How do you spell overkill?

[old.Tohtori]

Clicky

First time parents, thought their way of life was good for baby(perhaps the medical business should've FORCED some knowledge about malnutrition too), didn't know better and when they did notice everything wasn't right(not all parents are so anal about their wee ones), it was too late.

Could be more then malnurishment to this also(refer to House episode "Babies and bathwater"(or something along those lines.

Just...life for this...after losing a baby...well..

 

[tris-]

i dont think the punishment is too harsh. maybe their clapped out bullshit diets work for a fully grown adult but they should of researched it to see the affects on a baby. i thought everyone knew an adults body can adjust its self to being treated badly. a baby on the other hand is not developed and needs essential shit to grow properly.

 

[old.Tohtori]

Yeah it's "common" sense, but not all have the same education or knowledge as the regular internet dog. But life? Murder charge? Seriously there's some..."Oh no a baby died!" overkill here.

 

[tris-]

Yeah it's "common" sense, but not all have the same education or knowledge as the regular internet dog. But life? Murder charge? Seriously there's some..."Oh no a baby died!" overkill here.

im not sure what education you need to understand that only giving a baby soy milk and apple juice isnt going to be fun and games.

 

[Ormorof]

i seem to remember a similar story in the UK about a woman who was sent to jail for giving her child skimmed milk and a vegetarian diet (died of malnutrition), but not life

 

[old.Tohtori]

im not sure what education you need to understand that only giving a baby soy milk and apple juice isnt going to be fun and games.

Well, if those people are "hippie vegans" and they eat this, and haven't been told that it's bad for baby not to eat other stuff, then it's just a case of giving baby what you get.

Works kinda like that in "primitive" cultures too. Bet half of this forum wouldn't know what to give a baby.

Since it was a "natural" baby, they probably just didn't get the necessary medical info on malnutrition, which isn't completely their fault. Them people stupid? Ignorant? Pretty clueless on baby care? Yes.

But the point is a bit different, life sentence and a murder charge, calling them basicly baby killers with intent, is overkill.

Kinda like sending a father to the chair for going out for a breath of fresh air and the baby suffocating on a toy.

 

[Azurus]

Life is far too harsh. They weren't trying to 'harm' their baby it was an error of judgement. Now both their lives are ruined.

And what about Nestle who agressively market their powdered milk in third world countries, when breast milk is clearly more nutricious?

That results in the death of many babies, those fuckers should get life.

 

[tris-]

Works kinda like that in "primitive" cultures too. Bet half of this forum wouldn't know what to give a baby.

no i dont but im not the one with/having a baby. if i was id be pretty keen to educate my self.

 

[old.Tohtori]

no i dont but im not the one with/having a baby. if i was id be pretty keen to educate my self.

If you thought, or were brought up, in the belief that spores and rabbitpoo was a good choice for a growing baby, you'd probably believe it.

Also, read what i wrote after it and not out of context, it was a homeborn baby(probably one of the hippie style natural borns), so the lack of knowledge is there compared to hospital knowledge given to people.

By your definition(correct me if i assume wrong), if a baby dies of a cold, parents should go to jail for not knowing stuff.

 

[Neffneff]

Fucked up tbh, why wasnt the baby being breast/formula fed? it was SIX WEEKS OLD ffs, apple juice? what? jesus christ, soy milk? hello? BABY..that's a B A B Y!!! either should have been on the breast (best way with the stupid diet ideas, or on formula..and yes..you can even get vegan formula..no excuses at all.

they should be in jail, not necessarily cos of the stupid diet (though i'd sling em in jail just for being that dumb) but because of the NEGLECT and therefore ABUSE of a 6 week old baby. ignore the diet for a minute, lets say everyone in the household is a happy omni-vore, and the baby is drinking down mommy's iron and protein rich breast juices. you beutifull newborn, let's say (cant find it for sure) _Average_ 7 pound baby...awwwwwww....how cute.

now..fast foward six weeks....SIX FUCKING WEEKS...your baby...awwww....is now a lovely DYING SKELETAL 3.5 Pounds.....must be so cuddly. and you DONT....DONT take her to the doctors AT ALL?! in its 6 weeeks of being alive..and LOOSING WIEGHT (irrespective of the cause) you dont even BOTHER to visit someone about it?

that's neglect, the baby died of neglect, okay the diet caused it, but so could have many other things, end of the day..one trip to a doctor, doctor would have prescribed treatment/formula/vitamins/drugs/whatever and there WOULD have been a SEVEN week old baby.


Don't get caught up in the vegan warcry, dont get stuck in the politics of who should be allowed to eat what and raise who how etc...this is just a simple case of stupidity PLUS NEGLECT. they deserved what they got.

 

[old.Tohtori]

And to you, a lifetime in jail with murderers, rapists, bank robbers, paedophiles, whatnot scum of the earth is what they deserve?

Hell, if being dumb equals a life sentence, then half the population here should be locked up for a thing or two.

I'm saying the sentence is overkill, i'm not saying they were right, or that their "warcry" is just...i'm saying that's ridicilous for the parents of a newborn.

 

[Chronictank]

they got charged with negligence as neffets said, if thats the punishment for it then thats right

 

[Solo]

It's child abuse and resulted in the loss of a life.

Just because they are fuckwits and didn't realise does not shift the blame.

Authorities could have maybe done something in the long term but after only 6 weeks Im sure they wouldn't of had time to save the baby by taking it from them.

Fair price.

 

[Cadelin]

I'm saying the sentence is overkill, i'm not saying they were right, or that their "warcry" is just...i'm saying that's ridicilous for the parents of a newborn.

So if they had stabbed the baby to death or shot it that would have been ok?

They were found guilty of murder, that means the prosecution has to prove that they knew what they were doing. If they hadn't been able to prove that they could have just been convicted of manslaughter etc.

 

[old.Tohtori]

So if they had stabbed the baby to death or shot it that would have been ok?

YEah, that would be clcosed case from the getgo.

But because they thought that soy milk and orange juice(which doesn't sound THAT stupid really), they get charged with "malice murder, felony murder, involuntary manslaughter and cruelty to children"

And you are saying that it's not too much?

 

[tris-]

And you are saying that it's not too much?

yes

 

[old.Tohtori]

Honestly i'm not suprised you are on the burn them camp tris-, just the way you are, but this seems to be the general view on this also.

Seems silly. Kill a guy? Get life. Malnurish your baby 'cause you odn't know better? Same cell!

 

[Cadelin]

But because they thought that soy milk and orange juice(which doesn't sound THAT stupid really), they get charged with "malice murder, felony murder, involuntary manslaughter and cruelty to children"

And you are saying that it's not too much?

They were found guilty of those things. They weren't stupid they knew that there child was going to die by not feeding it and they then they made up an excuse to try and cover it up when it happened. Thats the conclusion the Jury came to. The article doesn't provide us with all the facts of the case so all we can really go on is the what the Jury and Judge say and not what some journalist decides they want to write about.

 

[old.Tohtori]

Yeah, that argument is valid if we think that there's no such thing as "innocent prisoners" or "wrongly accused". AND that they actually wanted the baby dead.

Same kind of speculation you're saying i'm doing.

Involuntary manslaughter and child abuse, sure, those i could understand. But as it is, it was just too harsh.

 

[chretien]

If your stupidity causes someone to die then you should go to prison for that. deliberate or not you've done something bad. It's not even as if it's hard to get the info you need to look after a baby, all new parents to be are showered with leaflets, promotional stuff, health info and all kinds of advice automatically. Also as having a baby is a pretty major thing for most couples, it's not unreasonable to expect them to put in some work to research stuff themselves - even buying some of those crappy baby magazines would give you enough info to work out that babies can't live on soy and apple juice. If my baby died because I tried feeding it steak and chips I wouldn't expect to get away with claiming I didn't know better.

As someone else pointed out, there are vegan baby formulas so they can't even claim they had no choice if they didn't want to compromise their principles. I'd imagine that at least one issue of Sandal Wearing Weirdo Monthly would have baby care tips for people who follow that kind of lifestyle.

 

[old.Tohtori]

I'd imagine that at least one issue of Sandal Wearing Weirdo Monthly would have baby care tips for people who follow that kind of lifestyle.

Maybe that's just the problem. They got the idea from the latest Sandal WEaring WEirdo Monthly.

And as i said, you don't get bombarded with the info when you have a homeborn kid. They might not have gone to the doctor at all during preggies.

But that's speculating, and like i said, i don't think they should go unpunished for that kinda thing(just to set an example if nout else), just not THAT punished.

 

[Yeke]

She was pregnant for nine months ample time to research what a baby needs even if you are criminally stupid, If my first child so much as sneezed just after he was born he was at the doctors pretty soon after (yes I looked stupid lots of times those first few months) the fact they didnt seek advice on the fact that it had lost so much weight is criminal.

 

[Congax]

I agree with Tohtori, a punishment should've been made - no doubt about that - but this kind of a severe punishment is just way too much.

 

[fl3a]

i think this isnt about making their baby eat only vegan stuff, feeding him wrong, whatever, its about the fact that they never took the baby to a doctor. that is negligence. and they deserve punishment for it.
however, they are a couple that has just lost their child, who they (one would think) loved, due to their own fault and now are being punished for it with a life sentence - a bit harsh, but that is the punishment for killing someone, after all, if a murderer gets stuck under a train and loses a leg while shooting someone the sentence is the same, noone takes years off for emotional suffering

 

[Cadelin]

Yeah, that argument is valid if we think that there's no such thing as "innocent prisoners" or "wrongly accused". AND that they actually wanted the baby dead.

Same kind of speculation you're saying i'm doing.

Involuntary manslaughter and child abuse, sure, those i could understand. But as it is, it was just too harsh.

I am going on what the jury decided. Yes, mistakes sometimes happen but they are the best people to judge what went on and we have to trust that they made the correct decision. You can't pick and choose what judgements you want to believe.

How on earth can you understand the being convicted of child abuse but not murder? If you believe it was a horrible mistake by un-educated parents then its not abuse its simply an accident. If you believe they realised that they were hurting their child then you surely believe they knew they were going to kill their child too.

 

[old.Tohtori]

I am going on what the jury decided. Yes, mistakes sometimes happen but they are the best people to judge what went on and we have to trust that they made the correct decision. You can't pick and choose what judgements you want to believe.

How on earth can you understand the being convicted of child abuse but not murder? If you believe it was a horrible mistake by un-educated parents then its not abuse its simply an accident. If you believe they realised that they were hurting their child then you surely believe they knew they were going to kill their child too.

Actually that's the beauty of the system, you CAN choose what judgements to believe. I don't like the legal system too much anyway, sure, it works , but not so well that it validates the innocent sitting behind bars. Might as well start killing people on a hunch.

I said i understand the child abuse charges because there's no such thing, atleast to my knowledge, as unintentional child abuse. Why? 'cause people wouldn't believe it. That's what i believe happened here. Uneducated, misguided perhaps(some community style, example), people making a big mistake and getting an unjust punishment for it.

And by unjust i mean, wee bit over the top just because it's a baby issue...but let's not go there.

 

[Cadelin]

Actually that's the beauty of the system, you CAN choose what judgements to believe. I don't like the legal system too much anyway, sure, it works , but not so well that it validates the innocent sitting behind bars. Might as well start killing people on a hunch.

This is rubbish. The legal system has rules, everybody sticks to them. No where in the system does it say, "you may kill people on a hunch".

I said i understand the child abuse charges because there's no such thing, atleast to my knowledge, as unintentional child abuse. Why? 'cause people wouldn't believe it. That's what i believe happened here. Uneducated, misguided perhaps(some community style, example), people making a big mistake and getting an unjust punishment for it.

Once again rubbish. Lets take an example, your child burns himself accidentally on a sparker or some other used firework that they try and pick up. If you had been watching him constantly you could have probably avoided it but it is certainly not cruelty. However if you were to tell your child to pick up a sparker that you knew was hot that would be cruelty. Exactly the same end result but clearly one is cruelty the other is not. Yet you are saying that both should be punished the same?

And by unjust i mean, wee bit over the top just because it's a baby issue...but let's not go there.

So you are saying that if they had starved a 5 year old kid to death it would have been different?

 

[old.Tohtori]

1:This is rubbish. The legal system has rules, everybody sticks to them. No where in the system does it say, "you may kill people on a hunch".

2:Once again rubbish. Lets take an example, your child burns himself accidentally on a sparker or some other used firework that they try and pick up. If you had been watching him constantly you could have probably avoided it but it is certainly not cruelty. However if you were to tell your child to pick up a sparker that you knew was hot that would be cruelty. Exactly the same end result but clearly one is cruelty the other is not. Yet you are saying that both should be punished the same?

3:So you are saying that if they had starved a 5 year old kid to death it would have been different?

First off, saying everything is rubbish, isn't a really good "argue" point.

1: I wasn't talking about that, i meant; I can choose which judgement i see, from personal opinion, as right or wrong. Nothing to stop it. AND that the legal system as it is, is so uncertain some of the time that it judges innocent people. This is wrong.

2: Again, you read me wrong. I was saying that there's no such judgement as "unintentional cruelty to children" which means, by law, you either do it or not, no gray area. Also something that should be looked at. I was saying the exact opposite then what you implied.

3: Like i said about that issue, let's not go there, too sensitive for the people here.

 

[Huntingtons]

@ cadelin

the jury is just people picked out with no emotional influence to the case.

and yes it would have been different if it was a 5 year old child. the child would be able to speak up for itself and making the parents aware that its neglected, it could even run away, it could eat by itself etc. it would have been clear neglect to starve a 5 year old. an ifant cry all the time so it can be hard to know when its too much crying or what it may be (for first time parents. people take notice of it being an infant, its helpless - lets defend it. their sentence is too hard, but they def. deserve to get punished for neglecting it (wether or not its on purpose)

 

[Roo Stercogburn]

Whether the punishment is considered harsh or not the fact remains its shocking that parents in one of the western countries with amongst the highest standard of living, education and technology can willfully mis-feed their child.

They're vegans - not isolated hermits living on some far off island. Living in Atlanta in the US they had access to a full education and all the facilities needed to ensure their son was given a healthy start in life.

They may have loved him, but they put their so-called principles above his life. It was willful and disgusting.

Regarding the sentence I cannot say - I notice the penalty is described as 'automatic' for their crime so it would appear the US judicial system has very clearly defined punishments for crimes such as this.

The parents are not victims in this - the only victim is the child.