Looking for the ultimate gift for your trouble-making kid this Christmas? Get him or her a personalized video… from Brendan Shanahan!
I’m Brendan Shanahan of the North Pole’s Department of Gift Decisions. Recently, an incident occurred involving Andy, age 11, who has requested—via handwritten letter to Santa Claus—the gift of an iPhone 5c.
At 3:23 p.m. on the second day of Christmas break, Andy stole and ate the last Oreo cookie in his house.
As the video shows, Andy’s younger sister, Clara, is in clear possession of the cookie and is carrying it through the kitchen, unaware of the approaching threat. Andy pivots and pursues his sister, aiming to cut her off before she enters the living room.
In an attempt to gain an advantageous position, Andy lunges toward Clara from behind, making her left arm the principal point of contact. This action is in clear violation of Family Rule 32.74, which states:
– Don’t touch your sister.
Clutching his sister’s arm, Andy employs his free right hand to snatch away the cookie. He subsequently uses his superior height advantage to raise the Oreo out of the reach of Clara, a clear violation of the recently instituted Section 6.4 edict on taunting—and a borderline contravention of Rule 44.17, which states:
– Don’t play with your food.
This incident cannot be described as a snack-craving that went bad. Nor do we consider it a spontaneous reaction to a sibling’s provocation. Rather, it is our view that this was a deliberate act of retribution for an incident that occurred earlier in the day: the 173-minute period during which Clara played the same Miley Cyrus song on repeat.
Andy’s decision to consume the cookie in a single bite is admittedly (though barely) within the parameters of acceptable behavior. But chewing with his mouth wide open clearly exacerbated the emotional impact of the incident.
Taken as a whole, we at the North Pole conclude that Andy’s actions fit the description of: “Naughty.”
We have also taken into consideration that although Clara temporarily held it together after losing possession of the cookie, she eventually broke down in tears, interrupting Daddy’s nap. This outburst is a clear violation of Family Rule 71.66, which states:
– Any noise exceeding 43.5 decibels, when Daddy a) has his eyes closed, and b) is in a horizontal position on the couch, is not permitted.
It is important to note that just four days earlier, Andy was disciplined for an incident involving his sister Ella and her pet hamster.
The altercation transpired in the second-floor hallway. Under the supervision of Ella and her three friends, Mr. Giggles had been removed from his cage and placed inside his plastic exercise ball. At 12:09 p.m., the ball and its rodent occupant were launched down the stairs after coming into contact with Andy’s right foot. Ella and two of her friends report witnessing a “distinct kicking motion.”
The Department of Gift Decisions rejected Andy’s claim that this action was “an accident” and agreed with Ella that the incident left Mr. Giggles “really freaked out and acting kind of weird now.”
For his behaviour, Andy was assessed a 10-minute time out—which on appeal was reduced to seven minutes and a half-hearted apology. Mr. Giggles remains under the observation of a veterinarian and has yet to return to plastic-ball action.
To summarize:
• Andy grabbed his sister’s left arm.
• He stole and ate the last Oreo cookie—and did so in a taunting and pretty gross manner.
• Daddy totally needed that nap. You people have no idea the kind of pressure that man is under.
We accept Andy’s contention that the Oreo cookie was “delicious” and that his little sister can at times be “a bit of a crybaby.” However, this does not excuse his actions.
The North Pole’s Department of Gift Decisions has decided to suspend Andy’s request for an iPhone 5c for one year.
