Should laws be changed in the case of a woman who killed a woman

[thundley4]

oregonjen   (1000+ posts)           Tue Jun-16-09 11:04 AM
Original message
Should laws be changed in the case of a woman who killed a woman and her unborn baby?
   

 
http://www.kgw.com/news-local/stories/kgw_060609_news_p...


New charges in pregnant woman's killing don't include baby's murder

10:35 PM PDT on Monday, June 15, 2009

By Kgw.com Staff

BEAVERTON, Ore. -- A 27-year-old woman accused of murder in the death of a pregnant woman in Oregon was arraigned on new charges Monday, but won't be tried for allegedly killing the 8-month-old unborn child.
{snip}

Hermann said additional murder charges would not be filed in the boy's death because prosecutors could not prove beyond doubt that the baby had in fact taken a breath before dying -- a critical legal threshhold in Oregon for a murder charge.

________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________

I understand this is pretty sensitive territory, but I have to ask this question. Do you think laws should be changed to be able to charge this sick vile woman for murder of an unborn baby? For those who are unfamiliar with the story, the woman wanted to steal the pregnant woman's baby, killing her and the baby.
I think laws should be changed for this, but then it plays into the religious right's views on abortion.

What say you?

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=view_all&address=389x5860344

paulsby (1000+ posts)           Tue Jun-16-09 11:19 AM
Response to Reply #5
9. it is certainly within the legislature's or the citizen's (by initiaitve in many states)
   
prerogative, but you are correct, it doesn't apply ex-post facto.

in many states, what the accused did WOULD be prosecuted as multiple or aggravated murder. in oregon, they have no such law.

you can argue either policy preference is better, but we live in a democratic republic where laws vary SIGNIFICANTLY from state to state.

i used to live in a state where the age of consent was 14, for instance. thus, an act that would be a class A felony in my current state, was entirely legal behavior.

in the state i live in now, it's legal to carry a firearm openly, w/o a permit.

in my previous jurisdiction, that would be a felony.

Dummie Paulsby never heard of the shift key.

noamnety (1000+ posts)             Tue Jun-16-09 11:06 AM
Response to Original message
2. Please don't go there.
   
Fetuses don't have personhood until they are born for good reason. We really don't need people arguing that "killing a fetus is murder."

Thanks.

We already KNOW that killing a bay in the womb is murder.

Recursion (1000+ posts)           Tue Jun-16-09 11:12 AM
Response to Reply #4
7. My own take
   
I personally think we lose the choice debate if we make it about the status of the fetus. Mostly because biologically it's pretty obvious that a human life is created at conception. Even if the fetus were fully adult, the state could not force a woman to keep it inside of her; it's about the woman, not the fetus.

Um, then you are "pro murder" for the convenience of the mother?

I wonder.  What happens when one of these crazy people succeed in removing a baby from the mother, and the mother lives, but the baby dies. Will these callous baby-killers have a differing opinion?  Probably not.

[delilahmused]

I can't imagine going through life without a soul but evidently it's possible. What kind of cold hearted bitch considers a baby a month away from delivery a nonhuman "fetus"? It's so concerned about the "right" to rip a baby from the womb limb by limb it has no compassion about the loss of someone's beloved child. Humanity is seriously wasted on some people.

Cindie

[AllosaursRus]

The way they dance all over calling the baby a fetus astounds me. It WAS a baby until this murdering bitch ended both their lives, you cretins. This woman WANTED the child! To me that makes all the difference in the world! You asshats can dance all you want, it won't change the fact this was a child!

[Lord Undies]

I think laws should be changed for this, but then it plays into the religious right's views on abortion.

So you actually agree with the "relgious right's views", but your hate for the "religious right" trumps your humanity.

Got it!

[docstew]

So you actually agree with the "relgious right's views", but your hate for the "religious right" trumps your humanity.

Got it!

Ahhh, but you're assuming them to be actual humans, as opposed to organisms shaped like humans, whose black, twisted, necrosed hearts, instead of blood like you or I, pump a black, viscous, foul-smelling concoction of pure evil

[Celtic Rose]

So because this woman killed the baby before it took its first breath outside of the womb, she will not be charged with its murder    And DUmmies refuse to acknowledge that it should be a double murder because that would validate the "religious right".  You know, I'm usually hesitant to call political views evil, but I don't know if there is a better word for this 

[AllosaursRus]

So because this woman killed the baby before it took its first breath outside of the womb, she will not be charged with its murder    And DUmmies refuse to acknowledge that it should be a double murder because that would validate the "religious right".  You know, I'm usually hesitant to call political views evil, but I don't know if there is a better word for this 

Pretty much a circular thought process ain't it?

[MrsSmith]

Recursion...

Mostly because biologically it's pretty obvious that a human life is created at conception. Even if the fetus were fully adult, the state could not force a woman to keep it inside of her; it's about the woman, not the fetus.

And yet...and yet...it's just  fine to end that life, isn't it?

[Carl]

And yet...and yet...it's just  fine to end that life, isn't it?

That was one of the most evil,selfish and cold things I have ever seen.

Absolutely unfathomable.

[USA4ME]

Recursion

I personally think we lose the choice debate if we make it about the status of the fetus.

Oooo, can't let that happen, can you?

You've already lost in the only court that really matters, you just don't know it yet.

.

[dandi]

noamnety (1000+ posts)             Tue Jun-16-09 11:06 AM
Response to Original message
2. Please don't go there.
   
Fetuses don't have personhood until they are born for good reason. We really don't need people arguing that "killing a fetus is murder."

Thanks.

So your admitting that your arguments related when life starts, when a fetus is a person, etc., have less to do with sentience, survivability and morality and more to do with just being able to kill one at will without getting into trouble. Thanks for clearing that up.

[The Village Idiot]

noamnety (1000+ posts)             Tue Jun-16-09 11:06 AM
Response to Original message
2. Please don't go there.
   
Fetuses don't have personhood until they are born for good reason. We really don't need people arguing that "killing a fetus is murder."

Thanks.

and what was your good reason for being born??

Not good enough

[Toastedturningtidelegs]

damntexdem  (1000+ posts)        Tue Jun-16-09 01:43 PM
Response to Original message
28. No, a fetus is not a baby -- and killing it should not be murder. 
 There should be heightened charges for killing a wanted fetus; but not murder charges for that.

The 'murder' laws are a backdoor way to try to get around Row v Wade.
I don't buy lead from China, anymore -- I hear that it's contaminated with toys.

Yes it is. You're just too stupid and sick to recognize it! Oh! and for someone who loves abortion as much as you do,one would think you would know how to spell the name of the person whom the legislation that made it legal for women to kill children is named for!

[BlueStateSaint]

Yes it is. You're just too stupid and sick to recognize it! Oh! and for someone who loves abortion as much as you do,one would think you would know how to spell the name of the person whom the legislation that made it legal for women to kill children is named for!

Toasted, look at the post you quoted.  I think it might be a mole.  Two clues:

damntexdem  (1000+ posts)        Tue Jun-16-09 01:43 PM
Response to Original message
28. No, a fetus is not a baby -- and killing it should not be murder. 
 There should be heightened charges for killing a wanted fetus; but not murder charges for that.

The 'murder' laws are a backdoor way to try to get around Row v Wade.

Everybody and their expletive-deleted grandmother knows how that should be spelled.

I don't buy lead from China, anymore -- I hear that it's contaminated with toys.

Methinks that this is a not-so-obvious attempt to jerk their collective chain . . .

[Airwolf]

The way they dance all over calling the baby a fetus astounds me. It WAS a baby until this murdering bitch ended both their lives, you cretins. This woman WANTED the child! To me that makes all the difference in the world! You asshats can dance all you want, it won't change the fact this was a child!

Somedays all you need is a large hammer and a DUmmie to beat it against.

[shorty]

This story pisses me off. This was a case of double murder. That dumb bitch better watch her ass in prison.