::Checks thread::
Oh yeah. I disagree with his main point expressed in page 1 of the linked thread. I believe that 90%+ of the population doesn’t self-evaluate their 1 in a million day incompetence especially well.
Not special, NORMAL. MOST parents would never do it. It’s fucking bullshit to say that they would.
That’s not what the pitting is for, though. The pitting is because I said that it isn’t necessary for leaving the aby to be intentional in order for it to be negligent homicide. That is a factually correct statement, not an opinion. Some people want to change the laws to make it legal if they say it was an acident. I object to that.
My initial thought upon seeing this thread title was, “Oh, awesome, the Heaven & Hell summer tour must be back on track.”
Then I realized it’s about Diogenes the poster, not Ronnie James Dio.
Then I remembered that Ronnie James Dio passed away last month, which I’m always forgetting about. Now I’m all depressed again.
Thanks a bunch, you fuckers. :mad:
Yeah. It’s the all or nothing thinking that gets me. There’s never any exceptions–really? Or like in the thread where the politician grabbed the kid with the video camera–Dio’s reaction is that the kid was a gaywad who secretly wanted to be grabbed. It’s just kind of insane.
I didn’t say “secretly.”
What if someone puts a baby on a restaurant table and it falls and cracks its head open? Follow up question: is it OK if the baby is a “gaywad”? I’m an expectant father and need to learn the rules.
Diogenes, did you read the Pulitzer Prize winning article on this subject? I used to be just as unforgiving as you about these types of cases. But then I read about the cognitive neuroscience aspects, which changed my mind. I no longer think that every parent who does this, or even most of them, are monsters.
The article also points out that in 60% of these cases, charges aren’t filed. Diogenes seems to be under the impression that the very fact that a child has died in a hot car automatically proves somebody is legally guilty. But this simply is not the case.
IANAL, but from my arm chair readings on the law: Virtually every criminal offense (except traffic infractions) require both an actus reus (the criminal act) and the mens rea (“guilty mind”).
What Diogenes wants is for this to be a strict liability offense, and I think he’s under the impression that it is one. But it’s not. It’s up to a jury to decide whether a particular defendent met the mens rea requirement, beyond a reasonable doubt, for criminal guilt to be established.
Cite that a jury must find that it’s intentional for it to be a crime?
I can’t vouch for all 50 states, but since I live in Washington I decided to look up Washington state law.
At first glance, this definition of criminally negligent may appear to favor your viewpoint (“fails to be aware”), but notice there’s some wiggle room here with “reasonable person” and “same situation.”
What standard of care would a reasonable person exercise in the situation where their brain was under stress, and they completely forgot their child was in the car?
As much as I’d love to spend hours browsing through case law, unfortunately I’m off on a camping trip until Tuesday, so I hope some other legal eagle can pick up the torch where I left off on this mens rea issue.
I think you nailed it Blalron.
Dio, it’s not the case that ut must be intentional to be a crime, but it must at least be negligent. Not all of these cases involve negligence.
I did say above that you don’t take “intent” into account, which was slightly off the mark. I should have said that you don’t take “state of mind” into account.
I think you meant to link to Strict liability (criminal).
Oh wow… so stress is a plausible excuse? I don’t get that. Several of us are in professions where we are required to make instantaneous decisions under extreme stress which subsequently we can be prosecuted for. While I wouldn’t say that every child death in a car should lead to an automatic indictment…I would say that their should be and IS a possibility for a further investigation and a potential presentation to a grand jury.
I can get that humans make mistakes… but also as a parent I’ve never come close to this one so its largely unfathomable to me. As for DIO… I would pit him for his hate of the VUVU’s… but then again I probably would be standing alone on that one…
or possibly the fact that he seems to like that prima donna from Kiln, MS
Who do you think you are arguing against by saying this? Were there any posts in that thread saying “eh, no biggie, shit happens, the police and prosecutors shouldn’t be involved at all”?
Heh, why are people chasing cites for the biggest fucking troll on the boards? A twat who is just going to continue to post one line variations of “no I didnt”, and “when did you finish beating your wife” for another six pages.
And after he has gotten his kicks from taunting you all, he will post “Ok, perhaps not all these parents were evil baby killing rapists”. Then four different people will jump in to praise Diokwad for being able to change his position. One will even say she has gained respect for him because of it.
You guys. You crack me up.
Explains why you keep coming back, assuming its not a form of penance.
I’m not sure if I’m being lumped in this group or not, but I feel I should clarify; I don’t hate Dio; I just think his absolute world view is at odds with the world we actually live in, where few things are absolute.
So how do 'luci’s nuts taste?
Like your mom. 
My mom is dead. 
(Not really. I think it’s stupid when people say the above in response to a mom joke, even when it’s true.)