Maternal aggressor finds doughnuts more important than own child

[lord of the mark]

Originally posted by OzzyKP


Lack of intent isn't an adequate defense and guilt after the fact isn't adequate punishment. If that were the case there would be no laws about manslaughter and criminal negligence. This woman was clearly criminally negligent and deserves whatever punishment others who commit manslaughter deserve.

Impose whatever punishment you wish, it will be as meaningless as executing someone for suicide. Losing ones own child through ones own negligence is a fate worse than death, and its not comparable to negligently killing someone else.

I can say right now, that if given the choice in this ladys position, between being set free, and being given the electric chair, the choice would not be difficult at all.

You can argue what legal formalism demands till the cows come home, I'll leave it to the lawyers to answer what the DA was or was not obligated to do. As a human being and as a parent, what y'all are arguing about is profoundly meaningless.

[lord of the mark]

Originally posted by DinoDoc
@ LOTOM: The 5 return trips raises that possibility IMO.

What do you think? Do you THINK she intentionally murdered the kid?

[Shrapnel12]

Originally posted by lord of the mark


1. Im not a lawyer

2. I place a VERY high value on children as well. I dont think we know that this woman didnt. I wont judge her based on such limited info. I assume the prosecutor had more info than we do.

1. Sorry, I thought someone called you a lawyer but perhaps it was in jest?

2. It is my position that the fact that this woman left the child in the car long enough to die is the very evidence that convinces me that she did not care about her child, or at least not enough to be considered a half-way decent mother. It's also my position that we don't need any more information (unless like I said, something redered her physically unable to save her child) and the prosecutor is an idiot.

[Shrapnel12]

Impose whatever punishment you wish, it will be as meaningless as executing someone for suicide. Losing ones own child through ones own negligence is a fate worse than death, and its not comparable to negligently killing someone else.

If that was true, I would expect her to not even try to give an excuse. She would have been her own worse critic and admitted to killing her own child (even if it wasn't technically true). Of course, I admit that this is one point, the article is not clear. It does lead you to believe she did her best to not get charged, but I don't know that's true.

[Japher]

The DA, on TV, just said he chose not prosecute her because if he did he'd get complaints from ppl who'd think she shouldn't be prosecuted.

Also, right after that story, they had another story about a couple who left their kids alone for 5 hours as they went to do errands and are now facing child endangerment charges... the child was not harmed.

There seems to be a real double standard here... and on top of that, it's backwards!

[Dr Strangelove]

First remember that these days all kids travel in the back seat until they're 12. Second, remember that it's generally recommended that for infants the car seat be fastened so that it faces the rear of the car. Most of the convertable seats are rated to 20 pounds rear-facing, but some are rated up to 30 pounds rear-facing. It is possible that the kid might have been in a rear-facing seat, in which case the child might not have been in clear sight of the mother as she got back into the car.

[Lord Avalon]

She was lucky she wasn't in Phoenix, where they're charging a COP for leaving his police dog too long in a hot car, where it died.

Cop charged in police dog's hot car death

[DinoDoc]

Originally posted by Japher
The DA, on TV, just said he chose not prosecute her because if he did he'd get complaints from ppl who'd think she shouldn't be prosecuted.

So basically he said that he won't prosecute what he apprently saw as a crime solely because of possible public pressure?

Also, right after that story, they had another story about a couple who left their kids alone for 5 hours as they went to do errands and are now facing child endangerment charges... the child was not harmed.

I imagine thier lawyer will have a field day with the rank hypocrisy evident in this prosecution.

[Kidlicious]

Originally posted by OzzyKP


Lack of intent isn't an adequate defense and guilt after the fact isn't adequate punishment. If that were the case there would be no laws about manslaughter and criminal negligence. This woman was clearly criminally negligent and deserves whatever punishment others who commit manslaughter deserve.

This isn't neglect. Neglect is intentional, because you make a choice. She didn't make any choices that put anyone in danger. She probably was just too stressed out about work and maybe she didn't care enough about her kid. But that is not neglect. Neglect is choosing to put someone in danger.

[Kidlicious]

Originally posted by Japher
The DA, on TV, just said he chose not prosecute her because if he did he'd get complaints from ppl who'd think she shouldn't be prosecuted.

Also, right after that story, they had another story about a couple who left their kids alone for 5 hours as they went to do errands and are now facing child endangerment charges... the child was not harmed.

There seems to be a real double standard here... and on top of that, it's backwards!

The first case is not neglect. The second case is. No double standard.

[Kidlicious]

Originally posted by OzzyKP


She didn't forget her wallet or accidentally leave the lights on at home. She left her daughter in a car and caused her death.

You can get a ticket for forgetting to put on a seat belt, you damn well better get a far more severe punishment for forgetting to keep your daughter alive.

At the bare minimum she should have her other child taken away from her permanently and never again be legally trusted with the care of another human being (or house pet imho). Personally I think she should go to jail.

She is a very bad parent for sure. And that's true about the seat belt tickets, although I don't think not wearing a seat belt is a criminal act. It's a minor traffic infraction.

As far as taking the other child away, I think that maybe she should be investigated.

[Kidlicious]

Originally posted by DinoDoc
How do the past incidents of the mother doing this factor into your calculations?

That's just something that someone told Japher. You don't consider that truth do you?

[GePap]

Originally posted by Kidicious


This isn't neglect. Neglect is intentional, because you make a choice.

The term used is negligent, not neglect.

One of the meanings of Negligent is "Characterized by careless ease or informality; casual" In this case it might be negligent homicide if the mother chose to leave the girl in the car, ignoring the dangers that posed, even if she had no intent for her to die.

I am with LoTM in the sense that the story specifically mentions that there was video tape and audiotape of the incident that the DA's office examined before making their determination. Given that none of us have seen or heard that evidence, it is quite possible that it is exculpatory and shows evidence that backs the woman's claim that she did not know her daughter was still in the vehicle.

[Kidlicious]

Originally posted by Dauphin
If you forget the law, and break it, then ignorance of the law is not a defence (usually). Similarly, you are generally considered criminally negligent if the misdeed is caused by your failure to act in a way which would be reasonably expected of a person with your responsibility and experience. (Can't remember definition off hand).

She'd not be charged for forgetting, she'd be charged for manslaughter brought about by not acting in way that would be adequately expected to avoid such a result.

Manslaughter would be the charge if she intentionally left the child in the car. She didn't do that.

[DinoDoc]

That's just something that someone told Japher. You don't consider that truth do you?

Did you miss the news story I linked to?