[Texas] Judges OK prosecutions for fetal murder

Austin American-Statesman ^ | November 22, 2007 | Chuck Lindell

[Aristotelian]

The death of a fetus can be prosecuted as a murder, even if the fetus was too young to survive outside the womb, Texas' highest criminal court ruled Wednesday.

State laws declaring a fetus an individual — and therefore eligible for protection under statutes prohibiting murder — do not conflict with the U.S. Supreme Court's Roe v. Wade ruling that protects abortion rights, a unanimous Texas Court of Criminal Appeals ruled.

"The Supreme Court has emphasized that states may protect human life not only once the fetus has reached viability but 'from the outset of the pregnancy,' " the Texas court ruled in Lawrence v. State of Texas. "The Legislature is free to protect the lives of those whom it considers to be human beings."

State laws protecting fetuses do not apply to abortions, the court acknowledged. . . .

The fetal murder case stemmed from the 2004 Dallas County murder of Antwonyia Smith by her boyfriend, Terence Lawrence.

After learning that Smith was pregnant with his child, Lawrence told a second girlfriend that he would "take care of" the problem and shot Smith three times with a shotgun, court documents show.

Lawrence was convicted of capital murder for killing Smith and her 4- to 6-week-old fetus, and he was sentenced to life in prison.

Lawrence appealed, saying that his due-process rights were violated because he was prosecuted for two murders even though the fetus was not viable, or could not have lived outside the mother's womb. Supreme Court precedent in abortion cases has established that states have no compelling interest to interfere before a fetus is viable, Lawrence said.

The appeals court disagreed.

[Aristotelian]

California, for one, also allows presecution for the murder of a fetus by someone other than the mother or her physician. The illogic of this stance is obvious. Yet the legal system continues to ignore the rights of the unborn. Somehow, they rationalize it's okay for a mother and her doctor to kill a child, but if anyone else kills the baby, it's murder. Legalized infanticide. Horrible!

[Spktyr]

One step at a time, one step at a time.

The abortionists and antigunners didn’t get where they were by going whole hog all at once; they did it through incrementalism. Going whole hog hasn’t helped US either, so incrementalism is the order of the day.

[Aristotelian]

Lawyers, especially liberal lawyers, love DNA evidence. Well, what does the DNA evidence say? Gee wiz, the DNA of the mother and child are different. Does that mean that the fetus is a unique individual, entitled to all rights under the 14th Amendment?

[Dilbert San Diego]

These are the kinds of questions that the courts will deal with in the future, I’m sure. It sure seems like a big “disconnect” that in some cases a fetus is considered a human being, and in other cases, it’s simply tissue growing inside the mother.

[Sola Veritas]

“One step at a time, one step at a time.”

I understand what you mean. It is possible to put a positive spin on this because it IS a step in the right direction. This does set a precident.

However, it is disturbing that essentially the court said, “It is a human being (thus homocide) only if the potential mother wants it.”

[mtbopfuyn]

Lawrence told a second girlfriend that he would "take care of" the problem and shot Smith three times with a shotgun

That cretin should be arrested for everything the prosecution can think of including jaywalking to the courthouse.

[cowdog77]

“...it’s okay for a mother and her doctor to kill a child, but if anyone else kills the baby, it’s murder.”
____________________________________
Amazing, isn’t it? Woe to those who call right wrong and wrong right. We will be judged as a nation by a righteous God for this insanity.