Link
Albany
The state's highest court has reversed the conviction of a Long Island woman who was found guilty of second-degree manslaughter for causing the death of her daughter — a fatality that occurred six days after the child was delivered by C-section following a head-on collision.
The singular case turned on the question of whether Jennifer Jorgensen of Suffolk County can be charged with homicide when the fatal injury to her baby occurred before delivery....
The people around here only care if a career criminal gets mistreated. Innocent babies don't faze them.Originally Posted by BedellBrave
Sadly it looks like you're stuck reading the headlines, not why the decision was made
"The decision noted that the law criminalizing such conduct is located in the statute on intentional self-abortion, where the offense is "no greater than a misdemeanor."
The court said that Suffolk County prosecutors "concede that, had defendant not consented to the cesarean section with the result that the child be born alive, she would not have been prosecuted for manslaughter in the second degree." Ruling against Jorgensen, then, "would create a perverse incentive for a pregnant woman to refuse a cesarean section out of fear that if her baby is born alive she would face criminal charges for her alleged reckless conduct, jeopardizing the health of the woman and the unborn fetus."
Such an imposition of criminal liability, the majority found, "should be clearly defined by the legislature, not the courts. It should also not be left to the whim of the prosecutor." "
Perfectly sound legal decision. But then again, it doesn't fit your rhetoric so I'm assuming it's the devil
Stockholm, more densely populated than NYC - sturg
In a dissent, Judge Eugene Fahey wrote, “I cannot join in a result that analyzes our statutes to determine that a six-day-old child is not a person.”
I was right - it is good news.
Last edited by BedellBrave; 10-30-2015 at 10:58 PM.
It will make us happy cause we finance barberism?
"For there is always light, if only we are brave enough to see it. If only we are brave enough to be it." Amanda Gorman
"When Fascism comes to America, it will be wrapped in the flag and carrying a cross"
Congrats to someone who put their personal beliefs over the letter of the law. I guess you also like judges who doll out sentences dependent on if someone is black or white? Afterall why follow the rules when you can let personal opinion get involved.
The case made against her was that she wouldn't have been charged if she didn't opt for the C Section, not that a 6 day old baby isn't a person. Again, not shocked that you believe what you type, you are only a touch more sensible than the people beheading people in the name of their god.
Stockholm, more densely populated than NYC - sturg
Yep, just a touch.
Feel free to continue to be glad this lady got her conviction overturned. Oh, and you might want to read the ruling before you make sweeping statements about it not having something to do with personhood.
Anyway, miss the forest for the trees.
"...After several years of court cases, in 2012 Jorgensen was convicted of killing her child and sentenced to nine years in prison. Naturally she appealed the decision with her attorneys offering a two pronged defense. First they say that she never intended to purposefully kill her baby (so premeditated murder is not the case) and secondly according to New York law her baby wasn’t really a “person” so she couldn’t be convicted of killing it. The reasoning on the latter is that the baby was not yet born during the accident so it didn’t matter that it was pulled out of her later and lived six days outside her before its death.
So, Jorgensen’s defense team appealed still maintaining that the conviction was wrong based on the fact that the baby was not yet born at the time of the accident.
This week the Court of Appeals for the state of New York has agreed with the defense. In its decision the majority of the court determined that Jennifer Jorgensen cannot be charged with the murder of her child despite that it was alive outside her body for six days before it died. Her baby, the court ruled, wasn’t a human.
The dissenting judge, Eugene Fahey, was thoroughly disgusted by the majority ruling saying, “I cannot join in a result that analyzes our statutes to determine that a six-day-old child is not a person.”
At first blush this does seem to be an outrageous ruling. But maybe not for the reasons you might think.
Before we get too upset at the court, let’s understand that on a strict reading of the state’s law regarding who is and who is not a “person,” well, the fact is the court is probably right in the Jorgensen case. If the baby had died in utero as a result of the accident and was still born as a result, prosecutors would never have charged the mother with murder in the first place. Why? Because according to New York law a baby isn’t a person until its umbilical cord is cut and it is breathing on its own.
As the Appeals Court decision notes, state law holds that a person cannot be murdered unless they are “a human being who has been born and is alive.” In the case of Jorgensen, her baby was clearly not yet born at the time that she perpetrated the reckless behavior that eventually killed her baby.
But this is still an outrage quite despite that this particular decision is probably a correct reading of the law. In this case it is clearly the legislature’s fault, not the court’s, and shows how iffy it is to say that a human doesn’t count as human until after they are “born.”
After all, it is a horribly cold, heartless–yes, even inhuman–thing to say that a baby that can be born alive through medical technology doesn’t count as a “person.”
This law essentially says that a human is not a “person” until they pass through the portal of birth, as if the birth canal itself bestows “personhood” on human beings. This is such an arbitrary and silly claim that it makes a mockery of the law not to mention belittles life itself.
The idea that you are not a person on one side of the birth canal but you are on the other is absurd–especially in light of the capabilities of modern medicine.
This case lays bare the illogic of proclaiming that a human doesn’t count as a person until it clears the birth canal. And the reason these illogical backflips are made in legislatures across the country is merely to give sanction to abortion–which is murder, too, but that truth can’t be said for political reasons."
Link
Last edited by BedellBrave; 11-01-2015 at 12:22 AM.
It is somewhat ironic that one who supports the crushing of a fetus' skull in the womb should the mother desire that, then accuses me of being merely a touch more sensible than the ISIS beheaders.
Last edited by BedellBrave; 11-01-2015 at 12:23 AM.
and we have progress
we are accurately calling it a fetus now instead of a baby or a human
"For there is always light, if only we are brave enough to see it. If only we are brave enough to be it." Amanda Gorman
"When Fascism comes to America, it will be wrapped in the flag and carrying a cross"
An accommodation to the morally calloused.
Garmel (11-02-2015)
however you want to sell it
is fine by me
cause i am glad we are using the correct terms now
"For there is always light, if only we are brave enough to see it. If only we are brave enough to be it." Amanda Gorman
"When Fascism comes to America, it will be wrapped in the flag and carrying a cross"
Oh, so that you know and your semantic dodges are seen for what they are:
Human Fetus:
"a developing human from usually two months after conception to birth"
Fetus:
"an unborn offspring of a mammal, in particular an unborn human baby more than eight weeks after conception.
synonyms: embryo, unborn baby/child
i feel we are moving backwards now
we had progress there for a little while
"For there is always light, if only we are brave enough to see it. If only we are brave enough to be it." Amanda Gorman
"When Fascism comes to America, it will be wrapped in the flag and carrying a cross"
The regression isn't really regression; it's you stuck in your callousness and sophistry.
He simply defined the word you insist on using... the definition in enveloped in "human"
i am willing to move on my stance. i don't think you are
i am not deceiving anyone here or anyone else here. hell, my whole interaction with you recently in this thread is how i don't like a fetus being described as an actual human obviously
no ****? thanks for explaining what that post was to me. i had no idea
"For there is always light, if only we are brave enough to see it. If only we are brave enough to be it." Amanda Gorman
"When Fascism comes to America, it will be wrapped in the flag and carrying a cross"
You seemed to have trouble understanding
BedellBrave (11-04-2015)
Posting Permissions
Reply With Quote