Quote:
Originally Posted by Neverfly
Meanwhile- the report says she went to check on the other two children and could hear the kids in the tub.
I'm sure anyone with an ounce of sense never takes their eyes off the road or hands off the wheel while driving. EVER. They always check their blind spot too when switching lanes too.
And if they don't?
Prosecute! Punish them! Punish Punish! Take away all their kids! Excessive bail! Lock 'em up for a decade!
|
And if they don't check their blind spot and run over a guy a motorcycle, let em go, right? they didn't mean it and they probably feel really bad about it. All of these other examples you pull out seem to always leave out that one small matter. A person died because of this.
I've done some stupid stuff, but I never hurt or killed anyone doing it. When I see something like this, it makes me think that maybe the next time I'm going to do something stupid, i should think about it from a slightly different view.
20 minutes. She left the kids in the tub for 10-20 minutes. Where were her other kids that it took her that long to check on them? If it were really that important that she shop for shoes, or she was so pressed for time that there was no other time to do it, have the 10 year old sit in the bathroom with the kids for a few minutes. Would a 2.5 year old and a 1 year old even know how to wash themselves? You never did answer some of the questions I asked in an earlier post about this, but I attributed that to you taking some time off to cool down a bit.
So, just so we're clear on where you stand on this, if a person does something stupid and irresponsible and accidentally kills a kid, it's okay as long at was their own kid right? Does this extend to all blood relatives? How about if her kid had died at a day care under the exact same circumstances?
What was her sentence again? I missed it in those articles.
What if the news articled didn't actually relate the full story? What if the investigators arrived to find that all 4 kids shared one room while the two other rooms were full of shoes? Would that change things at all?
In the end, what it comes down to is that she put a kid in a situation that caused that kid to die. The DA found enough cause to move forward with manslaughter charges. If the jury agrees to convict, the judge will impose a sentence. Whose kid it was shouldn't make a lick of difference in the charging of the crime. It might make a big difference in the outcome of the case and the verdict, if any.
One other thing that struck me when I first read the story. She was quoted as saying it was her fault and that she'd had a really bad year. The way it came across to me was a very self centered statement about how bad this was for her, not her daughter. This may come off as very unsympathetic, but the truth of the matter is, I do feel badly for this woman, but not as badly as I do for her kids.
You may not agree, that's your right. You have your own opinion on the matter. I don't agree with it, but it's yours, and from your point of view it's correct. Just as from my point of view, mine is correct. Our two views will probably never be the same on this matter, so there is probably no sense in trying to change the other persons. What I do object to, is calling those who have a different view "wrong" or a hypocrite. They are opinions, and as such can't be "wrong".