I am pretty sure at least one person has accidentally jumped outa a plane without a parachute. If you can forget that, you can frigging forget anything.
How the fuck can you “know” something you “forgot”?
Forgetting is negligence, not an excuse.
Nobody is arguing with this.
What’s a legal excuse? If you mean legal defense, obviously, you are wrong.
Dio, you’re really pissing me off. What you are really saying is that any parent who has ever forgotten anything important is criminally negligent merely strapping their infant into the car! I’ve forgotten things so obvious and ridiculous it’s painful. One time my boyfriend and I planned a one-way, all-day hike where we parked my car at the end, and drove his car around to the trail head. Then I left my car keys on his front seat. We were halfway through the hike when I realized what I’d done. So yes, conceivably, I COULD forget my baby in the car. Does this mean I should never, ever drive with him? That is idiotic.
Police have this cool thing called an interrogation. It’s specially designed to elicit the truth. Parents who leave their babies in their car typically do get interrogated, and I think they all should be. Police are actually pretty good at telling when someone is feeding them a load of bullshit. There might be a few psychopaths out there who would consider doing this to their child, but most parents would truly rather die themselves than have anything like that happen to their child. When I think of the excruciating pain they must be in, it breaks my heart. To call them criminals on top of that is cruelty bordering on viciousness.
No I’m not. There is nothing in the statutes that say you get to walk if you say “I forgot.”
No I’m not. I’m saying people who forget babies in the car are criminally negligent. That is legal fact, not an opinion.
Show me where allowable legal defenses are listed in “the statutes.”
So how do you explain all the parents who have stood in front of a jury and have been acquitted?
Criminal negligence is putting your child in a situation that is inherently dangerous and likely to harm the child. An extreme example might be a person who leaves an infant in the middle of an interstate highway. Automobile car seats are not thought to be inherently dangerous.
Another example: accidentally running over a child is not necessarily criminally negligent. It depends on the situation. Driving through a residential neighborhood at 70 mph might be criminally negligent, for instance. Backing over a child in a driveway probably isn’t, but it’s up to the justice system (including police investigators) to figure this out and distinguish criminal negligence from tragic accidents.
Similarly, intentionally leaving an infant in a car on a hot day while someone runs into the store is likely criminally negligent. Accidentally leaving a child in a hot car almost certainly is not. It’s an accident–just like the person who backs over a child in a driveway. Again, we have a justice system whose job it is to distinguish criminal negligence from tragic accidents.
From one of my website links provided earlier:
Based upon this rule, how does a brain fart causing forgetfulness amount to “willful?” If you have a brain fart and forget your kid in the car, it’s not willful, and it’s not criminal negligence.
The act of placing the child in the car with you at the start of your trip is not exposing the child to a harmful or dangerous situation where the child is likely to be injured.
Dio, I think you are confusing ordinary negligence with criminal negligence. You are asking a good question: How can forgetting your child not be negligent?
The answer appears to be that it is negligence, but it is not criminal negligence.
Some people have brain farts and they fail to notice the red light when driving. This failure to pay due attention while driving is negligence, but people don’t get thrown in jail every time they run a red light and cause an accident. They may get sued in civil court, but not thrown in jail.
Simple, ordinary, or civil negligence is not the same as criminal negligence, which requires a willful act or omission exposing someone to foreseeable harm. Brain farts are not willful.
If you know the kid is in the car, then leaving it is automatically willful. We don’t legalize baking babies in the car as long as you say “I forgot.” That’s not how it works.
Criminal negligence: Deciding to pray for a child instead of giving him prescribed necessary medication
Ordinary Negligence: Accidentally giving a child Tylenol instead of the prescribed necessary medication
That’s the whole point in all of these cases. The parent does NOT know that the kid is in the car. If they did, they obviously would never have left the child in the car.
Instead, they simply forgot or had a brain fart or a mental hiccup, or whatever you want to call it.
To call this willful behavior is completely ridiculous (for the cases being discussed here).
This is not putting your kids in a car and pushing the car into a lake like Susan Smith. That is willful behavior. Forgetting one’s kids in a car sitting in a parking lot is not willful behavior.
Yes, the parent DID know the kid was in the car. The parent PUT the kid in the car.
THANK YOU!
I believe that a lot of people here are arguing from ignorance.
It won’t happen to me (my child can get out of the car on her own), but when that article came out I realized that “it can’t happen to me, they must be bad parents” is BS. It gave me a healthy dose of paranoia that perhaps saved my child from a similar fate.
We all forget things, some unfortunate people forget their children and they die (same as the ones that run over them with their cars), these people (not the ones who purposely kill their children) do not need the extra serving of scorn. And they do not deserve it.
That article changed my mind, I am happy my mind was changed. Some people cannot conceive that they are humans, and can be wrong. That is sad.
No parent would lock a car in the hot sun and walk away from it knowing their child was inside. Therefore they didn’t know or remember that the child was in the car.
As I posted in the concurrent Pit thread, in almost all of these cases, the child is asleep, usually in a rear-facing car seat normally present even when the child is not in the car. From the front driver’s seat, then, nothing looks any different.
But they DID know the kid was in the car. Not remembering isn’t the same thing as not knowing. Not that it should necessarily be believed that they forgot.
I think you’re grasping at straws on that one. Forgetting is merely a current lack of knowledge of something previously known. I fail to see a legal distinction between lack of knowledge and forgetting.
Just because a person knows, at one point in time, that there is a child in the car does not make a crime. The knowledge of having a child in the car and accompanying willfulness (mens rea) must be concurrent with the act or omission causing the harm (actus reus). No concurrence, no crime.
As to the issue of believability, that’s an issue for the jury. If the jury believes the suspect’s testimony regarding forgetfulness, then there is no crime.
I understand how this can happen, but forgetting is not an excuse. What actually happened in each instance is that the parent FAILED TO CHECK. Posters have come up with lots of little tricks that sound good, but even those could be forgotten. All that is needed is to check the back seat EVERY TIME you leave the car. Once you’ve trained yourself to do this it becomes automatic, like checking your mirror before switching lanes. Many women already do this before they get into their car, scanning the back seat for intruders. To me this is on par with somebody forgetting to lock the gate to the pool, thereby allowing a kid to gain access and drown. Sure it happens. But it doesn’t have to. And when it does, it’s not just a shame, but a crime.