[Alabama]Woman who miscarried after being shot in stomach faces homicide charge

R13...

Honorary Master
Joined
Aug 4, 2008
Messages
30,186
Surely even if they think she's culpable they must still prosecute the shooter for attempted murder at a minimum?
 

cerebus

Honorary Master
Joined
Nov 5, 2007
Messages
36,234
It is actually a perfectly consistent ruling, if you decide that a foetus has the same rights as a born child.
 

Blackhand

Well-Known Member
Joined
Dec 22, 2004
Messages
491
This makes sense in the context of their laws. If you commit a crime, and as a result of that crime people are killed, you can be charged with their murder even if you didn’t kill them.

Best example I saw was some years ago, a bunch of teenagers broke into an elderly man’s house not realizing he was home. The man opened fire and killed one of them, injured another. The survivors were charged with felony murder and are facing life, their criminal actions directly resulted in the death of their friend. https://www.google.co.za/amp/s/amp.theguardian.com/us-news/2015/feb/26/felony-murder-teenager-55-years-jail-indiana

I wish we had similar laws here.

The article is just spinning it. From what I understand, the women being charged assaulted someone, that person rightfully defended themselves. As a result of the initial crime of assault the baby died. Charged with assault and murder of the baby. In my opinion, this is the law actually working.
 

Nanfeishen

Executive Member
Joined
Apr 8, 2006
Messages
7,295
Anti-abortionists turning the shooting of pregnant woman into a propoganda case.
Pathetic and petty.
 

Sollie

Expert Member
Joined
Apr 20, 2005
Messages
4,283
The americans are slowly but surely becoming just as messed up as the arabs. I would have expected something like this from one of the arab shtholes, not the US.
Shielding behind kids when attacking people? Oh wait, it's already being done.
 

sparticus

Expert Member
Joined
Jun 11, 2007
Messages
2,193
An interesting perspective. Not sure of the details of the fight but if the mother initiated it, could the shooter claim self defense? Not saying I necessarily agree with the charges but if you willfully put your unborn child at risk by assaulting someone knowing they might retaliate, I can perhaps see where they are coming from by charging her...
I dont know hey, 5 shots is not self defense normally
 

daveza

Honorary Master
Joined
Apr 5, 2004
Messages
36,038
Says she started the fight but mentions no weapons held by her ?

How do you claim self defense against an unarmed person you shot five times ?
 

noxibox

Honorary Master
Joined
Apr 6, 2005
Messages
17,597
Sounds like someone might be looking to score some political points. Probably looking at getting themselves elected to some office.

This makes sense in the context of their laws. If you commit a crime, and as a result of that crime people are killed, you can be charged with their murder even if you didn’t kill them.
Unless you caused their death you should not be charged with causing their death.

Best example I saw was some years ago, a bunch of teenagers broke into an elderly man’s house not realizing he was home. The man opened fire and killed one of them, injured another. The survivors were charged with felony murder and are facing life, their criminal actions directly resulted in the death of their friend. https://www.google.co.za/amp/s/amp.theguardian.com/us-news/2015/feb/26/felony-murder-teenager-55-years-jail-indiana
That is utterly ridiculous. The only time such a charge makes any sense is a situation where the individual who died was coerced or they were mentally handicapped and someone tricked them into being present. Otherwise they made a decision to be there. You're suggesting punishing other people for the choices you make.

I wish we had similar laws here.
If you're in favour of collective punishment why stop there? Do like the gangsters do and punish their family too. Hell why no blame the whole community?

The article is just spinning it. From what I understand, the women being charged assaulted someone, that person rightfully defended themselves.
Unless the woman was armed or in some other way an imminent threat to their life they had no justification.

In my opinion, this is the law actually working.
Actually it sounds like a very dangerous slippery slope. Women endanger their foetuses every day. Just getting into a car is a risk. So where does it stop? Keeping in mind there are already lunatics who'd like to punish women if their foetus dies.
 

Blackhand

Well-Known Member
Joined
Dec 22, 2004
Messages
491
That is utterly ridiculous. The only time such a charge makes any sense is a situation where the individual who died was coerced or they were mentally handicapped and someone tricked them into being present. Otherwise they made a decision to be there. You're suggesting punishing other people for the choices you make.
It doesn't seem ridiculous to me? If I decide to break into a house with my friend and the homeowner shoots and kills my friend in the process of the burglary while defending his home and property, I would get charged with murder and the homeowner is left alone.

Unless the woman was armed or in some other way an imminent threat to their life they had no justification.
They don't talk about the degree of the assault (slap vs beating), but I believe in their state you are not obliged to retreat if you are assaulted (stand your ground) and can respond with lethal force if someone is attacking you.

If you're in favour of collective punishment why stop there? Do like the gangsters do and punish their family too. Hell why no blame the whole community?
Only those involved in the crime.

Actually it sounds like a very dangerous slippery slope. Women endanger their foetuses every day. Just getting into a car is a risk. So where does it stop? Keeping in mind there are already lunatics who'd like to punish women if their foetus dies.
Obviously everyday life includes many potential risks for a foetus. We aren't talking about "risky" behaviour, we are talking about violent criminal behaviour.
 
Top