Posted on 06/13/2007 7:13:19 PM PDT by monomaniac
LOS ANGELES, June 13, 2007 (LifeSiteNews.com) – A Los Angeles judge threw out infanticide charges in a case against a USC student who dumped her newborn son into a dumpster a mere 42 second drive away from a “safe-surrender” station that could have saved her son’s life.
Holly Ashcraft, a 22-year-old architecture major at the University of Southern California (USC) has stood trial since her arrest in October 2005 after DNA evidence proved the newborn’s body, found by a homeless man sifting through trash behind the 29th Street Café, was her own son.
Los Angeles Superior Court Judge Samuel Mayerson had tentatively denied a request by Ashcraft’s attorney Mark Geragos yesterday to dismiss the murder charge, but then dismissed the charges Tuesday. Mayerson concurred with the March decision of Los Angeles Superior Court Judge David Wesley that the evidence supported only the lesser charge of involuntary manslaughter against Ashcraft.
Mayerson said prosecutors could no longer try Ashcraft since charges in the case had been dismissed twice—first murder, and then involuntary manslaughter—the limit under state law.
Geragos, who has represented convicted friends and associates of former President Bill Clinton, as well as the infamous Scott Peterson, among others, celebrated the ruling with Ashcraft and her family.
However Deputy District Attorney Franco Barrata disputed Mayerson’s reasoning, saying the two charges were different and allowable under the law. Barrata has indicated he may soon file a writ of appeal to the Appellate Court to get the trial back on track.
Baratta’s prosecution team cited evidence from the coroner showing Ashcraft had given birth to a live infant, not a stillborn child as she had claimed. Deputy medical examiner David B. Whiteman gave expert testimony saying the baby’s lungs were partially inflated, a tell-tale sign he was born alive.
Geragos on the other hand brought in two medical experts from USC's Keck School of Medicine to dispute the coroner’s final autopsy report. They described the murder charges as "a miscarriage of justice" against Ashcraft.
This is the second time that Ashcraft has been under investigation for the death of a newborn infant. Police first investigated her in April 2004, after she arrived bleeding at a downtown hospital and doctors determined she had given birth. Ashcraft also claimed then that baby was stillborn, but its body was never found, depriving police of evidence to arrest and charge her with a crime.
California has a “Safe Surrender” law that allows parents to deliver unwanted babies anonymously and without penalty to prepared institutions such as hospitals and fire stations. The law says that if a newborn is left anywhere other than a Safe Surrender site then the parent is subject to criminal prosecution.
According to the site, Independent Sources, Ashcraft’s second deceased baby was found a mere 42 second drive away from Fire Station No. 15 according to Google Maps. Police said the baby was found dead still attached to his umbilical cord. (http://independentsources.com/2005/10/16/holly-ashcraft)
Distgusting case but Geragos is not a “Clinton” lawyer.
What, after she does this for the fifth or sixth time someone may realize something’s up?
Intentionally misleading title.
ping
The Defenders of Perjurers, Pedophiles, and High-Profile Freaks.
There’s a special place in Hell for the Geragos’/Allreds’ of the world.
If it is not fanticide, or murder, or manslaughter, what is it?
The Defenders of Perjurers, Pedophiles, and High-Profile Freaks.
There’s a special place in Hell for the Geragos’/Allreds’ of the world.
Distgusting case but Geragos is not a “Clinton” lawyer
Yea I agree. That totally confused me and devalued the story. It has never been mentioned before except in this story. I think the media needs to be careful in their stories so it does not take away the actual point of the story.
Since I didn’t see otherwise, I’m going to conclude that she has not been locked up the whole time. This means that Paris Hilton will serve more time than Ms. Ashcroft. Didn’t take long for me to see an example, either :(
It was not a “request”; it was a motion to dismiss.
Do you get your news from any source other than LifeSiteNews.com?
nice homepage link
Well what about Susan McClinton ?
‘Doubt it. This is LA.
In this case, "the media" happens to be LifeSiteNews.com exclusively.
Here's a snippet from their website:
LifeSiteNews.com is a non-profit Internet service dedicated to issues of culture, life, and family.
LifeSiteNews.com...was originally started by Campaign Life Coalition (CLC), a Canadian national pro-life organization headquartered in Toronto, Canada.
So, I guess their reporting isn't totally unbiased. But then...whose is?
That still does not mean he is a “Clinton” Lawyer. Was he appointed by Clinton? I mean one thing I will agree on is that he goes after cases that makes him very “Hollywood”. If the story concentrated on his love of publicity than it would have been more credible.
Yea, she will star in a movie about her poor childhood and how abused she was and how unfair it is to arrest her and bing her to trial, afterall it was only a baby.
That is true.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.