Your child dies in the snow. You're a "child murderer"

[ditchdj]

http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/28430359/

-----Pretty strong label the prosecutor's slapping on this guy if you asked me. Although I DO acknowledge that he exercised really bad judgement in this situation, it's not exactly like he's at the local tavern celebrating with buddies over cold brewskies over this.

[Greenday]

Murderer? No. That'd be an inaccurate description. I don't think he was trying to kill his kids. But I think he was reckless in that who the hell lets their kids walk that far in below freezing temperatures alone? A 10 year old and a 11 year old should not be walking without supervision down a highway for any reason. I don't see why they couldn't have stayed with him. Reckless endangerment, yes. Manslaughter, maybe. 2nd degree murder, no.

[AFPheonix]

I think that was the closest charge they could come up with, since he is definitely guilty of felony child endangerment. He probably won't get life in jail. He definitely should get a few years though, just to keep him from reproducing for awhile.

They need to come up with another set of charges just for the criminally stupid. It would have been one thing if he had at least called the mom to let her know what was up, but he didn't. Further, when he got the truck unstuck, he turned around and went home, didn't bother to call or anything to make sure the kids had made it ok. It's a miracle that the boy survived at all, frankly. Especially since that snow was knee deep on adult male searchers.
Someone over on the Something Awful forums pointed out that had the girl successfully made it back to where the truck had been, no one would have been there to greet her since dipshit turned around and went home. What a horrible thought.

[Lingering Grin]

While I can agree he's not necessarily a murderer. I can see where they got the murder charge from, and I can't say that I disagree with the charge itself.

I'm not sure how it is in other states, but I know here (Florida) that if you commit a felony, and someone dies, you can be charged for murder. Doesn't matter what the felony was, or how they died.

You rob a bank, and a little old lady has a heart attack? You get a murder charge.


So, this guy committed a felony (Felony Child Endangerment), and the kid died as a result... hence 2nd degree murder.

I'm sure other states have similar laws.

[Flyndaran]

Also, here in the U.S. the prosecution will often make a charge they know they couldn't prove just so they have a starting point from which to bargain with the defense.

[Lyra]

Wow...just...wow.

Ya know...I waited 12 YEARS to have my son.

I didn't "exhaust every possiblity" in order to have children but I did dream about it. I wanted to be a mom. Not crazy desperate wanted to be a mom, just calmly quietly REALLY wanted someone to call me "Mommy".

I do feel for the man's loss. Nobody should have to bury a child.

But the sheer mind numbing stupidity? Sending your children out in hip deep snow, to walk ten miles to their mother's house, and then DRIVING THE OTHER DIRECTION when you dug your happy ass out?

I'm sorry. I can't come up with a coherent debate type statement.

Well...maybe...

If he really loves his children? There is absolutely no need for a murder charge. He'll be punishing himself far more harshly for the rest of his life than any court ever could.

Very sad.

[Slytovhand]

They need to come up with another set of charges just for the criminally stupid.

Wouldn't that put about 80% of your population in jail?? ('your' meaning pretty much everywhere on the planet).

I presume that the father was a complete moron, but just to put in the possibility that he wasn't - I'm going to assume that the children's names were indicative of a certain thought pattern of upbringing -which includes teaching children responsibility and self-survival at a very young age. 11 and 12 are old enough to suvive - if taught correctly from a much earlier age. It's been that way amongst humanity for hundreds of thousands of years before our civilisation came along.

But perhaps a charge of "Criminal Negligence leading to Death"?? Which pretty much amounts to man-slaughter. Murder won't hold... it presumes intent - and clearly there is none. Only stupidity.

[Boozy]

I presume that the father was a complete moron, but just to put in the possibility that he wasn't - I'm going to assume that the children's names were indicative of a certain thought pattern of upbringing -which includes teaching children responsibility and self-survival at a very young age.

Rule #1 of surviving harsh winter conditions: Find shelter instead of wandering around outside in three-feet of snow and sub-zero temperatures.

The guy was just an idiot.

[BlaqueKatt]

If he really loves his children? There is absolutely no need for a murder charge. He'll be punishing himself far more harshly for the rest of his life than any court ever could.

and because we can't read minds-this mindset-that "there is no possible way anyone could feel any different about their children than I do" is why we have people getting away with murdering their children by leaving them in a car on a hot day.

The statement "they'll punish themselves more" is the same one the court system uses to not charge the parents in those cases.

It's an easy way to murder your child for whatever reason and get away scott free.

Start charging them with criminally negligent homicide and I bet you'll see a huge decrease in incidents.

Heck you leave your dog in the car and it dies you are normally charged with felony animal abuse, do it with your kid "and you've suffered enough".

[Flyndaran]

If a stranger does something and gets X punishment, then a family member culturally trusted to care for someone should get X plus, not minus punishment.

[RecoveringKinkoid]

The more I think about this, the more I have to wonder about the guy's story and his intent. His story is just full of holes.

Unless the man is mentally ill, mentally handicapped, or in some way incompetent, NONE of his actions make much sense. I think there is far more to this story than what we are seeing.

[Slytovhand]

I hear you RK... (btw - good to see you on this board )

My gut instinct said that he and the ex weren't on the best of terms, and he wasn't a really good father because of it. In that case, he's got the kids because of 'duty' rather than real love and affection. If that's the case, it would make sense that he'd sort of just shove them off... not intentionally to kill them, but certainly with less empathy, and a bit of a cruelty streak - as if he resented them somewhere deep inside (perhaps in a way to get back at her).

Course - this is just me and a theory - and could be completely crap!!!

[AFPheonix]

looking at his picture, he'd probably smoked a bowl or three before going out.

[Girly]

Heck you leave your dog in the car and it dies you are normally charged with felony animal abuse, do it with your kid "and you've suffered enough".

In this state, it's not a felony.

Gross negligence is a crime though, and this would certainly fall under that!

[ExiledV20]

But perhaps a charge of "Criminal Negligence leading to Death"?? Which pretty much amounts to man-slaughter. Murder won't hold... it presumes intent - and clearly there is none. Only stupidity.

2nd Degree Murder/Homicide is considered to be one of the following (according to Black's):

1) an intentional killing that is not premeditated or planned, nor committed in a reasonable "heat of passion"

2) killing caused by dangerous conduct and the offender's obvious lack of concern for human life.

This case clearly falls into the 2nd category. The death was caused by the dangerous conduct of the father, who should have exercised due caution and not sent minors under his care (note the term minors, very important there) out alone in such conditions. His lack of concern for their life is evidenced by the actions he took after getting the truck unstuck and his failure to notify the mother that the children should be enroute.

So, really, the charge of 2nd Degree Murder pretty much applies on the face of it.