Which completely explains why they buried the corpse in the middle of nowhere.
C’mon, Dio, you’re smarter than that.
Please note the word I put in bold and its inapplicability to the circumstances at hand.
Then what is she guilty of? Is it illegal for a woman to receive an abortion from a non-qualified individual?
Well, there must be a reason why they weren’t charged. No matter how suspicious something looks a prosecutor still has to prove it beyond a reasonable doubt. If (hypothetically) all witnesses concerned were to swear that the moms didn’t know, how is a prosecutor going to meet that burden?
Ok then why isn’t the girl being charged with a crime? Her bat-weilding boyfreind isn’t a doctor so the privacy statue shouldn’t be present no? She’s at least a conspiritaor.
Except if that’s the case he’d be facing asulat charges against her, he isn’t, he’s charged with harming the fetus. Again with her consent.
Since none of the stories remotely supports your thesis, now bought up for the second time and are now expanding to include the girls father, I’d suggest you drop this line of reasoning as it’s a red herring and a call to emotion.
Prosecutorial discretion and the relative culpabilities of Bat Boy vs. Buryin’ Moms are much simpler explanations than concluding that both mothers’ first thought is “A miscarriage? How tragic. Come, we must put the baby in a shoebox and bury it in the middle of nowhere.”
How about conspiracy, aiding and abetting, concealment of a crime, …
Cite? Show us the statute.
I said he was charged with the wrong thing.
I don’t have a “thesis.” What are you talking about? I’m just speculating. There’s no question that anyone who would beat his pregnant girlfriend with a baseball bat is a depraved, abusive psychopath. Given that much, I’m saying it wouldn’t surprise me if she was bullied into going along with this. I don’t need a cite for what wouldn’t surprise me, do I? If I do, then look no further. I am the world’s foremost authority on what would or would not surprise me. My post is indeed my cite.
She’s the VICTIM. Is it a crime to conceal a crime against oneself? Is any battered woman who doesn’t call the cops guilty of conspiracy?
Is abortion legal in the state in question? If so, I can’t perceive the guy being found guilty. It sounds like this law is for causing an abortion when the mother isn’t willing.
If it isn’t legal, then they’re obviously both guilty. One caused the abortion and the other allowed it. She would be guilty of conspiracy at the least as I said earlier. Calling her a victim is absurd. You can’t be a victim of something you consented to. It’s as simple as he killed the fetus and she aided. The only question is if killing fetuses is legal there.
Good question. Step one is to find me a Michingan statute that says it’s a crime to abort your 6-month-old fetus.
Depends how you characterize the constitutional right, of course. With abortion, there’s both the “right of privacy” between the woman and her doctor and the “right to an abortion” that inures to the woman alone. Either way, Bat Boy doesn’t qualify.
Abortion is a federal right. It’s legal in every state.
Yiu have a right to receive an abortion, not to perform one. Abortion is surgery. It is illegal to perform surgery without being licensed to do so.
It isn’t.
There is no victim but the woman who was beaten. It is not a crime to consent to be brutalized.
“Michigan law generally prohibits abortion after the 24th week of pregnancy without a significant health concern at play,”, but it does require “consent from one of her parents.” (Again, from Stuffy’s link). I assume, but do not know, that you must be a medical doctor licensed in Michigan to perform an abortion, as it is a medical procedure. The “miscarriage” happened at the “25th week of development,” which is actually the 27th week of pregnancy. They had been attempting to perform the procedure for “several weeks.”
So, from several standpoints, the abortion itself was illegal.
- They were 1-3 weeks too late for a legal abortion without a significant health risk
- They did not (apparently) notify at least one of her parents beforehand
- He was not (apparently) a medical doctor
Okay, well I should have read the whole story before posting. Abortion is legal there, so no one commited a crime. That’s simplicity if I ever saw it.
Hello…did you catch the part about it being a crime to perform abortions without a license? Even if you DO have a license it’s malpractice to do it with a baseball bat. Someone definitely committed a crime here but it wasn’t the girl who was beaten.
Except your speculations aside, she KNEW what they were trying to accomplish. She doesn’t get to wear the victim charge as they aren’t charging the guy for assaulting her.
I’m working my way through Michigans criminal laws now, this appears to be what he’s charged under, except I see no exceptions written under this law. Legal Eagles whay say you?
Beating the crap out of someone is a crime. So is performing any kind of medical procedure with a baseball bat.
I will say again that I think he was charged under the wrong law and I will say agin that the ONLY victim is the girl who was beaten. Anyone who gets the crap beaten out of them with a bat is a victim whether she “consented” or not.
That law linked is unfortunately ambiguous. In the first article, it implied there had to be assault against the pregnant woman. That isn’t the case since she consented. The actual law doesn’t state that though, so one can only speculate if the legislators intended this law for even when the woman consented.
Beating the crap out of someone is not necessarily a crime. Ever watched boxing? If the person consents, you can do pretty much anything to them short of killing them. As for it being illegal to perform medical procedures with a baseball bat, I’d like to see a cite for that. Even if it was a law, it sounds like it would be a civil law, not a criminal law.
First I found the exception here, so it appears the woman can in fact cause her own abortion, without sanction.
Now analogy time.
Person’s A B & C are friends. C happens to work the night shift at 7-11, and convinces A & B to stick up the convenience store and wound or beat him up to make the robbery appear legitimate. By DtCs logic, only A & B are guilty of a crime since C was shot or beaten he’s a victim. Unless you somehow feel…
… was made up whole cloth by the police. In my analogy A & B are guilty of robbery while C is guilty of consiracy, aiding and abetting and whatever they charge you with for misleading police. Tell me how this differs?