http://www.cnn.com/2004/US/12/17/missouri.fetus/index.html
Baby found in Kansas might be missing girl
This happened a year and a half or so ago as well, in Texas, I think. Maybe Oklahoma. I was afraid of this happening to me, actually. My husband’s ex-wife is a. a total psycho, b. thinks the law only applies to other people, not her, and c. was acting all jealous that we were having a baby, especially that we were having a boy. Between pregnancy hormones and coverage of the Texas incident, I was freaking.
At least they have found the baby. In the Texas incident, the baby died as well because it was too premature.
If the insta-pundits want to tell me I’m living a life of degneracy and sin because I’m in a big city, I get to toss their arguments back at them at times like this. Red and blue have nothing to do with it – I just don’t like the idiots who associate “urban” with “crime.”
My apolgies then. Just about every post I see from you has some sort of reference to red state/blue state, Michael Moore, or how everything wrong in the world is Dubya’s fault. To me, you’ve earned the reputation of the boy who cries wolf. It gets OLD.
I’m certainly glad they found the baby in good shape. Wonder what kind of jacked-up reason they had for killing the mom.
That is truly strange wording. My twins were born by cesarean section at 34 weeks (8 months). They were not referred to as fetuses after they were cut out of my body.
I think in this case they were not positive that the baby had survived.
There aren’t enough of these :eek: to properly react to this.
If the culprit can be positively nailed and it’s determined this was done in cold blood, the poison needle’s too good.
Under the Civil Law definition here, you acquire the condition of Person as soon as you are “alive, detached from the mother’s womb”. Yet it’s not uncommon for crime-scene reports to refer to a newborn as a “the fetus”.
I don’t know for certain, but I would imagine the news agencies are saying “fetus” instead of “baby” so they can make clear she’s not an 8-month-old baby in the traditional sense. She’s an 8-month-old fetus that was “born,” for lack of a better term, yesterday. They aren’t calling her a 1-day-old baby because they didn’t know if she was alive and the more important fact is that she was eight months along when she was stolen.
(I apologize for any harshness for using the word “born” in this case. It certainly doesn’t feel appropriate, based on the circumstances, but there really isn’t a better term to define the difference between a fetus inside a woman and a baby outside. Being a father and having witnessed the birth of my son, I still can’t imagine what the family and father must be going through right now.)
From the headlines “The woman’s husband was at work at the time and is not a suspect”.
WTF?
When did men become such vile creatures, each and every one of us, that the husband is automatically assumed to be the perpetrator unless I am specifically told otherwise?
FUCK YOU, columnist. There isn’t a single high-profile case that I have leapt to a conclusion to in the past 5 years, no matter who was likely to have done it, and while it’s certainly of interest to know that the husband is not a suspect, you SHOULDNT MENTION IT. That reeks of damning with faint praise.
Methinks you’re overreacting a bit.
Actually, my first thought was, “Oh, God, tell me this wasn’t some fucked up marital dispute gone wrong.” My second thought was, “Tell me it wasn’t hauss.”
I breathed a heavy, heartfelt sigh of relief to hear that her husband wasn’t a suspect. Not that it’s good to be killed by strangers, but the other way is just too, too fucked up. This way is simply too fucked up.
Can we stop the world for a moment, please? I want off.
The husband is always a suspect because the vast majority of murders are committed by people close to the victim.
I can’t get my head around stories like this. I haven’t read past the headlines on this because I just don’t have the heart for it.
Incidents like this are the reason I don’t believe in God.
Don’t take offense. We can assume that reporter is a moron.
There was a similar incident the next town over from me. Then they also took the dead woman’s little boy and shot him down like a dog in a Chicago alley. By comparison, Dave, this incident is an improvement.
I don’t think so, but at least we can relish the knowledge that up here in Canuckistan, no fetus-thievery has happened. Thus far.
That line leap out at me as well. I’m well aware that there are a handful of men so terrible that they’d do something like this, but it’s not the first thing I’d suspect in a case like this. In cases like this the murderer is usually some mentally ill woman who wants a baby badly enough to kill for it, often pretending to herself and the world at large that it’s hers.
I’m with you - if the husband isn’t a suspect, don’t mention it. There are usually a lot of people who have frequent contact with the slain mother - her mother and mother-in-law often, her sisters and brother, her boss etc- but you don’t hear about how grandma, auntie, uncle and employer aren’t suspects, do you? It’s slightly sinister to single out the dad, as if they want you to think that maybe, just maybe, he’s like a certain other high-profile wackjob in the news a lot and they, the reporters, are wiser than the police :rolleyes:
Sadly, the statistics do not bear this out. One fact from my link says that one-third of all female murder victims were murdered by an “intimate”: husband, boyfriend, ex-boyfriend, etc. Compare that to 4% of male victims.
Also: “For every age group female murder victims are more likely than
male victims to have been killed by an intimate.”
-
Nearly 11 times as many females were murdered by a male they knew (1,551 victims) than were killed by male strangers (142 victims).
-
Sixty two percent (963) of female homicide victims were wives or intimate acquaintances of their killers.
I’m not saying that when a woman is killed, we should assume it was their partner, but if you’re starting an investigation from zero, the logical thing to do is to look at the people closest to the victim first.
When I said “a case like this” I didn’t mean something as broad as a woman who was murdered. I meant a woman who was murdered and had her unborn baby ripped out of her body; a baby which then disappears rather than being found dead with its mother.
I remember Scott Peterson’s lawyer putting forth the ‘satanic cultist’ idea in the press before the trial started…
There have been a lot of cases where husbands have killed their wives and tried to stage the scene to suggest that a psycho did it. Granted, their attempts usually fail. But look at it from a cop’s POV. You HAVE to look at the husband first, if for no other reason than to *eliminate * him as a suspect. SOP, IMO.
Apologies for no link, but the first case I ever heard of a woman having a baby ripped from her womb in order to steal a baby was somewhere in the range of 15-20 years ago in Reader’s Digest. The woman who perpetrated that crime was a nurse and actually allowed the maternal victim to survive, IIRC. Again, IIRC, the woman was eventual arrested and the child returned to it’s mother. Took a a couple of months though.
Contribution to the topic at hand: This crime was perpetrated by two men and a woman. Capital punishment is not punishment enough in my opinion. Of course, I have no idea what would be punishment enough.