Gawd, thats some nuclear strength stupidity there. Do YOU think anybody here thinks it should be legalized?
That’s how the criminal justice system works - innocent till proven guilty.
Following your logic, if you assume that the parent probably did it on purpose then there’s no way that the parent can prove otherwise.
The death should certainly be investigated by the police and any discrepancies followed up. (‘He said he couldn’t hear the child, but a passer-by said he could,’ etc). The parent should be thoroughly questioned, even if the questioning upsets them - it’s not like no killer ever confesses. Social services should investigate to see whether it’s part of a pattern of abuse and/or neglect. But automatically assuming the parents are guilty would be insane.
My GF once forgot to pick my daughter up from school because I was always the one who did that; it was a break in routine. That doesn’t mean we’re neglectful, terrible parents, but that we’re imperfect human beings. None of us are perfect; it’s completely impossible to be a perfect parent anyway.
You may not like it, but intent is a factor in our criminal justice system. You’re re-writing the system here, not anyone else.
You’re not answering my question. Precisely how would you write the law? What circumstances would have to be proven in court to find the parents guilty?
You let them outa your sight and the pedo’s got em. THATS the act. You knew the risks.
And if a pedo pulls a gun on you while you are with your child, you just should have prepared for that possibility as well and been better armed and wore kevlar vest and took ninja training courses and so on and so on.
Show me where any statute says that intent is a factor in the legality of leaving a baby in a car.
What specific negligent act with forseeable risks are you asking me about?
That’s what I’M trying to find out. Apparently, they at least think the law should be changed so that intentionality has to be proven. If that’s the case, they’d be making it almost impossible to get convictions.
I did answer your question, and I even gave you a hypothetical. A deliberate or criminally negligent action that puts a child in a circumstance where it was reasonable to assume that child would die is a felony. How’s that? The prosecutor, and if it comes to it, the jury, can decide if the act was deliberate or criminally negligent. Just like for any other crime.
I’m pretty sure our system doesn’t work that way, is what I’m saying.
Intentionality is not currently required for the parent to be guilty of the crime. It is a crime to leave a baby in a car. The law does not say it has to be intentional. If it is agreed that the parent left a baby in the car, then it is agreed that the parent committed the crime. No other circumstance has to be present. It’s not legally relevant if the parent did it on purpose. If it can be proven that the parent left the abby in the car then, under current statutes, the burden of proof has already been met. Whether it was an accident is neither here nor there. Intent does not have to be proven for the crime to be proven.
it sounds like a lot of people think the laws should be changed so that intentionality does have to be proven, but that is currently not the case, so that issue has no reference to the presemption of innocence in these crimes.
Dude, you’re grasping here. Intent is a factor in every crime, that’s how our criminal justice system works. You know that, right? It doesn’t need to be recorded in every law, “…and this one, too, will consider intent in determining guilt or in the exercise of prosecutorial discretion…”
Or let me word it differently, since you think we’re re-writing law. Show me where it says this is automatically a criminal act, regardless of intent. That is at odds with the actions of juries and prosecutors all over the country.
Cite please.
I meant to say that the other way around. I can’t believe I did that. I meant to say the presumption of innocence still obtains, yes of course, but that the burden is already met if it is undisputed that a parent left a baby in the car. Intentionality is not something that has to be proven, only that they did it.
Google any statute. Show me one that says it has to be intentional.
Leaving a baby in a car is automatically criminally negligent by statute.
I’m asserting that intent is a well-established element of our criminal justice system. If you need a cite for that, you’re playing games, especially on a topic where it has been cited in this very thread that prosecutors and juries alike have determined no crime occurred even when it was admitted that the parent in question left the kid in the car. You, OTOH, are asserting that the act, by itself, once established, is automatically a crime, regardless of intent, in contradiction of the well-established concept I just mentioned and the multitude of cases where that is NOT how the law was applied. You can’t support your contention because it’s unsupportable.
This is argument by assertion. There are countless juries, judges and prosecutors who contradict this contention. They were all wrong, eh?
Show me a statute that says that intentionality must be proven.
Diogenes, you have become a joke. I’m done.