How can you definitively state that he has learned his lesson? What evidence do you have to suggest that? A few months of no transgressions?
Dude, we've got to work on your math. First you claim 2 strikes when its 4, now you say zero evidence when there is a piece evidence. The most damming kind, infact: from the horse's mouth. PJ admitted it to police! Per Duvall's linked article:
Link“Mr. Hairston stated that ‘Fatts’ rented the vehicle for Mr. Hairston because he was planning on traveling to Atlanta this weekend to see some friends,” the report said.
This is now a moot point as you have been corrected. But, who cares if other kids drove them? Is that a "well they were doing it to" defense? Doesn't matter I guess, but that's weak if that's what you're going for.
I honestly don't really care what Roy does or does not do, as long as the kid makes better life decisions. That said, I don't think he's been treated harshly enough to really teach him a lesson, whereas you think he has received an appropriate level of punishment (or close to it). However, I think your opinion is distorted by your view of the facts, or your selective memory and omission of some facts. Witness: PJ has not had 2 strikes, he has 4, which I outlined earlier. Moreover, 2 of those strikes involved association with a known felon. Even further, the cars were rented specifically for him by this drug dealer, something you claimed was not true and used as a defense.
I don't know what the right recourse is for all those transgressions, and I'm not really trying to opine on that, but you are simply making up your own facts now and that needs correction. In light of these actual facts, if you still believe what you've been spouting, then you should just admit that whatever Roy does if fine by you regardless of what's really happened, b/c you are clearly not forming an opinion based on the actual events.