I cannot join in a result that analyzes our statutes to determine that a six-day-old child is not a person...
These Appeals Court Judges should be hung!
So, even when the mother WANTS the baby, the State can now call it NOT a baby?
Had another vehicle hit her and the baby was killed, that person should be on trial and I would vote to convict.
Physically sickening.
Sick sick people, these judges.
A dangerous extension of “the right to choose” if this stands.
Freepmail wagglebee to subscribe or unsubscribe from the moral absolutes ping list.
FreeRepublic moral absolutes keyword search
New York is where Satan goes to vacation.
Follow that line of “reasoning” to its logical conclusion. A sixty year old progressive is not a person and may be killed in the public interest.
It is unfortunate such a ruling was forced but those involved in making the decision seem to have been stuck between a rock and a hard place.
Indeed as the majority opinion points out, if the conviction had been allowed to stand, it might encourage future mothers in such a situation to not elect to have a cesarean, even to implement life saving measures for the baby, because she might be charged with manslaughter if the baby dies later.
If she (or any woman) had been in a head on collision with a tree, so no one else died as a result, should she still be tried and convicted of manslaughter? Just because her baby died? And the only reason the baby died outside the womb was because she elected to have a cesarean? So if she didn’t have a cesarean she shouldn’t be charged but if she does she should?
No the way I see it the judge’s decision at least removes any legal threat for pregnant women in car accidents who wish to try to save their baby.
Like I said it’s a rock and a hard place situation. (I’m assuming throughout all this she wasn’t intoxicated or anything like that).
How long before someone who kills a baby goes free while someone who kills a baby animal goes to jail? Wait. we’re already there.
Hard to argue against this. It's nice to see that some NY Judges actually recall what each branch's Constitutional duties are.
(Of course, it reads to me like they're hiding behind this correct logic, but I'll appreciate the rare reasoning anyway.)
She swerved into oncoming traffic and killed 2 other people. The Prosecutor seems to think that she needs more names added to her list of victims, and wants to tinker with the statutes to do it. That takes a lot of time and effort. This Prosecutor is doing it for some reason.
I still agree with the majority decision here, sympathies to the unborn aside. Let the Legislature change the laws, not judges and prosecutors.
Don’t you have to stop and pause at a few things: Shouldn’t the NY legislature be the ones to make this a crime? We are tired of rogue prosecutors coming up with theories of liability, whether it involves using Sarbanes-Oxley to prosecute under-sized fish (Yates decision) or using Chemical Weapons laws to go after a jilted lover (Bond). I don’t want courts making up laws, and I don’t want prosecutors creating laws through enforcement strategies.
Here we go again w/ courts/judges reading into that which is not there: deeming the Law didn’t INTEND one way or another.
B.S. What does the Law SAY. Words have meaning and they should have meant EXACTLY what the Law said
Course, now, the lawyers are all in a tizzy for all the $$ coming their way from clients convicted on the basis that the child (in-utero) is a person and had possibly years added to their sentence.
When will it be a person? At 5? Or at 18? Or if it a conservative, never?
’Carly Fiorina Was Right’: Group Releases Full Abortion Video Mentioned in GOP Debate
http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/3344264/posts
**WARNING: GRAPHIC CONTENT**
{See the link above which includes actual photos and videos}
...
The graphic video of a “fully formed fetus… its legs kicking” appears in episode 3 of a multi-part documentary produced by the Center for Medical Progress (CMP). This video shows former tissue procurement specialist Holly O’Donnell describing how she was shown an intact fetus with a beating heart. O’Donnell says of this moment, “I don’t know if that constitutes it’s technically dead, or it’s alive.” O’Donnell was then asked to harvest brain tissue from the same fetus by cutting through its face.
As O’Donnell narrates her gruesome experience, the video shifts to 10 seconds of a fetus in a metal bowl which is still moving. The video is clearly labeled as coming from the Grantham Collection & Center for Bioethical Reform. It is not video of the fetus O’Donnell is describing but was inserted by the producers to illustrate what a living fetus at this gestation would look like.
Whether the decision is right or wrong on it's actual issue, the issue isn't about the status of a six day old child.
Despite the best efforts of hospital personnel, the baby died six days later.
An autopsy confirmed that the cause of death was due to injuries sustained in the accident.... Following deliberations, the jury returned a verdict finding
....a six-day-old child is not a person
-PJ