OK, but if you don’t use them, I assume your windows can open more than 5 inches right ? So I shouldn’t just assume that the windows can’t open more than 5 inches in any apartment I happen go to. Maybe my childless friend who lives on the 11th floor opens his window enough for a person to go through it and I therefore shouldn’t hold up a 2 year old to it without being certain it’s closed.
This is the post I was responding to:
I’m wondering why someone wouldn’t expect it. It seems the window must have a locking device* , but the person who lives in the apartment can decide not to use it and might not-my 2nd floor windows are typically open more than 5 inches . And I assume there are balconies and rooftop terraces etc that someone could fall off either deliberately or while doing something stupid - and if you can sit on the railing and fall off, you could drop a baby that you had standing on the railing.
which is not so different from many places in the US where a landlord must provide window guards to tenants in certain circumstances but people who own their house/condo are not required to have them.
I’ve been on this exact ship (I believe it was 2016).
It’s pretty noticeable when those windows are open, even from the inside. The glass is decently tinted. NONE of the lower windows are even open, so this being in a children’s area should never be an issue. Also, this is not a children’s ONLY area, where parents are free to just leave them and go. Parental supervision is still required.
The railings are all fairly high. I’m 5’4 and they are up past my hips. Up to maybe my midsection. There’s also a decent amount of space between the railing and the window wall. She’d have to seriously lean forward to fall out.
I don’t think the grandpa had dementia or anything like that. I think he was a bit negligent, but not necessarily criminally so. I see this as a tragic accident, nothing more. There’s a reason why most people, both adults and babies, are perfectly safe on cruise ships. The difference here was that he let her sit on a railing without having a firm grip on her.
This poor, poor child. I can’t imagine. I feel so incredible sad for her.
I know that you’re asking this more of the “grandpa should not be charged” people, but to anticipate some of the arguments against charging grandpa (actually, some have already been made) I think it’s important to consider the deterrent effect that prosecuting negligent acts that lead to death or injury.
Not necessarily to deter future negligent acts (I am one of those people who thinks that people aren’t always rational actors and it’s hard to legislate “good judgment” into them), but to eliminate a possible vector that would allow deliberate acts to be disguised as negligence, much in the same way that self-defense laws can possibly be abused to disguise a contrived scenario in which the murderer tries to blame the victim for provoking the violent encounter. Which isn’t to say that I think we should eliminate self-defense as a defense to a charge of murder or manslaughter, only that I think we need to weigh the potential for abuse for certain defenses.
In short, I don’t think “I was just an idiot and made a bad decision,” should be able to be used as an absolute defense against murder, even if proven (that is, even if we can all stipulate you were an idiot and made a bad decision), in the same way that “he tried to kill me” might be acceptable, provided that claim of self-defense is credible based on the totality of the evidence and the circumstances.
It’s much easier to fake stupidity than self-defense, you know?
ETA: Oh, but I do want to add this one thing. I don’t generally find it helpful to label people as stupid or an idiot, even if they were negligent. It’s just kind of mean, and overlooks how easy it is for any of us to make a careless mistake that could have unintended but disastrous consequences. So I use such terms here only as a sort of shorthand to get at the gist of what I’m saying, not necessarily as an assessment of the level of intelligence of anyone involved in this unfortunate incident. The surest way to make a dumb mistake is to assume you could not possibly make a dumb mistake. The genuinely intelligent are not immune.
Not always never, of course, but in this particular situation it’s obvious the grandfather could never have had any reason or incentive to kill the baby, that the death of the baby already imposes an immense burden of agony on him, and that adding prison time on top of his agony does absolutely no benefit to anyone.
I would argue the same of the majority of “kid left in hot car, dies” cases.
I find it interesting that you only ever hear the “hasn’t s/he suffered enough?” argument when whatever idiocy results in the death of a baby or toddler. A woman who accidentally hits a pedestrian doesn’t get that pass, a guy who gets into a fight that turns fatal doesn’t get that pass, but when it’s a parent who leaves their baby in the car, doesn’t supervise their toddler well enough to keep them from drowning…oh they’ve suffered enough.
Very strong point. Here in Phoenix, it’s swimming pools and hot cars. Always the same thing, the parents suffered enough. If it was their dog in the hot car though… Off to jail. Sorry grampa, you killed a kid AND want to get a payout? Off to jail for being a greedy jerk along with the parents.
So it’s ok to commit a crime so long as you’re really, really, super duper sad about it afterwards?
You also hear it when the person has the “right” socioeconomic background in all situations. Then, they’re haunted by the incident, which is “enough punishment” no matter what the crime. (And, when people with the wrong SES accidentally kill a child, people want to throw the book at them).
There are several problems with the “they’ve suffered enough” narrative.
I’ve always felt that if I was in those shoes, accidentally killed my kid, I wouldn’t give a shit what they wanted to do to me. Throw me in jail it would not compare to the loss I already was suffering through and might actually make me feel better if I was paying for it with more suffering behind bars.
Sam Anello said pretty much the same in his interview that whatever the outcome of a trial it would be irrelevant to him if he goes to prison.
The hot car deaths are the most confusing fuck ups ever, I might forget my pbj in the car but a human being? NEVER!
It’s not about the age of the victim; it’s about the relationship of the victim to the person causing the harm. Hit your child with a car, whether that child is 5 or 25, you are going to be suffering terribly from the loss of your child. Hit a random pedestrian, and their loss isn’t going to independently cause you to suffer apart from your guilt over your own actions. Get into a fight with your own father and accidentally kill him, you’re going to suffer a lot more than if you accidentally kill a stranger. I don’t see a problem with taking the remorse and heartache of accidentally killing someone you love into account when determining appropriate punishment.
A longer stretch from the interview. Apparently the fuckwit held her there for 30 seconds before dropping her. He knew the glass wasn’t there–he is making up shit to cover his own ass.