Washington, D.C. — In what can only be described as a jaw-dropping moment in the U.S. Senate, Senator John Kennedy (R-LA) delivered a blistering cross-examination that left Democrats and viewers alike speechless. The focus: a controversial parole granted to one of California’s most infamous criminals, James Shoenfeld, convicted of kidnapping and burying 26 children alive. The hearing, meant to vet a judicial nominee, instead became a public reckoning over justice, common sense, and accountability in government.
.
.
.
The story begins decades ago in Chowchilla, California, when James Shoenfeld and his accomplices committed one of the most disturbing crimes in American history. Armed and remorseless, they hijacked a school bus filled with children, forced them underground, and buried them alive in a makeshift tomb. Miraculously, the children survived, but the trauma reverberated through the nation, making headlines and sparking outrage.
For years, Shoenfeld remained behind bars, a symbol of justice served. That is, until 2015, when California Governor Jerry Brown stunned the public by granting Shoenfeld parole. The decision sent shockwaves through communities, reigniting old wounds and raising serious questions about the state’s parole process.
During a Senate Judiciary Committee hearing, Senator Kennedy seized the opportunity to confront Judge Coggins, a judicial nominee who previously worked for Governor Brown. Kennedy’s line of questioning was direct, relentless, and laced with the kind of common sense rarely seen in Washington.
“You talked a lot about juveniles in your testimony,” Kennedy began, referencing the nominee’s stated concern for young people. “Governor Brown in 2015 paroled Mr. James Shoenfeld. He was convicted of kidnapping 26 kids, juveniles, and burying them alive. Do you remember the case?”
Judge Coggins, visibly uncomfortable, replied, “I do not.”
Kennedy pressed on, undeterred. “When it happened, it got a lot of publicity in California. Did you call Governor Brown and say, ‘Governor, I love you, but what planet did you just parachute in from? Why have you done this?’”
Coggins responded, “I did not.”
The exchange quickly became tense as Kennedy demanded a clear stance on the parole decision. “Do you agree with this decision?” he asked.
Judge Coggins repeatedly deflected, insisting she would need to “look at the file” before making any assessment. Kennedy’s frustration was palpable. “Do you think kidnapping 26 juveniles and burying them alive presents a risk to the community?” he asked pointedly.
Coggins finally conceded, “If that individual is convicted of those crimes, which it sounds like he was, he would be a risk to the community.” But when pressed further, she refused to say whether Governor Brown made the right call, again citing the need to review the case file.
The hearing quickly became a spectacle, with Kennedy embodying the voice of ordinary Americans. “Picture this,” he said, painting a vivid scene. “A bus full of kids kidnapped, shoved underground, and literally buried alive. This wasn’t a movie. It actually happened. James Shoenfeld did it. Parents were terrified. The entire country watched and justice finally put him behind bars.”
He continued, “Everyone thought the case was closed. Well, everyone except California. Fast forward to 2015. Governor Jerry Brown wakes up one morning, has his coffee, and decides, ‘Let’s parole the guy who buried children alive.’ Californians didn’t just raise eyebrows, they practically launched them into orbit.”
Kennedy’s rhetorical flair highlighted the absurdity of the situation. “Who lets this man walk free?” he demanded. “Senator Kennedy didn’t need a file. He didn’t need a slideshow. He didn’t need a crystal ball. He spoke with the common sense every normal human possesses. If you bury 26 children alive, you should never leave prison, not even for a picnic.”
While Kennedy’s questions were pointed, they weren’t political. They were parental. He sounded less like a senator and more like a concerned father. “This hearing wasn’t just about one criminal,” Kennedy declared. “It exposed a much bigger problem. Leaders making decisions that defy basic logic and endanger the public.”
The nominee’s refusal to take a clear position on the parole decision underscored a troubling trend: bureaucrats and officials dodging accountability, even in the face of egregious crimes. “It was like watching someone refuse to admit fire is hot because they haven’t personally hugged a flame,” Kennedy quipped.
The hearing quickly went viral, with clips circulating across social media. Americans from all walks of life weighed in, expressing outrage and disbelief. Many demanded reforms to the parole system and greater transparency from public officials.
“Should someone who buries children alive ever be released?” Kennedy asked, throwing the question to the public. The response was swift and unequivocal: absolutely not.
The Shoenfeld parole decision has reignited debates about criminal justice reform, victims’ rights, and the role of common sense in government. Senator Kennedy’s performance, equal parts indignation and wit, has drawn praise from conservatives and moderates alike, while Democrats scramble to defend the nominee’s evasive answers.
As the Senate continues its vetting process, one thing is clear: Americans are demanding answers, accountability, and—above all—a justice system that puts public safety first.
Senator John Kennedy’s fiery interrogation has done more than expose the flaws in California’s parole process. It has reminded the nation of the importance of clear, honest answers and the need for leaders who prioritize the safety and well-being of citizens over bureaucratic procedure.
In an era marked by political polarization and institutional distrust, Kennedy’s voice rings out as a call to return to the basics: truth, responsibility, and common sense. As the debate rages on, the question remains—will America’s leaders listen?
A 92-year-old war veteran proved that age is nothing but a number when two men tried to rob his home — and only one walked away.
According to reports, the former soldier, who first picked up a rifle at just 18 while serving overseas, wasn’t about to let criminals intimidate him on his own turf. When the intruders broke in, he relied on the same instincts and training that carried him through wartime decades ago.
With a steady hand and one well-placed shot, he stopped the threat instantly. Both robbers bolted — but only one ever made it out.
Neighbours have since praised the elderly man as a “living legend,” calling the act “old school America” at its finest. Online, people couldn’t believe the story, with one commenter saying: “92 years old and still sharper than men half his age. Respect.”
Police confirmed the veteran acted in self-defence and is not facing charges. Many are now hailing him as proof that courage never fades, no matter how many birthdays you’ve had.
As one viral post summed it up: “He served his country at 18. At 92, he served justice at home.”