. Unbelievable.
When the pic is enlarged you can obviously see that this person pulled to the side and it is NOT the highway. The OP is obviously lying and trying to stir up the pot by putting this innocent person's photo on the web. Shame on you. Please give us your real motive for doing such a thing!
liar liar pants on fire,
Are you the lady in the picture? because this photo is taken from a car, which means she's not on the far side of the road..on either side (since we see cars whizzing past on the other side too.)Who could possibly defend this!?
And yeah, I know that a lot of times when I have a grudge against somebody, I like to trick them into going onto the freeway, getting out of their car, walking all the way around the car, dragging their child out of the car and undressing him in the middle of the street, and letting me snap photos of her doing it...for the specific purpose of making a fake post about her on a website. Works every time. Of course, I don't tell them my real intentions, since we already have a grudge going and they might be suspicious as to why I want them to undress their child on the middle of the freeway as a photo op and refuse to comply. So, as a clever diversion, I tell them the more plausible story of my hating them and wanting them to be run over and killed...but that, because I still like their husband, I want to snap a few "last moments of my child's life" photos to share with him after they're gone. That's sooo much more believable, and so they just come right along, like horses with carrots dangling in front of them.
Dufus.
And california, get ready for another tax expenditure. Now, not only do you need to have a bunch of theose signs along the freeway that depict entire families running across an 8 lane freeway, now you are apparently in need of a bunch of "watch for babies being changed on the freeway" signs.
Mom you are hilarious.
And I by no means implied that it's illegal to eat hard candy in the back seat. It's just stupid and why should a 4 year old eat such junk anyways? So go ahead and give them your candy on a stick while I pull mine out of my butt.
I can tell this story is real. This person is clearly capable of seeing the person who took this photo and would thus file charges against them if it was untrue. So it would make no sense if it was fake. Look at the background- other person is telling the truth.
OP,
You have no idea if this is a nanny or mom. Looks like a mom to me.
You have no idea what the kid spilled on himself. What if he grabbed a hot coffee she had in her drink holder and spilled it all over his front? What would you have done then?
And PUH-LEEZE about the lolli in the backseat. Some of you people are really over the top with your choking hazard alarmist attitudes!
OP,
I know exactly what you're saying about that location - the shoulder between the traffic lane and on-ramp. I grew up in that area and the 101 at that time of day IS insane. SOmeone could be coming on the on-ramp, lose control of the car and smash right into them. If she just HAD to change the child's shirt, it's entirely possible to do that IN the car.
Minnie Soda Nanny, the child is still in diapers. Too young to be sucking on a lollipop in the backseat. My child is 8 and I STILL don't let him have lollipops in the car. If we were rear-ended, and he wasn't holding it, it would go right down his throat.
Unreal sighting!
Pls don't let my lollipop opinion let people lose focus of what's really going on- it doesn't have to be a debate. Its just my opinion. I'm not saying don't let your kids ever have lollipops I just meant that I was brought up to think about where I eat certain items etc. For eg. Sure you can have a straw- just sit down when you use one. Or yes a hot dog is ok, but let's cut it up a bit. Or you can have a lolli when we are walking together in the park- as apposed to sitting in the car, being rear ended and swollowing the thing whole.
I too agree, it couldve been a hot coffee but that means the child unbuckled himself mid highway. Maybe he even vomitted. Who knows.that all being said- she could've pulled over and changed him IN the car.
Bad bad lady. OP I'm happy your kids knew she was nuts for doinf so- that means you are doing a good job as a parent.
Maybe he threw up all over his shirt and having throw up on him was making him gag? Idk!
Janet english makes good sense. It is good to think about where and when your kids eat certain items. Straws and suckers can be very bad if a child falls onto them while walking, or has them shoved into their throats during an auto accident. While the likelihood of that happening is small, it does occasionally happen, and we moms all have our certain fears that are larger than other fears that may be more important to a different mom. As I have said before on here, I had a particular aversion to open windows on upper floors, which some of my neighbors forund ridiculous. To each his own. I think janet just mentioned another danger that some of us may not have thought about before. Take it or leave it, but it's certainly a valid point and she shouldn't be attacked for offering us something to think about.
take that,
really? because, i'd like her to take a look around for my beta fish and hermit crab if she doesn't mind.
Mom, I agree to a point. However, Janet seemed a little hostile in her judgement of the woman, based on her attire and her choice of treats she gives her child. I was given lollipops as a child and I can almost guarantee I was sitting in the backseat. Whenever my mom and I went to the bank I'd get one as a treat. I know for a fact that my charge's mom gives her lollipops in the backseat as well because I have seen them both walk in after being out, my charge with an open lollipop in her hand. She's not a bad mother is over indulging her child on sugar, nor was my mother. I was almost NEVER allowed to have sugar as a child and I hate to think that someone could have possibly judged my mom's child rearing tactics based on something she saw in passing.
Get angry about this woman taking the child out of the car on such a hazardous part of road. It's not our business though if she wanted to give her kid a lollipop in the backseat. It goes back to another thread, where someone mentioned that there is a difference between looking out for a child's safety and simply being a busy body.
I liked Janet's follow up to her original comment about the lollipops. She was actually offering advice and her opinion as opposed to judging this individual woman's actions with her child.
Like she said, it's really about the dangerous situation, not the lollipops.
As far as this picture being fake, what!!?!?!
Mom, your response to that accusation was too funny. My sentiments exactly.
That must have been one complicated covert operation.
jxj,
When I look back on what we did as kids, I'm surprised any of us are still alive! My sister had a "carseat" which essentially amounted to a booster seat sort of loike those we would now use these days to "hang" a baby form a restaurant table, only it had candy cane style hooks that were used to hang it from the top of the seat. Not secured to anything...just hanging there. Thank goodness we never had an accident when she was in that contraption or she would surely have rocketed right out the front windshield!
I know Mom, and you're right. I just think the whole lollipop in the backseat thing...that's a personal choice. I doubt we'll ever see legal restrictions on backseat lollipop licking, ya know?
The whole carseat issue on the other hand, that's a universal no-no, not simply a personal choice. A safe carseat is not something to be debated.
Letting a kid eat a lollipop is. Some people parent differently, and in cases like this, it doesn't make one anymore right or wrong than the other.
omg mom you are one freaking fantastic woman!!
You truly are my hero!
That was one of the funniest things you have EVER posted!
I LOVE You !!! Rock on sister!
I am LMAO!
Well Jersey,
I agree with you however,with all the hysteria in todays world I would not be surprised at all to find the "Lolli-pop Law" finding it's way into society some-day soon.
Carseats..yes,yes,yes!!!!
This is horrible. I am glad the OP took a picture, and if this is indeed a nanny I really hope that the parents see this and fire her immediately. And if this is the child's mother I feel awfully sorry for that little boy.
OH and that post by 'take that' really needs to be removed.
The nanny/mom looks like a kid herself!! Was someone else driving maybe and this could be a sister?
Either way, unsafe...and I do get where she pulled over... in the extra space between the right hand lane and the onramp.
But if somebody else was driving wasn't it doubly stupid to stand two kids out on the onramp? I'd rather have the other person reach over and pull his shirt off inside the car without standing is traffic.
I really cannot imagine any excuse for this at all. Why did the little boy have to get out of the car at all? Can't a shirt come off while sitting in the car? If he had hot coffe on himself, the shirt could have been removed faster if she just yanked it off as soon as she got the seatbelt off.
And, not to start "suckergate" again, but I don't think the child was probably in an acute state of distress, as in being burned...or even terribly upset about anything for that matter. Wouldn't he have dropped the sucker if something so terrible happened ot him that he had to be yanked out of the car on the freeway on an emergency basis?
The only thing that would make me thing that this was the nanny and not mom is the skin tone of both people. The nanny is darker, but that could just be from a tanning booth.
I wonder if the police can be involved in a case like this after the fact? This would constitute child endangerment.
Just for fun I am trying to think of a reason to rip a shirt off and I just remembered that I ripped a shirt off as a passenger in my husbands car because I had a SPIDER crawling up inside of it...
If the kid had a hornet or something in his shirt and was freaking out you would probably take it off outside the car rather than in...
But I am just saying that to be devils advocate not because I think it is smart. Most situations could wait a minute longer to get passed the onramp and pull over in the breakdown lane.
Was traffic stop and go maybe? That girl, wrong or not, was probably like WTF are you doing taking my picture?
This is so definitely a typical nanny whore from soco. They nanny by day but prowl for husbands by night. Their wares are always on display.
I think the girl looks very pretty and not at all whorish... even if she is making a terrible choice in the common sense department.
Jealous much?
and she isn't even showing cleave.
OP here.
1. She could have been the mother, if so I hate her because she has a PERFECT body. (kidding... sort of)
2. The woman and the child were the only people in or around the car.
3. It was an extremely dangerous situation. I all but stopped my car on the onramp because I was terrified for the child and didn't want to be whizzing by at 80 miles an hour.
4. The shirt changing was very calm, the nasty look was aimed at me, like "What are you looking at?"
5. Whorish? I think not, it's been between 90 and 100 degrees here this week. I'd say you are all jealous, I know I am.
And the whole comment about skin color and tanning and whatnot. Wow, aren't you a little ashamed? Not every Nanny is dark skinned. Not every mother who hires a nanny is fair.
Just. Wow.
It does look as if there is another head in the back seat? Maybe an older child? Not that this really matters. I was just adressing the OP's update about the nanny and child being the only two in the car.
Perhaps it is some sort of reflection that I am seeing?
Thanks OP for the update OP.
I agree---what's with the whole whorish thing?
janet english and jojobear need to get over themselves.
j e ..skanky shorts?okay miss lets flash my ass allover the ISYN website.I am sure the only picture you had of yourself was that one right? The nanny in the pic is showing a lot less than you.
This nanny was dressed very decently and appropriately for a hot So. Cal day.
Of course she should not be on the shoulder of the freeway with a child..HUGE no-no.I hope mom & dad see this .Great post OP.
Wow OP I was just making an observation. No need to get bitchy with me, I was making a point. Someone mentioned that this could be the mom and I was saying that it could be but because of the skin tone I was thinking maybe not. That was it. How about next time ASK rather than assume I'm being racist.
And no I'm not ashamed in the least maybe YOU should be ashamed for your comments.
BTW I am a white nanny.
Let me say again just to be crystal clear for the OP. The child is lighter than the nanny, leading me to believe she is not the mother, most mother's have the same skin tone as their child unless they go to a tanning booth. That was all I meant and all that I implied with my post.
Mom, once again I am practically drooling I am laughing so hard as I read your posts. But you sure do know how to piss SOMEONE off, so good job well done!
As for the idiot stopped on the freeway, whoever she is she needs to be charged with child endangerment immediately. It's amazing that she herself has so far not been a victim of Darwinism, but too bad she is allowed to be in charge of children. And she has great legs and who in their right mind would shlep around with long pants on in 90+ degree weather? Not all mommies are fat and frumpy.
And back when mom and I were kids, there was no such thing as child car seats. I remember my friend telling me that when she and her brother would be arguing in the car, her dad would order them to "put your setbelts on!", as if that was a punishment for fighting in the car.
Yes, I live in CA and it has been so fricking hot these past few weeks that I didn't know this morning whether I had a fever or if it was the weather? Turns out it was an actual fever...but anyway, here in CA everyone dresses pretty much like that, even in the Fall. Plus the woman is very pretty and has a great body so she is entitled. I have seen others around here dress in less than that who are not "entitled"....LOL.
Sorry, I just had to defend the choice of clothes.
Edna, Flash my ass all over the site? Whose blog are you reading? Kim Kardashian? I was merely joking about the the shorts. My god, its not like I expect the woman to wear knee length skirts all day. She has a great body and she lives in sunny cali- she was prob on her way to the beach. She can wear what ever she wants. It's just a lot of "look" as tim gunn would say.
Again I was just teazing- and I shouldn't have. I can only wish to be as hot as her at that age and to be able to pull of something THAT short. I'm sorry but she looks 33 to me. Maybe it's all the sun she's had or the WTF look on face :)
No excuse me while I go parade my ass.
Cali mom, I wear pants in 90+ degree weather but down here in Houston that would be considered cold weather.
janet english and jojo,
while I agree that this woman is being completely stupid, I don't think there is a need to call her skanky and a whore.
There ARE 2 boys. One getting his shirt off, and another young one in the back seat, BOTH with blonde hair.
(brothers?)
I'm starting to think more and more this IS a nanny!
tc,
The woman in the photo has the same skin color as I. The child in the photo has the same skin color as my (biological) son. And I don't go tanning.
If you saw my brothers, sister and I together, you wouldn't know we're related. Our skin varies from light olive to dark olive. We all have dark hair and eyes, except for my sister, who has lighter brown hair and green eyes. Dad = Italian, Asian, Irish; dark hair, eyes and skin. Mom = French Canadian, English, Irish; strawberry blonde hair, green eyes and PALE.
Just throwin' it out there.
Wow back up. I never called her a whore. Nor would I. If anything I said slightly implied that- then I apologize.
I don't think I called her skanky either.. Just the shorts. And I'm sorry for that.
I frequently go clothes shopping and joke around when we shop that eg. Shirt/dress isn't skanky enough for a sat night. It was meant in a humorous way.
I'm not explaining or apologizing again. This should clarify it. Feel free to pick my words apart again.
I live in Southern California and I have to say this woman looks like half the mothers I encounter. Are you sure, OP, she's the nanny?
There is no way of telling if this woman is the nanny, nomdeplume...not even her skin tone, which people seem to be hung up on.
Regardless of who she is, she's an idiot. I think everyone can agree on that.
woah,
where did we get th eidea that the mom in the photo might be whorish?
I agree her actions are completely stupid...but a whore...that's a total stretch.
If its her outfit...I have shorts and a shirt just like that...and I wear them a lot during the summer.
OOOPS!!! Never mind my last comment. I stopped at woah's comment and wrote that, because I was so surprised and thought that comment was completely out of left field...then I went back and read the rest of the thread. I see the whole "whore" thing has been beaten to death already.
As for whether this is the nanny or the mom...WHO CARES in this case!? Somebody who knows her needs to see this. She's irresponsible, no matter how she's related to the child.
Cali,
Thanks. And I'm still curious about how somebody got so psychotically ticked off in the first place. Oh well.
Oh, and JXJ, I completely get what you're saying about the lollipop thing.
My point was jusy that to Janet English, that is obviously one of her big issues, and so it seemed to push a button with her. The open upstairs windows pushed my button, And somebody else's buttons might be pushed by something that somebody else might thinkn is completely ridiculous. We react strongly when we see somebody doing something we think is totally stupid...and I think that's why janet reacted that way to the lollipop.
That's all i was saying about that.
But yeah, eating lollipops in the backseat is one of those things that some moms won't allow and others will still do freely. It's one of those personal choice items.
Wouldn't it have been so much easier to be moms back in the days when all they did was open the door and let us outside, alone, in the mornings and expect us to reappear, after doing God knows what all day long, when we were hungry or it got dark outside?! For you Californiaites...I used to ride my bike up and down San Gabriel Boulevard to go to TG&Y, when I was seven years old!!!! OMG, I cannot imagine EVER letting my kids do that!! I used to troll phone booths for loose change at that same age. At four years old I can remember being allowed to go wherever my legs could get me, and doing whatever my little brain could thinkup to do
I just don't agree with splashing this woman's picture online, where it will haunt her for the rest of her days. You all must know how popular this website is. Seriously, this picture will be around *forever*. Yes, she's acting unsafely. That is what we know. We don't know why she was or she was thinking. We don't know the back story. OP, if you can slow to a crawl and get a photo then you could also have gotten a license no. and reported it to the police to sort out. Was this public humiliation necessary? I guess some people think they should be judge and jury but I wonder if this possibly could have been handled very differently.
What kind of person thinks that's ok?
As to her clothes, I see nothing wrong with them. T and shorts, what's the problem?
Maybe you ought to forward this to the local news website?
well,if she could slow to a crawl on an on-ramp,chances are traffic was at a stand still or close to it.
Nothing appears blurred in the photo. I presume the cars behind her were stopped too.
When I take any pictures out of my car window while moving many objects come out blurred.
Perhaps ther was an accident that stopped all traffic or construction that made this stretch a virtual parking lot . after all op was wrong about there being no one else in the car..perhaps she missed a few other facts here?
Hmmm, yes, there does appear to be another child in the car. I can see how OP might miss that since she was concentrating on the situation outside the car.
However, it is clear from the background of this photo that the traffic was NOT at a standstill. When that happens, the cars are backed up, one after another, bumper to bumper. Clearly that is not the case here. See how much space between cars? that allows for full speed driving...which in California usually means at least 70-75 mph. I know this freeway. It is typically very busy. And, if I'm correct, OP, this is a section of the California freeway system that has not yet been improved? Much of the So California freeway system has been updated and impproved to accomodate the huge traffic flow...numbers of cars far beyond what the original freeways were designed to accomodate. The unimproved older sections are way overcrowded, and often the shoulder is insufficient. Not to mention that offramps are plentiful and not that far apart in in this part of LA, so she could have easily pulled off the highway and done this. Even on a new section of freeway, this is NOT OK.
This is one time that OP deserves nothing but credit for her sighting.
Princess
I feel differently. The mom/nanny made a stupid decision and put those kids life at risk. So, as far as forever? Stupid is forever, she deserves it.
Not Park Slope, I understand your outrage at her actions but it seems that if the situation can be resolved by the authorities (which in this case seems to me to be true) then that is more appropriate than a public lashing (in absentia no less). In seems that there might be too a bit too much interest in here in 'punishing' her by shaming her in public.
paperbag,
I love ya but I hafta disagree here. If I were such a nincompoop that I did a thing this horrible, and if the police then came to my house and said somebody complained that I was changing my child on the freeway, I, being that I would therefore obviously be of mimimal conscience and judgment, might easily make up some convoluted story to make my husband somehow think it was not as bad as it sounded. This picture, as they say, is worth a thousand words.
Somebody needs to take charge here and make sure these kids are protected. And, if her friends see this, then their kids will also probably never be put into a car with her again...or maybe even be allowed to be under her sole supervision...which, if it were my kids, I would think was perfectly warranted. This is so serious that anybody who migh possible be affected needs to know.
It doesn't mean she's evil. It just means she probably lacks the common sense necessary to deal with kids. I've had a couple of friends over the years who were very nice people, but who lacked all manner of common sense when dealing with kids. I saw them, and loved them, but never left my kids alone with them....ever. And if I saw one of them in a photo like this, I wouldn't hate them or cast shame on them. I would think, "Looks about right. Glad my kids weren't along for that ride."
At my kids school they allow parents to drive on field trips when there's not enough room on the bus. We must first produce proof of insurance and a clean driving record. What if it is the same at her kids' school...and, bedside, this, she has a clean record. Wouldn't you be glad if this picture came out before she put your kid in her car?
Princess
I'm sorry to disagree, but if it worked in the good 'ol days, it'll work now.
I'm sure if she were to see her face plastered here, she'd think about ever doing something this stupid again.
And it doesn't have to be forever. I've seen people actually find themselves on here before, write Jane a letter, and she removed it. Not often, but it's happened.
I'm just sayin'..
Mom, you know I think you're the shizzle as well, but I still disagree. ha ha, and let me just say that I think the cops showing up at my door would be enough to scare me straight!
Look, I'm not defending anyone's actions but however silly this lady might be I'm not sure she deserves this. Her family might see this, potential employers might see this (OUTSIDE of child care). I know that's the point but you can't just hang someone out to dry in the court of public opinion without even hearing their story. Sorry, I may be over-reacting to this but I have a thing about privacy. Not Park Slope, I know that Jane could take the photo down eventually but with the many layers of the internet and linking and forwarding and re-posting, it is really impossible to wipe all traces clean, and you'll never know how far its been distributed. A couple posts up, someone suggested sending it to the local news!!
We have a federal election going on in my country (not the USA) and you wouldn't believe all the things that have been dredged up and used against the candidates in their ridings. Things they said in blogs that no longer exist, photos they'd taken down from years ago etc... Point is, it doesn't go away.
I'm just saying that I feel like in this instance you can accomplish what you want to accomplish without humiliating this lady. I won't say anything else about it but I just don't support the posting of the photo.
Princess
So then, let me ask you this: what do you think of the whole premise for this blog then? It's all about outing bad nannies, and the general consensus has been to "take a picture". If you don't agree with it, and it seems to me that you are quite adamant about it, why do you support this blog with your presence? (Don't take that the wrong way, it's an honest question)
Paperbag, I hadn't thought it about it that way, but you may be right. Innocent until proven guilty...You've convinced me.
There's really no one right answer though. I think OP did the right thing by posting this, but maybe, as others have suggested, it would have been wiser to call the cops. Again, I'm not faulting OP for her submission of this picture, but the ISYN public hanging does seem a bit much. We really DON'T know the circumstances. Chances are it was as plain as it appears..lack of common sense, completely oblivious the world around her, but maybe not. And paperbag is right, it's not fair to leave her out to dry without knowing what really happened. Maybe blacking her her face would suffice? I don't know.
I personally am a huge supporter of this blog. However, I have stated before on other threads that pictures like this are something I am not really fond of. I have to agree with PBP: the same "outing" could have been accomplished with a description or even with the face of this woman blurred out.
I love this blog, I think it does a world of good. I think PBP seems to feel the same. But if you ask me, her point about photos is well-taken, to say the least. I completely agree. That is not to say that this woman was not wrong, she clearly is. I would sooner have taken the picture to the police than posted it on the internet, though, were I the OP.
Just my humble opinion.
Not Park Slope,
To be honest I don't support the picture taking. I really don't. And I'm glad it doesn't come up too often. What I support are descriptions of truly harmful actions described in such a way that the person involved would be able to identify him/herself, and a nanny's employers and those closest to him/her would be be able to identify the nanny. You are correct to assume that I don't support one-sided 'outing' of 'bad' nannies to the general public. Unless it is suitably anonymised I think there is too much potential for abuse on a site such as this.
I don't think I provide de facto support for one-sided outing simply by my presence on this blog. I have always maintained that it is very, very important for there to be critical voices on this site - people who speak out if they think something is unfair. The potentially abusive aspects of this site need to kept in check by people who will cry foul if they think something is fishy.
Thank you Princess. I respect your opinion.
You too, Umass. :)
OP, let me get his straight. So YOU endangered YOUR kids by nearly stopping on a highway ramp long enough to snap a nice clear picture? What if some car came upon you at a near standstill and rear-ended you hard, injuring YOUR kids. One dumb move should never beget another!
Poor Gimmee a break, lacking such essential reading comprehensions skills. What a dumb-dumb.
I think this is a nanny, but so what if it isn't. If it is a Mom it is even worse and although she can't be fired, the world is going to know just what a dumb ass she is.
How long to an I Saw Your Nanny posting is used in court by the father to get custody of the children from the mother?
Who ever she is she looks beautiful. And I don't think her face should be posted on here, either.
And someone stated before she more likely must be the nanny because her skin color isn't the same as the child. I have dark straight hair and light skin. My son has dark hair but very curly. And his skin is a dark olive. I am Italian and German but his dad is Arabic. So you never can judge that way.
Mom - I haven't read all the latest comments but realized the post I was responding to had been deleted. Someone else called her a whore and I was saying that I didn't think it was called for. I see now why it looks like I came up w/ that.
I used to live 2 blocks from the coldwater cyn exit, and took the 101 to work every day, so I know the area well. This is not in the middle of nowhere. There is a Whole FOods, a few gas stations, a Hugo's taco stand and some apartment complexes around there, all with parking lots where she could have pulled over. This is a very large freeway onramp.
Coldwater is busy ALL the time, because there are so many businesses and apartments, but 3:30 is rush hour in L.A, so I'm sure it was crazy.
jojo,
gimme a break brought up a great point. can you, jojo, ever make a point without name-calling and sounding like a child? I don't believe you can.
and just because someone is doing a foolish thing, doesn't neccesarily mean that they should have their picture posted on the internet. I respect both sides of this issue. As I have stated, I think this blog is amazing. It is not my choice to post the picture or not.
But you're extremely rude to other posters all the time, including me. And I for one am growing tired of it. I like to respond to all posters and their opinions, but I think it's time to start ignoring yours.
Yes, people should have their pictures posted wherever when they endanger the lives of helpless children who are dependant on them for their very lives.
You bunch of lemon sucking liberals need to be slapped about the head. What is wrong with you?
Defending some shitbag?
The poster more than adequately described what was going on. Besides if you have a grudge against someone there are a whole lot of things you can do to them and with their picture that don't require ISYN. Get real, idiots.
Lord, sometimes there are just too many idiots blogging on this site at one time. I'd love to turn my fire hose on the lot of you.
rb, you are cold hearted. I hope no one ever catches you at your worst and splashes your dirty laundry in public for the world to see. Oh, I forgot, you righteous righties don't HAVE any dirty laundry. Riiiiiiiiiight.
It never fails to shock me how some people just seem utterly incapable of human empathy. What if it were you who pulled the bonehead move? Or your husband? Or your daughter? Hang 'em high?
Cold. Cold. Cold. SHAME on you.
rb,
with all due respect, you are the one who sounds like an idiot. The opinion that people should not be slandered/have their pictures published on the internet without a fair trial is an opinion that many, many people share. One could make a spectacular case of internet abuse with cases such as these. If you don't see how, then you are really ignorant.
I personally feel that, as PBP stated, everyone has had times in their lives when they have made poor choices. Yes, what this woman did was wrong, but it is debatable whether or not she deserves her face plastered on the internet. You said, and I quote, "Yes, people should have their pictures posted wherever when they endanger the lives of helpless children who are dependant on them for their very lives." Might I remind you that you do not know the details of this story: you were not there. I appreciate OP sending it in, and the issue PBP and I are discussing is not the fact that she endangered the children: we are talking about a fair trial and the right to privacy. From the way you state it, you seem to want to live in a Big Brother type of universe in which we are policed like in a George Orwell book. But we don't live in a society like that: we are offered a fair trial before we are judged.
Furthermore, I'm not a liberal. I'm a conservative. You sound like a judgemental junior high schooler.
When I read this blog there are always two contradictory thoughts going through my mind. One is that no matter how small the incident may seem, the op got upset for a reason and should be trusted to be in good faith. The other is that everything here should be taken with a grain of salt, as there are always two sides to every story. I am not too fond of pictures for the sake of the privacy argument. This being said, I am not sure I would hold the picture of this woman against her, because I cannot make much of it by itself.
my two cents makes a good point. Personally I can't really tell from this photo what even is going on. Those of us who don't live in this area are totally reliant on the OP and those who do live there to interpret it.
umass, good post. As for me, I'm a proud liberal! rb, I'm going to give the benefit of the doubt that your hard-@ss attitude comes from you passion for defending children. But being an advocate for children still doesn't give you permission to slander someone, call her a 'sh@tbag' (classy, by the way) and hang her out to dry without even knowing her situation. In the USA, as well as in my country, there is this little thing called 'civil liberty'. You should look it up sometime. Sheesh, people like you give conservatives a bad name.
I never thought I'd have to defend taking the picture of a woman who put a child in peril without cause.
As someone rightly pointed out this is a huge city, densely populated and there are a million places she could have safely stopped.
I made traffic all but stop getting on the freeway by slowing my car down. Yes, I risked my car being rear ended, but I felt like it would be better for my car to be totaled than for a young child to be run over.
My children were beside themselves. This woman was not rushing and didn't appear panicked at all. She was calmly changing his shirt.
I'm sorry that some of you feel like she needs protecting. If she is, in fact, the mother I'm hopeful the father of the child will see this.
Why didn't I get the license plate? Because my 7 year old was snapping pictures, I was concentrating on the child and praying with all my might that he didn't dash into harm's way.
FYI traffic was light, cars were moving FAST.
OP,
you do not have to defend taking this picture. We were merely having a discussion about privacy and having your face posted on the internet before you have been convicted of a crime. It is a valid argument.
I certainly thank you for this posting. I hope it does some good.
Additionally, I hope the woman in the picture doesn't see her face and attempt to sue you. That would be irritating, huh?
:)
Frankly,I find Both drivers behavior irresponsible when it came to the safety of the children with them. changing a childs shirt on the side of a busy freeway is just crazy not to mention dangerous as hell. "Slowing you car on a freeway on-ramp and risking your car being totaled" while your children are in the backseat no less is also dangerous and both show lack of common sense or concern for the childrens lives.
A simple phone call to 911 informing the police would have been the best way to handle this.
OP your actions if traffic was as you say,moving fast,were just as dangerous if not more so than the nanny/mom in the pic! If your car had gotten rear ended it would have no doubt wiped out the car in the pic as well as several others!
I think you BOTH need your heads examined!
Had you simply called the police and then posted the incident on ISYN I would have supported the siting..but you putting your OWN childrens lives at stake really makes me wonder??!!
op, you are completely right to do this. don't let the freaks that hang out on this sight all day and night (moniker butt, yawn) try to scare you. a bunch of them are bitter nannies who try to scare moms away from posting. this has happened to me the two times i posted nanny sightings. sometimes i think there's an underground nanny mafia out there trying to villify any honest posters and imitidate them into never posting again. i wouldn't take this to the news myself, but it would be nice if someone else directed a local news team to this sight. BTW, I am so sure - moniker woman -you wanted her not to slow her car down? oh, so she could run over the poor kid? you are pathetic
"don't listen to these crazies":
I love how an anon-moniker can accuse others of "hanging on a site all day" when we have no idea how much you are here because of your (yawn) anon moniker. If you have posted two nanny sitings, you are obviously "hanging around" quite as much as we are. Of course you are: it's a great blog. At least you're smart about something.
But just because someone does not share your opinion does not make them crazy. I am neither bitter nor a nanny, and I think BLB had a great point.
You have no idea what you are talking about: both myself and BLB are big supporters of this site. We would never want to scare anyone away from posting. We have opinions and we shall voice them.
An underground nanny mafia? Someone has been watching too much television.
hey crazies, aside from the fact that you follow me around,since ditching your old moniker for your several new ones,whats your beef? You have made it clear you don't like me..well, get in line honey and bring a chair cause it's a long one!
Get over it already!
Not sure how you missed it but I agree 100 percent that the woman in the post is in the wrong as well as endangering the child!
And, our OP would not have run the child over as he was on the SHOULDER.
You are so focussed on trolling my waters that you are starting to make yourself look like an ass.
Please, tell me..do you think a person with 2 small children in the backseat of their car who "slows to a crawl" "all but bringing traffic to a stop" for the sake of capturing an ISYN posting, while in her own words"risked totaling her car with her children in the backseat" is any smarter than a women who places a child on the shoulder of a busy freeway to change his shirt?
Of course you don't but if you stated as much them you would have no reason to piss & moan at me!
The only person I would like to scare away is YOU my single handed,multi tasking many monikered troll!
Shoo!
Shoo? LOL :)
Your right it wasn't smart of the O.P. to put her own childrens lives in harms way. Maybe, someone should have gotten a picture of her.
Post a Comment