kellinator | How fucking far can you abdicate responsibility?!

Skip to Main Content

Current Mood: infuriated

How fucking far can you abdicate responsibility?!

http://www.cnn.com/2002/US/Midwest/09/23/video.child.beating/index.html

"The woman caught on videotape repeatedly striking her 4-year-old daughter in the rear of a sport utility vehicle is due in court this afternoon. Despite admitting the beating and saying there was 'no excuse' for it, she's expected to plead not guilty to felony child battery charges."

Is the state of society so bad that this moron thinks she can admit to a heinous crime on NATIONAL FUCKING TELEVISION and STILL claim she is innocent in a court of law?

Flat | Top-Level Comments Only

Not only will the dirty cunt plead not-guilty (excuse my language, but nothing upsets me more then child abuse), but how idiotic for the courts to even listen to such a story with the blatent evidence in front of their blind little eyes.
What a waste of time and money, and sense.

shes not denying that she beat her kid or did wrong...

shes saying that the charge against her is incorrect. that she does not agree that she should be brought to that charge, but probably a lesser one.

shes probably shooting for a misdemeanor.

That's an important point.

Pleading not guilty in a court of law is not equivalent of saying "I didn't do it," it's really "I am not guilty of this charge as it is defined by law"

For example, say you hit a person with your car and kill them, and it's totally an accident. You would pleadn not guilty to, say, 1st or 2nd degree murder, because technicly the crime would be vehihcular manslaughter.

On the surface it seems like the law is needlessly pedantic, but such distinctions maintain consistency in that simmilar crimes are treated in more simmilar ways, which supports fair trials.

Point taken, but if she intends to plead not guilty, why in the fuck did she go on national television and basically admit to the crime?

she knows she did wrong. she agrees with that.

again, she is saying she is not guilty of the charge they have given her. she never said she wasnt guilty of hitting the kid. in admitting she did wrong, she is saying that she did hit the kid.

she, more her lawyer, is shooting for a lesser charge for lesser time. this is why lawyers get big money.

she, more her lawyer, is shooting for a lesser charge for lesser time.

Yeah, you hit the nail on the head.

The headline bugged me too...but from a legal prospective, I realize
she *has* to plead not guilty to this just for...well, procedural reasons. Hence why her attorney calls it a formality. My best guess is they're currently researching the avaliable case law in order to find some precedent to establish this as a "crime of passion" (using that strictly in the common law sense) type of thing.

Criminal law is odd...its all statutory. Like...all of it. Thus, the case law can be make or break, esp. if its in your jurisdiction. My guess is they'll be plea bargaining because I highly doubt there is going to be ANY case law that would help her. (Kelli, you work in a law library! Use your westlaw password to reserach it ;-) ) Plea bargaining might give her visitation rights (at the least) and will be less of a charge on her record.

I understand why it all pisses you off though...I remember interning at the county court in undergrad and working on a case involving the rape of a 12 year old girl -- at school -- by her 14 year old boyfriend. He admitted to raping her, but it went down on his record as "attempted rape" because of the plea bargain. He got a 3 year sentence, at least 2 years shorter than what it would have been had he been convicted of rape. Plus, he doesn't have to list himself as a sex offender that way...fucked up, huh?

(then again he had an IQ of 72 so....well...there might have been another ground to pursue with that. but thats a WHOLE other issue of the law.)

we all sell our souls to the devil, one way or another, to get off easy...

sad but true...

not to mention that the charges you are brought against and their penality can determine if you spend the rest of your life in jail or die at the hands of the state or do community service.

theres a reason law students spend so much time studying.

I mean, sure, I beat the hell out of my kid. You saw me do it. But... I shouldn't be punished to harshly because... um, I... um, didn't mean to! That's it! I didn't mean to beat my child!

It was the DEV-ILL!!

don't you love her excuse "I just lost my temper" and you wont do it again because....??

we heard a sound bite of her protesting sending her child to foster parents, because "it was my fault, why punish her?!" exactly, lets not pusish the kid. give her to someone who WONT hit her for being a 4 year old.

my parents spanked me as a kid. hell they even beat me at some points...

i grew up to be a productive individual.

i hate that society has taken this "soft, safe, protecting" side and spoil kids rather than giving them a good spanking. parents have done it for years and most of us have turned out okay. suddenly we change that? blah whatever.

spare the rod, spoil the child. personality, im tired of whiny kids.

spanking is different than beating. I was spanked, I think its fine. but I don't think beating a defenseless child is going to do anything but hurt and terrify them; its not discipline

What? You've never done anything regrettable in a fit of temper? She clearly said she wants to go to parenting classes and learn to deal with the situation.

She was protesting that her daughter was not allowed to go to other family members. Instead the little girl is being sent to stay with people she doesn't know. Frankly I'd be pretty worried too... there is a long history of foster parents who abuse their charges.

This woman's sister -- the child's aunt -- stood by and watched while the incident occurred. She apparently didn't think enough of it to say anything either for her niece's sake OR her sister's. If she had said something, it's likely the family would not be in this mess. Doesn't sound like a capable caregiver to me.

Yes, I've done things I regret, as I imagine we all have. But punching a four-year-old in the face (which is what the video appears to show) is, I believe, beyond the pale. No matter what you think of spanking, no child should be punched in the face. It could cause serious damage.

Right now she's pleading not guilty to fellony battery, and once medical evidence is presented in the courtroom, a decision will be made as to the extent of the crime. Gut feeling is that the charge will be reduced to a misdemeanor, and the family will come under the eye of Child Protective Services who will arange for counseling and assign a social worker, and so forth.

Foster care routenely spits out psychologically damaged children with no family or support structure, who get dropped out of the system at 18 with no future. Children outside of infancy have abysmal adoption rates.

If she can be taught to be a competent care giver, it is in the child's best interest to do so. but a criminal court's jurisdiction extends only to the scope of this incident.

WHEN did I ever say a child should be punched in the face?!?

just because I'm willing to give her the sympathy only another parent can give; because I applaud her courage in admitting what she did was wrong and wanting help for herself??

I'm with

satia on this one people... there but for the grace of god...

Maybe I would be more willing to sympathize with this woman if she had shown any remorse before she got caught. And I do feel sorry for her. But I do not understand the rush to vindicate her and to take her at her word. My parents lost their temper with my brother and me. They didn't punch us in the face.

I admit freely that I don't have children and I don't know what kind of parent would be. Maybe I'd be worse. But that doesn't mean I can't recognize when a parent crosses the line.

how do you know she didn't show remorse? Because she didn't rush into a police department five minutes later and demand to be taken in?

You don't know what she did before she was taken in, you only know what you've been told by the media. I'm sorry but when the media makes such a blatent emotionally appealing "mistake" as saying "pleading innocent" I'm going to be VERY suspicious.

No one is rushing to vindicate her, we are simply not ready to execute her until we've heard more. I am amazed that she has publicly admitting to being in the wrong, wanting to get help and describing her appalled reaction when seeing what she had done.

After this, I can begin to understand why people hide themselves and especially their mistakes... there's no pacifying some people.

What I am seeing more than anything is a country being appalingly manipulated by the media. I think what she did was wrong too... but that doesn't mean she doesn't have the right to a fair trial. It doesn't mean she can't mend her ways. It doesn't mean her daughter doesn't love her. It doesn't even mean she can't turn around and have a happy family. So far as I can see, this ONE incident doesn't even mean she's a horrible abusive parent. Maybe she is, and maybe she isn't... I'm not getting out the tar and feathers until I've seen evidence that goes beyond ONE incident that she admits to doing wrong.

Isn't there supposed to be something about "christian charity" and maybe "forgiveness with contrition" and oh yeah, how about "innocent until proven guilty"

...and I'm not even a christian
???

i guess then you just have better parents than the most of us.

(which is what the video appears to show)

it appears. believe 1/2 what you see. you cant see for certain if the girl is being popped on the ass or the face, so dont make it into something its not.

i think its real easy to point a finger and lecture others bout their child raising methods, especially when we have no kids of our own.

Why else would I have added that parenthetical clause if I weren't acknowledging that there's a possibility I misinterpreted?

I've never struck anyone in anger, not even a child. I was hit in anger as a child, and I won't do that.

(deleted comment)

...subculture of thieving incestuous nomadic gypsies

YEAH! how DARE anyone claim persecution against those thieving gypsies!!!

We treat those scumbags as good as all the other scumbags in America!!!

"Remember too that she's part of a subculture of thieving incestuous nomadic gypsies, who are constantly claiming persecution at the hands of non-gypsy America."

Is this a joke?

(deleted comment)

Ahhh that much I can accept. Thank you for the clarification.

Notice the headline is "Mom... pleading Innocent.."

There is no such thing as "pleading innocent"

She is quoted as saying her LAWYER told her to plead NOT GUILTY (which lawyers generally do) to charges of child FELONY BATTERY. Felony battery is a SERIOUS charge that implies irreversible damage and carries the stigma of felony conviction for LIFE. She gets convicted of that, what little lifestyle they have can be kissed goodbye forever.

Apparently the child had no marks on her (even if it was eight days after the event; a bruise that heals in eight days is not a bad bruise) and therefore, as wrong as her behavior was, it probably wasn't felony battery.

She herself is appalled at her own behavior, knows it was wrong and wants to learn how to better deal with the situation. What would make you feel better? If she killed herself from remorse?

Heh, emotionalism. I agree with you how the media presentation of this event differs wildly from what will and should happen inside the courtroom.

Fair and impartial trials, and basis on British common law instead of Napoleonic Law are some of the foundations of the "american way of life" - They *are* important, and are some of the most major lines of defense in protecting our rights.

In the end, her guilt or innocence on this charge of felony battery should be decided by a court of law.

No matter what the world thinks of her parenting skills, or whether or not child protective services should step in, is a completely different matter.

She can admit publicly that she needs counseling and help learning parenting skills, etc. She can also, without any hypocracy, plead not guilty to commiting felony battery as defined by the law in this case. The two are entirely different questions.

This whole thing seems to be a really sad story, but denying her a fair trial would be an even wider reaching tragedy.

If she's so concerned about her right to a fair trial, then why is she making all these statements in the media?

Because people who feel as you do would be jumping all over her even worse than you are now if she kept her trap shut and said nothing. In light of the video evidence, what the hell else do you expect her to say?

As it's been said SEVERAL TIMES, it is her LAWYER who has plead her not-guilty and HER LAWYER is concerned about her getting a fair trial and HER LAWYER who probably wishes she'd shut up to the media. That is the JOB of a lawyer - like it or not.

As I noticed, she didn't say anything about getting a fair trial or whether she was framed or what-ever-other excuse many criminals come up with to mollify the media. She seems to be overly concerned with owning up to her behavior, admitting that she did wrong and correcting it. She is also concerned for her daughters well-being.

(deleted comment)

wow... you are certainly reading a lot into a very short story.

And yes, I believe if a bruise heals completely in only eight days then it was not deep tissue damage. You disagree that's your right. You needn't be nasty about it.

She goes on TV, sheds a few crocodile tears, and apologizes.... Suddenly the jury pool is swimming with apologists, people who think that "a bruise that heals in eight days is not a bad bruise".

Well, that can also work AGAINST them...

most juries are picked by both attorney's asking questions to weed down people they don't want (its called vois dire, or something to that affect). generally, a big number will be called, the court will pull 15 or so names out of a hat and the attorney's ask questions like "were you beaten as a child" "do you approve of capital punishment" and eliminate those that have a bias towards the other side. I once witnessed this for a stupid little tort case involving a relativly minor car accident. The questions they asked ranged from "have you ever been hurt in a car accident" to "how familar are you with that exact strech of road?"

so...i wouldn't neccesarily speak of media spin being a lawyer's job because in the vast majority of cases (and there are exceptions --::cough:: OJ! ::cough::) this isn't at all true.

the same fucking reason anyone does. because once you get in the medias eye, you get trashed left and right and treated like shit and you get to the point where you just wanna scream at them and try to make yourself seem like a normal person.

Well, this one would be great for

ljdrama!!!

It is hard to know what someone feels behind closed doors. I know that she said she was shocked when she saw the tape, that she wasn't aware, in the heat of the moment, how bad it was . . .

I know some people have a hard time being vulnerable in public and, under the advice of her lawyer, she is probably being told what to say and what not to say.

Hell yeah. If I'd realized my personal opinions on a case a thousand miles away and how it reflects on the way many people don't take responsibility for their actions were going to get me accused of being a mom-hater and a cold unsympathetic unfeeling bitch, I would have kept my mouth shut.

You realize I'm not out to get you (or anyone else I know), right?

Jeepers! Who called you that?!?

I'll beat em up!!!

We may be disagreeing, or whatever, but I'd never call you those things!

Whoever called you that is WAY out of line...

Coincidence . . . I had been thinking about it all morning as the office watercoolers talked their way into a frenzy and the more I thought about it the more I wanted to write out what I was thinking.

Last time I checked my toes were fine.

What this story is about more than anything is that CNN is attempting to strike an emotional chord with everyone in attempts to get better ratings. It is simply a story of a mother who lost her temper, has since realized the error of her ways and is attempting to make ammends a learn from it. However, CNN would have you believe the world is coming to an end to keep you glued to your TV and or their website. I am more discusted at the media than the mother by far.

i havne't seen it. I know too many parents that have beaten thier children and never stopped. I think its admirable that she wants help. If she really does. IF she is a "Gypsy " in the Irish Traveler sense of the word, as some of you seem to think, they really truly devalue girls in thier society. I only live about 45 min. from Murphy Village in South Carolina. And I hate to say it but that sort of thing may be extreme but it is by no means unusual. Girls wear adult type makeup at about age 7. They also marry girls off at the youngest age allowable by law in whatever state they are in. In South Carolina for years they were giving parental consent to marry off girls at 13. Another part of thier initiation into adulthood is stealing something, typically in the realm of shoplifting. This is not a depiction by any means of all Irish Travelers. I am sure there are many from those blood lines that are truly good people. This is an overview of what I know from watching that particular subculture.

Flat | Top-Level Comments Only