Poll

Should this mother be charged with homicide?

Yes, a 1 year old and a 4 year old are dead74%74% - 103
No, she did her best, charge her with something else25%25% - 35
Total: 138
Ender2309
has joined the GOP
+470|6764|USA

Scorpion0x17 wrote:

lowing wrote:

Scorpion0x17 wrote:

YES. FOR FUCKS SAKE! YOU DON'T LEAVE ANY LIVING BEING, UNATTENDED, IN A CAR FOR 8 FUCKING HOURS!

And, the company she worked for should be sued for not having a crèche facility.
^^^^^^^^^

Future ACLU lawyer in the house.

This guy clearly thinks we shouldn't be held accountable for our own actions. See? It is crap like this that  makes it soooooo hard for me to get up in the morning and put on my cape and leotard. It just doesn't seem worth it sometimes.
WHAT? Did you actually read what I wrote?

Do you not know what 'Yes' means. Or 'And'?

Idiot.
he's commenting on the creche facility, not the rest.

as in, you're insinuating that this whole thing wouldn't have happened if the company had a daycare.
SenorToenails
Veritas et Scientia
+444|6323|North Tonawanda, NY

Scorpion0x17 wrote:

WHAT? Did you actually read what I wrote?

Do you not know what 'Yes' means. Or 'And'?

Idiot.
Sure.  I read it.  Why should the company be sued because she didn't find adequate day care?  That doesn't make any sense at all!

That is like saying "She did a bad thing, but it's also her employer's fault because they didn't provide day care."  That is taking away her personal responsibility.  I can see why lowing has a hard time putting on his cape and leotard.
HunterOfSkulls
Rated EC-10
+246|6473

Scorpion0x17 wrote:

WHAT? Did you actually read what I wrote?

Do you not know what 'Yes' means. Or 'And'?

Idiot.
I'm sure he did read what you wrote, but as soon as he got to the part about suing the company it tripped the relay in his brain that puts him in "must attack librulzzzzzz!" mode and all else was forgotten.
lowing
Banned
+1,662|6845|USA

HunterOfSkulls wrote:

Scorpion0x17 wrote:

WHAT? Did you actually read what I wrote?

Do you not know what 'Yes' means. Or 'And'?

Idiot.
I'm sure he did read what you wrote, but as soon as he got to the part about suing the company it tripped the relay in his brain that puts him in "must attack librulzzzzzz!" mode and all else was forgotten.
You mentioned "librulzzzzzz" not me. But the fact that YOU were keen enough to assume he was a liberal, based on his comment, has not gone unnoticed.
RavyGravy
Son.
+617|6599|NSW, Australia

why did'nt she just leave them with a relative or friend?

cause it seems like the smart thing
Doctor Strangelove
Real Battlefield Veterinarian.
+1,758|6661
Doesn't for homicide it need to be intentional?

This was caused by negligence.
SenorToenails
Veritas et Scientia
+444|6323|North Tonawanda, NY

doctastrangelove1964 wrote:

Doesn't for homicide it need to be intentional?

This was caused by negligence.
I brought this up in a previous post.

Implied malice.  She left them with fans and drinks, but when she found them unconscious, she did not take them to the hospital and they died.  I would have no problem convicting her with murder.

SenorToenails wrote:

Depraved Indifference.  That's murder.

Murder is the killing of human being with malice prepense. Malice can be expressed (intent to kill) or implied. Implied malice is proven by acts that involve reckless indifference to human life or in a death that occurs during the commission of certain felonies (the felony murder rule).
Scorpion0x17
can detect anyone's visible post count...
+691|6959|Cambridge (UK)

SenorToenails wrote:

Scorpion0x17 wrote:

WHAT? Did you actually read what I wrote?

Do you not know what 'Yes' means. Or 'And'?

Idiot.
Sure.  I read it.  Why should the company be sued because she didn't find adequate day care?  That doesn't make any sense at all!

That is like saying "She did a bad thing, but it's also her employer's fault because they didn't provide day care."  That is taking away her personal responsibility.  I can see why lowing has a hard time putting on his cape and leotard.
The company insisted that she come into work (they threatened to sack her). Therfore they share some of the responsiblilty for what happened. If they'd've had daycare, this would not have happened.

That does not remove her personal responsibility. She should still be locked up and the key should be thrown away.
SenorToenails
Veritas et Scientia
+444|6323|North Tonawanda, NY

Scorpion0x17 wrote:

The company insisted that she come into work (they threatened to sack her). Therfore they share some of the responsiblilty for what happened. If they'd've had daycare, this would not have happened.

That does not remove her personal responsibility. She should still be locked up and the key should be thrown away.
Reread the article.

"She was either told to come to work or be fired, or she was afraid to call in sick -- one of those things," said police Lt. Michael Fowler.
Where is that threat of termination?  It isn't clear that it happened.  Surely she mentioned that her babysitter cancelled...

After eight hours, she called a supervisor and said she had to leave because of child-care issues.  According to her employer, she didn't tell the supervisor or a co-worker that for all that time, she had left her 1-year-old daughter and 4-year-old son in her Chevy Cavalier hatchback, parked on a residential street.
OK, I see.  No one knows if she was actually threatened with termination.  And she didn't tell anyone about her circumstances.  She only cited "child care issues" after 8 hours.  So then...how is the company partially responsible?

Hint: It isn't.

Last edited by SenorToenails (2007-08-06 01:11:59)

BluRR33
Member
+27|6581|Sweden
omg!!  Psyko!! hope she Die!!  kill childrens like that..  omg! horrible   think of die  like that
Scorpion0x17
can detect anyone's visible post count...
+691|6959|Cambridge (UK)

SenorToenails wrote:

Scorpion0x17 wrote:

The company insisted that she come into work (they threatened to sack her). Therfore they share some of the responsiblilty for what happened. If they'd've had daycare, this would not have happened.

That does not remove her personal responsibility. She should still be locked up and the key should be thrown away.
Reread the article.

"She was either told to come to work or be fired, or she was afraid to call in sick -- one of those things," said police Lt. Michael Fowler.
Where is that threat of termination?  It isn't clear that it happened.  Surely she mentioned that her babysitter cancelled...

After eight hours, she called a supervisor and said she had to leave because of child-care issues.  According to her employer, she didn't tell the supervisor or a co-worker that for all that time, she had left her 1-year-old daughter and 4-year-old son in her Chevy Cavalier hatchback, parked on a residential street.
OK, I see.  No one knows if she was actually threatened with termination.  And she didn't tell anyone about her circumstances.  She only cited "child care issues" after 8 hours.  So then...how is the company partially responsible?

Hint: It isn't.
Oh, OK. I did miss read it the first time round - didn't see the 'either' - so, yeah, if she didn't mention the kids at all, and they didn't threaten termination, then they share no responsibility.

Hmm... It's not at all clear exactly what happened...

But, still, companies that employ single women with children should have daycare (NOTE: I'm not saying it should be illegal for them not to, but that it would be the 'right thing to do').

Last edited by Scorpion0x17 (2007-08-06 01:21:03)

SenorToenails
Veritas et Scientia
+444|6323|North Tonawanda, NY

Scorpion0x17 wrote:

Hmm... It's not at all clear exactly what happened...

But, still, companies that employ single women with children should have daycare (NOTE: I'm not saying it should be illegal for them not to, but that it would be the 'right thing to do').
It's not clear what was (or wasn't) going through her mind when she stuffed her kids in the car and told them to wait 8 hours...and didn't tell even a coworker/supervisor that she had babysitting problems or seek medical attention when it was obvious they needed it.  The outcome of her actions and inactions is known.

Mandatory daycare would be nice, but it is an unreasonable request.  Should a small business owner who employs a single mother as a secretary provide day care, even if it causes a financial loss?  Large corporations have money to do that kind of thing, but not every business is financially capable.
Scorpion0x17
can detect anyone's visible post count...
+691|6959|Cambridge (UK)

SenorToenails wrote:

Mandatory daycare would be nice, but it is an unreasonable request.  Should a small business owner who employs a single mother as a secretary provide day care, even if it causes a financial loss?  Large corporations have money to do that kind of thing, but not every business is financially capable.
It could be subsidised by the government.
SenorToenails
Veritas et Scientia
+444|6323|North Tonawanda, NY

Scorpion0x17 wrote:

It could be subsidised by the government.
Keep your hands out of my wallet, please.
lowing
Banned
+1,662|6845|USA

Scorpion0x17 wrote:

SenorToenails wrote:

Mandatory daycare would be nice, but it is an unreasonable request.  Should a small business owner who employs a single mother as a secretary provide day care, even if it causes a financial loss?  Large corporations have money to do that kind of thing, but not every business is financially capable.
It could be subsidised by the government.
BUT OF COURSE, let the taxpayers be the ones responsible for raising your kids, why not. How about this? YOU deal with your problems in child care and I will deal with my problems in child care? Simple? and I have 2 sons so it is an issue I have to deal with.

If you are not going to be responsible for raising your kids, then DON'T have any kids.

To FORCE companies to open up day care centers so you can pawn off your responsibility for your child care is ludicrous.

I will bet as soon as your kid gets hurt in one of these forced day cares you will not hesitate with a law suit.
Scorpion0x17
can detect anyone's visible post count...
+691|6959|Cambridge (UK)

lowing wrote:

Scorpion0x17 wrote:

SenorToenails wrote:

Mandatory daycare would be nice, but it is an unreasonable request.  Should a small business owner who employs a single mother as a secretary provide day care, even if it causes a financial loss?  Large corporations have money to do that kind of thing, but not every business is financially capable.
It could be subsidised by the government.
BUT OF COURSE, let the taxpayers be the ones responsible for raising your kids, why not. How about this? YOU deal with your problems in child care and I will deal with my problems in child care? Simple? and I have 2 sons so it is an issue I have to deal with.

If you are not going to be responsible for raising your kids, then DON'T have any kids.

To FORCE companies to open up day care centers so you can pawn off your responsibility for your child care is ludicrous.

I will bet as soon as your kid gets hurt in one of these forced day cares you will not hesitate with a law suit.
AGAIN READ WHAT I POSTED!

I did not say companies should be forced to provide daycare.
Gawwad
My way or Haddaway!
+212|6878|Espoo, Finland
Horrible story and I'm sorry for the kids and their mother.
But what kind of idiot leaves kids in a car for 8 hours on a hot summer day?
mcminty
Moderating your content for the Australian Govt.
+879|6915|Sydney, Australia

lowing wrote:

To FORCE companies to open up day care centers so you can pawn off your responsibility for your child care is ludicrous.
Any socially responsible workplace would have family-friendly work practices. These include 'flexible working hours' and possibly some daycare facility for its employees children.
De_Jappe
Triarii
+432|6720|Belgium

what the hell, you don't leave a 1 and 4 years old alone even if they are at home, especially not in a car for 8 hours...
It's obviously her fault, I can't believe people here think the company is responsible. There are OTHER options than the work's daycare, there are professional daycares, heck, there is always your own parents who might be at home.
It's her fault, she has to pay for it. It will be emotionally very hard, but it's called 'death without intention' in dutch, lighter penalities than with intention of course.
Scorpion0x17
can detect anyone's visible post count...
+691|6959|Cambridge (UK)

mcminty wrote:

lowing wrote:

To FORCE companies to open up day care centers so you can pawn off your responsibility for your child care is ludicrous.
Any socially responsible workplace would have family-friendly work practices. These include 'flexible working hours' and possibly some daycare facility for its employee's children.
Precisely. But lowing clearly doesn't do social responsibility.
SenorToenails
Veritas et Scientia
+444|6323|North Tonawanda, NY

Scorpion0x17 wrote:

Scorpion0x17 wrote:

It could be subsidised by the government.
AGAIN READ WHAT I POSTED!

I did not say companies should be forced to provide daycare.
It was implied by suggesting government subsidies.  A sort of "If you can't pay, the state will pick up the tab."
aLi3nZ
Member
+138|6700|New Zealand
She cared a lot about her kids and now that they are dead she is so sad she also wants to die. She knows she has done wrong and is devastated.

imo homicide charge should not be given. Too harsh for this case.

These are cases that happened in my country. These are the kind of cases that deserve homicide charge or much much worse. These are people that hate their kids. Unlike the above ignorant lady that doesn't want to lose a job to provide for her kids.

# 1990: Nineteen-month-old Robert Harlen's mother was out for an hour. Her partner, Graham Ross Sperry, who was babysitting, was later jailed for Robert's death from injuries 'consistent with shaking'. The baby had also had internal injuries.

# 1991: Two-year-old Delcelia Witika was bashed, burned and hit so hard that her appendix burst. She was left in her cot to die while her mother and her partner went socialising. They were both jailed for manslaughter.

# 1992: Craig Manukau's mother turned the radio volume up trying to drown the noise when the 11-year-old's father kicked him to death in their home.

# 1994: Babysitters had seen three-year-old Jordan Ashby with bruises and black eyes - and a doctor had said those earlier injuries were consistent with him falling off his bike - before his mother's boyfriend Phillip Rakete, beat him to death.

# 1995: After the Children and Young Persons Service had ignored claims of abuse and after social workers did not tell the Family Court about fears made by a public health nurse, her father beat 11-month-old Veronika Takerei-Mahu to death.

# 1997: Massive head injuries killed 10-month-old Jaydon Perrin while he was in the care of his mother Leanne and her boyfriend Aron Vercoe who was charged but acquitted of murder.

# 1997: CYPS had removed three-year-old Tichena Cros-land from the care of her mother Moana Whakamarurangi and given custody to her father David Crosland three months before she died of traumatic head injuries and with a badly damaged vagina. He was found guilty of murder but not rape.

1999: After months of violent beatings, seven visits to hospital in a year and 40 examinations by health professionals, four-year-old James Whakaruru was punched and kicked to death by his mother's boyfriend, Benny Haerewa, who was out of jail after earlier attacks on little James. Another child watched and actually handed Haerewa a jug cord, steel vacuum cleaner pipe and a hammer as the 45-minute beating and stomping went on. Convicted of manslaughter, Haerewa was sentenced to 12 years.

# 2000: Hinewaoriki (Lilly-bing) Karatiana-Matiana died from cerebral swelling after being shaken. She had bruising and lacerations to her genitals. She died in her cot on her second birthday while her mother was out partying. Two aunts who had been 'caring' for her were jailed.

# 2000: Mereana Edmonds, 6, was beaten to death by her mother Belinda and her lover Dorothy Tipene. Mereana suffered three serious brain injuries and 30 cuts, bruises and abrasions to her body. Among other things, she had been thrown into a shed all night when she wet her bed. Her mother was jailed for eight years, her partner for 27 months.

# 2001: Saliel Aplin, 12, and her half-sister Olympia Aplin, 11, were killed in a knife attack by their stepfather who first admitted the murder then said he had confessed to protect the girl's mother Christine Aplin. He got 25 years non-parole.

# 2003: Tamati Pokai, 3, was beaten to death by his 'foster father' after the child brought home a packet of jelly beans from kindergarten.

# 2003: After he vomited up his dinner, 12-year-old Kelly Gush was kicked to death by his mother's partner.

# 2003: Coral-Ellen Burrows, 6, complained she didn't want to go to school while her stepfather Steven Williams was driving her there. He knocked her unconscious, beat her to death and dumped her body. He had a long criminal record and had been on a P bender. Her birth father had earlier rung CYPS to relay his fears for her safety.

# 2003: Fifteen-year-old Rocky Wano, already hooked on booze and drugs, had come home from Rotorua for Christmas. His angry father kicked and beat him to death after he was called to get Rocky from the Waiiroa Marae, finding him drunk.

# 2004: Tangaroa Matiu was beaten to death with a fence paling by his stepfather after soiling his pants. His mother got seven years for manslaughter, her husband life for murder.

# 2005: Harley Wharewera, 19, was jailed for 10 years and Jeremy Tawa, 23, for two after attacks on an unidentified two-year-old boy whose home they shared. (The trial judge suppressed his name.) The boy was thrown against walls and beaten, forced to eat dog faeces. His mother, Jill Tania Tito who knew what was happening, was jailed for 18 months.

# 2006: Ngatikaura Ngata, 3, was beaten to death with weapons also after soiling his pants. His mother and stepfather are serving eight years for manslaughter.

# 2006: The who and how of the Kahui twins' killing have yet to be argued in court where their father faces murder charges.
Scorpion0x17
can detect anyone's visible post count...
+691|6959|Cambridge (UK)

SenorToenails wrote:

Scorpion0x17 wrote:

Scorpion0x17 wrote:

It could be subsidised by the government.
AGAIN READ WHAT I POSTED!

I did not say companies should be forced to provide daycare.
It was implied by suggesting government subsidies.  A sort of "If you can't pay, the state will pick up the tab."
I don't give a fuck for what is implied - what is important is what is explicitly stated.
znozer
Viking fool - Crazy SWE
+162|6738|Sverige (SWE)
I get angry when people leave their Dog or Cat in a over heated car, but this is just sick.........
spacebandit72
Dead Meat
+121|6924|Michigan
My God.
I got a tear or two reading that.
I have two girls 1.5yo and an almost 3yo.
I could not even begin to think it would be OK to leave them in a car for even more than a few minutes let alone all day.
One would think she'd at least go check on them periodically.
This is another case where that person doesn't deserve to be called a parent.
I don't care what they charge her with... just toss her in jail for the rest of her shitty life.

Board footer

Privacy Policy - © 2024 Jeff Minard