• Welcome! The TrekBBS is the number one place to chat about Star Trek with like-minded fans.
    If you are not already a member then please register an account and join in the discussion!

Girl Dies on Cold Walk; Dad Charged With Murder

He got the truck moving....and he didn't try to go FIND THEM? :wtf: This is the same stupid shit as people leaving children in hot cars with the windows rolled up after "forgetting" to drop them off at day care.

Charge the bastard. And charge the idiots who forget their children in hot cars as well. Maybe their damned priorities will finally be their children and families.
 
How in hell does sombody send their kids off to walk 10 miles in the snow?

My father and my aunts and uncles, and everyone they went to school with in rural Wisconsin did that all the time at that age. Not daily, but not an uncommon occurrence.
 
^By my understanding, second degree murder doesn't require premeditation towards murder perse. It's basically saying there was malicious intent behind the death, but a fatality wasn't the intended goal. Only with first degree murder is there a genuine, malicious intent to kill.

Murder second degree is a depraved, wicked indifference to human life. A person knows an action could cause death, willfully disregards this possibility (manslaughter), but does it in a way that basically shows he didn't give a damn to whether or not anyone lived. Murder 2nd Degree seems harsh for this guy. I certainly could see criminally negligent homicide and, if you are really thirsting for blood, manslaughter. Not really anything more, though.

Either way, he should go to jail, imo.
 
Well, this guy is an idiot; he needs a mental health assessment, at the very least. The charge should be manslaughter or criminal negligence.

I wonder if that "other adult" is being charged as an accessory.
 
I'm not seeing what greater good that jail time for this guy would serve.

What would be the goal?

I, in part, agree but at the same time such a sentence would serve as a mindful deterant towards others. But I think the charges are trumped up, his bail is absurdly high, and it was obviously an "accident" a extremely negligent "accident" but he didn't intend to kill his kids with his actions. At the worst he's guilty of manslaughtger, child abandonment, endagerment of the welfare of a child. (Natually double counts on those last couple.

But Murder 2? No way.

I hope the PD assigned to him is damn good.
 
I'm not seeing what greater good that jail time for this guy would serve.

What would be the goal?

I agree. His daughter's death should be all he needs for punishment. However, he did seem upset when he realized he could spend the rest of his life in prison. So he's more concerned for himself at this point. And perhaps that's the real problem - he's self absorbed. I don't know.

The incident is probably being used as a learning moment by the good parents out there. I know my mother used a tragedy to teach me something.

Incidents like this are such heartbreakers. :(
 
Read his arler from CNN.

So sad. But I have to agree 2nd degree mudrer fits. It more or less is meant to be
for "exterme stupidity that leads to a death" sort of like drinking a ton and then driving and hitting someone.

Harsh as it seems, and yes, he is probably suffering, but he did send this poor child to her death even if that was not his intent.

I strongly agree with stiff penalties--especially when an adult uses his power over a child so horribly. I believe that society MUST vigorously defend those who cannot defend themselves.

An act of forgetfulness is one thing. I have heard someone speak once, who accidentally left a child in a hot car, and in THAT case yes...I would agree the death itself was enough punishment. There was no intent in that case--hence the highest charge that would have made sense would be manslaughter and even then, I think that leniency would be appropriate in some cases.

But in this case, there was clear intent. There was a willful action. Was the intent necessarily that the children die? No, but this man put his own well-being ahead of theirs. As a father, indeed, as a MAN, he should have put their lives ahead of his own, even to the point of being willing to die for them if necessary. But instead, he sent them to risk themselves when they were more vulnerable both physically and mentally. He cast them to the void, come whatever may. And now that one is dead, he should pay the price.

This is very much akin to a "heat-of-passion" murder: someone who may not have intended to kill, but got out of control and used deadly force. The act is done; it can't be taken back. There are some decisions so selfish and stupid that that individual can no longer be trusted as a responsible member of society.

For that, two things must happen: they must be punished for their actions, and an example must be made of them in order to demonstrate to the rest of society exactly what will and will not be tolerated. And that message should be clear: if you purposely imperil your children, there will be no mercy. Murder 2, in that light--and especially contrasted with the fact that mere forgetfulness brings a manslaughter charge, and that this was a willful act--makes absolute sense.
 
I suspect the Murder charge stems not from sending them out, but from turning around, going home and not bothering to even make a phone call to see if they made it ok. Well deserved.
 
Before everyone gets too fired up over him being charged with 2nd degree murder, remember the son lived, he spoke with police and would have said what happened when his father sent them walking, for example if he was angry at them and trying to teach them a lesson, etc. We don't have all the facts from a short news article, let the guy have his day in court and let the jury hear all the evidence.
 
^By my understanding, second degree murder doesn't require premeditation towards murder perse. It's basically saying there was malicious intent behind the death, but a fatality wasn't the intended goal. Only with first degree murder is there a genuine, malicious intent to kill.

As I've always understood it, Second Degree murder is "murder in the heat of passion" -as opposed to First Degree which is pre-mediated/planned murder- that you were so angry or emotional that you caused a death.

This case seems more fitting for "Third Degree Murder" or better known as Manslaughter - where ignorant actions caused a death.

Murder second degree is a depraved, wicked indifference to human life. A person knows an action could cause death, willfully disregards this possibility (manslaughter), but does it in a way that basically shows he didn't give a damn to whether or not anyone lived. Murder 2nd Degree seems harsh for this guy. I certainly could see criminally negligent homicide and, if you are really thirsting for blood, manslaughter. Not really anything more, though.

Actually, what is first-degree murder and second-degree murder is usually (although not always) defined by statute, and the definitions of murder differ from state to state; there is no one uniform definition of what is "murder in the first" and "murder in the second." For example, New York's murder laws, for example (based on the Model Penal Code and frequently featured on Law & Order) include general premeditated murder/so-called "lying in wait" murder in their definition of second-degree murder; you need aggravating circumstances beyond simple premeditation to escalate it to first-degree murder (e.g., killing a police officer, felony murder, contract murder, torture murder, etc.) By contrast, Pennsylvania, for example, defines premeditated murder as first-degree murder, while non-premeditated murders are only second-degree (or third degree, a designation that New York, among others, does not have, in lieu of various degrees of manslaughter).

Idaho seems to hew closer to New York's model, although New York expressly includes depraved indifference homicide in its statutory definition of second-degree murder, while Idaho just has a catch-all defining second-degree murder as any murder that is not first-degree murder. (I would assume that case law establishes that depraved indifference homicide is included in Idaho's definition of murder; even if depraved indifference is murder two, this indictment seems like overreaching, based at least solely on the facts in the article, and if depraved indifference is not included, I don't think there's any basis for a murder indictment here.)
 
I agree with the murder charge. The way I read it, the jerk just didn't want to go to the ex's. He went part way, told the kids the truck was stuck and to start walking. When they were out of sight, he went home. Was probably drunk too, because no one that isn't intoxicated is going to send kids on a 10 mile hike with the weather closing in. I'd also be wondering if there was somebody at his house, like a new girlfriend, that he wanted to get back to.

He may not have meant for them to die, but he sure doesn't seem have cared about what could have happened until it was too late.
 
Actually, what is first-degree murder and second-degree murder is usually (although not always) defined by statute, and the definitions of murder differ from state to state; there is no one uniform definition of what is "murder in the first" and "murder in the second."

That's true and a good point.
 
If you are not already a member then please register an account and join in the discussion!

Sign up / Register


Back
Top