Ok, interesting perspectives here. As an attorney, it's not my job to make value judgments. My job (at least part of it) is to determine whether a violation has occurred. Yes it is a technicality, but most of the time that's what penal law is all about. In this instance there is a school rule which prohibits the use of profanity on school grounds. There is no list of words and no definition of profanity. My client received a homework assignment he didn't like and said, "I hate this crap." My position is that this does not constitute profanity. I believe Lara is correct, the school rule should be deemed void for vagueness. Yet if my client had said, "I hate this sh*t," I don't think I would have an argument, because the general consenses is that word constitutes profanity.

I'm all in favor of following school rules. But I don't think a kid should get in trouble for language which is commonly and generally used in public.

Now as for the attitude issue, if the allegation had been that he was uncooperative and refusing to participate in class, or that he failed to turn in his assigned homework, etc, I would concede he was in violation of his probation terms. That conduct could have been alleged, but it wasn't. What was alleged was violation of school rules by use of profanity. As it stands, I don't believe my client is guilty as charged. He may be guilty of something, but not of what's been charged.

Nova, as for your statement that my client might not "deserve" to be saved - I strongly disagree. No one should ever be convicted of something they didn't do just because they might have done something else. If you expressed any hint of that attitude in a case I was involved with, I would immediately, with all due respect, excuse you from the jury panel. Any prosecutor worth anything would do the same.

Thanks everyone for your thoughts!