Ah, @steveblucher, I misread - I realised that you were not the architect,  and misunderstood your reference to Matt, so yes, most definitely not personal.

What a horrible experience for your family and particularly your son.  That behaviour is most definitely not ok, and nor was his mother's response.  In your shoes, I'd also be chucking a curry in his face.  Actually, it strikes me that if you really wanted to do something, that was assault.  A criminal offence, no?  And don't tell me you that a) children are not capable of criminal behaviour or that b) you can't charge children with criminal offences... Having been involved with the street children movement in the 80's - about which I've written a couple of time and most recently in my last post but two - I know that.  And had to deal with both wrongful charges and chldren doing criminal things....

Yes, trying to teach the "do-as-you-would-be-done-by" lesson rather than perpetuating the "do-as-was-done-to-you" reality is the really hard thing, isn't it?

I think that you are so right about justice being rewarded as you say. However, justice is also served on those who can afford it.  As I have learned, the law is not fair.   The law is the law. That means justice is not fair either, complicated by the motives that drive it and it can be government and sometimes, public sentiment.  Actually, there is an interesting case underway in SA at the moment - currently postponed - and where the defence attorney has asked the judge to recuse himself because of perceived bias. It's a very sensitive case involving human trafficking and rape.  Swirling public opinions and sentiment.  The spat between the judge and the attorney is what's caused the postponement.  It's going to be interesting so see how that pans out.  

If you're interested, Google the Omotoso trial.  I don't necessarily advise it though.  Very harrowing.

On that note, g'day!