How Far Should the Government Go to Punish Balloon Boy's Parents?

Posted by Enrique on 10.22.2009

Other people's reality



Last week, there was a great disturbance in the 24/7 media world when a saucer-shaped balloon that didn't contain a six-year-old boy captured the attention of the poor folks who have nothing better to do on a weekday afternoon than watch breathless news coverage of non-events. Apparently, the balloon launch was a stunt intended to raise the Heene family's profile because they want to be Reality Show Famous. The local sheriff was not amused by the stunt, which called a "hoax," and said he will pursue felony charges against Richard and Mayumi Heene.

The tawdry business of the Heene family has been great fodder for watercooler conversation and talk radio chitchat, and one issue that's come up is whether or not the Heenes are fit parents. While most of us would agree the Heenes are a little idiosyncratic, at this point there is no evidence their children were physically abused. So why are some suggesting the children be taken away from their parents?

The story so far...

No charges have been filed as of this writing, but the local authorities have indicated they're doing everything in their power to make sure the Heenes pay for their yet-to-be-proven crimes:

Larimer County Sheriff Jim Alderden said the charges against Richard and Mayumi Heene would include conspiracy, attempting to influence a public servant, contributing to the delinquency of a minor, and false reporting to authorities.

Some of the most serious charges each carry a maximum sentence of six years in prison and a $500,000 fine. [...]

He said the "a-ha moment" came when the 6-year-old boy, Falcon Heene, said in an interview with CNN's Wolf Blitzer that he thought "we did this for a show."

Since he is a government employee, perhaps the sheriff should be congratulated for noticing the obvious. If you haven't seen it, here's the CNN footage. The boy's startling revelation comes at about 0:40, and the change in his father's body language is heartwarming to behold.



The lesson – when planning an elaborate and deceptive publicity stunt, never entrust the success of the scheme to a six-year-old. It would appear the Heenes have surrendered any claim they might have had to benefit of doubt. Even if they didn't mean to draw that much attention, certain criminal charges may be appropriate. After all, reports indicate quite a lot of effort went into saving the child:

Some flights at Denver International Airport had to be changed to a different runway, but the airport remained open during the balloon's flight, airport spokesman Chuck Cannon said today. Previous reports said the airport was temporarily shut down.

The National Guard provided two helicopters in an attempt to rescue the child, costing several thousand dollars. When the balloon landed without the boy, officials thought he had fallen out and began the grim search for his body.

I'm sure we all appreciate the first responders' attempts to be helpful, and the Heenes certainly misled them into believing their son might have been in the balloon. Still, would it be impolitic to suggest the authorities may have overreacted? Granted, they had every reason to believe a first grader was possibly trapped in that balloon, but even so – why the hell was the National Guard sending helicopters? What were they going to do if they caught up to the balloon? Shoot it down? Try and catch it in midair? How did they think two helicopters were supposed to help? I would suspect they didn't think – they just wanted to give the impression they were doing everything possible in view of the television cameras.

It's funny how media overexposure can make people behave irrationally. No one thought to question to use of National Guard helicopters at the time, and now few people are thinking to question the appropriate level of punishment for the Heenes. When deciding how to charge the Heenes, Sheriff Alderden initially said, "We were looking at a Class 3 misdemeanor, which hardly seems serious enough given the circumstances." That's an interesting mentality – the charges we know we can prove (filing a false report) aren't serious enough, so we'll have to trump up additional charges because of the attention this case has gotten. The ability for authorities to tack on criminal charges in this way can lead to abuses of power, unless the public and the media are willing to hold them accountable.

At this point, it seems the public would prefer to look the other way regarding potential overreach on the Heene case. On Monday morning, I was listening as a local rightwing talk radio host discussed the topic of whether the Heene children should be taken away from their parents. Callers universally supported government officials taking custody of the minor Heenes. CBS ran a similar segment on Tuesday morning:

Wendy Murphy, a former prosecutor, addressed on "The Early Show" a growing concern for the family: Can they stay together?

Murphy said parents, Richard Heene and his wife, Mayumi, don't have to be charged with a crime in order for Protective Services to come in and take their children away.

"All they have to have is evidence of neglect or abuse," she said. "And boy, I think they've got plenty of that here."

She said that's because the Heene parents seem to have subjected their children to participation this fraud.

Even if we assume the Heenes coerced their children into abetting fraud – which we probably shouldn't since they haven't yet been charged, much less convicted, but work with me – I'm not aware that any evidence currently exists that the children have been physically abused. Richard Heene does have a criminal record, and served jail time for vandalizing a car in the late 90's. There have been suggestions Mayumi Heene has been abused by her husband, but again, no actual proof at this time. In the absence of such proof, how can anyone reasonably suggest the Heene children should be taken away by the state?

I'm reminded of the story of that polygamist Mormon cult from Texas last year, whose members had several hundred of their offspring temporarily placed in state custody based on a single allegation of abuse that turned out to be unfounded. Few were willing to defend the Mormons, because the general public regrettably tolerates government interference in the lives of people who hold unpopular beliefs. That sordid affair exemplified the sentiment expressed in Martin Niemöller's renowned poem – they came for the Jews, but I didn't speak out because I wasn't a Jew, etc.

A similar sentiment seems to have developed about the Heene family, that they should have their children taken away because most people don't approve of how Richard Heene spends his time. The Heenes should be held accountable under applicable law, but I would suggest we shouldn't continue sending law enforcement officers the signal that they are free to overreach in their authority. Rather than expecting the sheriff to make an example of the Heenes, we should hope he applies the law fairly.

There's a reasonable argument that the Heenes should be held liable for the cost of the rescue efforts. It's much less reasonable to suggest someone should lose their children when there's no evidence of physical abuse. The standard for taking away anyone's children should be stricter than one parent being an eccentric attention whore.