Woman in alabama, arrested

  • Thread starter Thread starter Labaddy
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
F_Marturana said:
she suspected her baby would die.
Click to expand...
I don’t think this would make it an involuntary manslaughter charge though. Knowledge of a possible death would change things.

They would have to show that the mom committed a dangerous and unlawful act that directed harm to the baby which was likely to cause the death, if i can recall.

The ““problematic”” part would be ‘directed harm to the baby’ which doesn’t seem to be reflected in this case. Of course, it doesn’t help that laws vary from one state to another, from one country to another.
 
Last edited:
For all we know, she might have known the woman was pregnant and was aiming for her limbs, but accidentally shot her in the abdomen. Should people just let themselves possibly get killed or injured just because a woman is pregant and fighting back could result in the death of a baby?
 
I wasn’t arguing for her to be charged, because I don’t think she should be if there’s a genuine threat to her life. But was asking since her case may fit the charge better, and apparently it seems like she was charged but wasn’t indicted. Anyway, we don’t even know the details so this is speculation.

Assuming she knows that she’s pregnant, she would be engaging in the act that killed the child (shooting) and it would be involuntary obviously.

The reason that I don’t think the shooter should be charged with the death of the baby is because the act is not unlawful to begin with, given that she shot out of self defense rather than some sort of heated moment during a fight. One would have to prove that there was no grave danger and that it was the latter, which we currently have no proof of.

If I can recall based on past pases, the act has to be unlawful and dangerous + directed towards the victim. This doesn’t mean there’s an intent but rather the action would have to kill the person.
redbetta said:
accidentally shot her in the abdomen
Click to expand...
So this part wouldn’t be relevant since we aren’t talking about murder, but involuntary manslaughter. What’s important here was whether she shot to protect herself or because she did it out of anger/extreme emotion.

So i guess my summary of this ramble is that I can’t see both women fulfilling the criteria, but unfortunately laws vary so I don’t know how relevant this is.
 
Last edited:
F_Marturana said:
Intent matters in a criminal case.
Click to expand...
Not always. There is an old concept in English common law that we still use today called felony murder. If someone dies during the course of a felony you commit, you are guilty of felony murder. This prevents someone from pleading, “I only meant to rape her. I did not know she would die when I choked her.” Or, “I only meant to fire a warning shot when I robbed the bank. I did not intend that the bullet would bounce off a pipe and kill someone.”

We had a case in our city about two punks who decided to rob two people sitting on their porch. One perp forced the homeowner into the house to collect the valuables while the second man pistol whipped the homeowner’s friend outside the house. The homeowner took the first perp to his bedroom where he had a concealed gun and shot the robber, killing him. The accomplice ran away but was arrested the same day and charged with felony murder, even though the first robber was shot by someone else.

A lot depends on the facts. We had a case just this week where a young man punched an older man several times after a minor traffic accident, then drove away and posted on social media how he taught the old guy a lesson. Unknown to him the elderly man died at the scene from a heart attack. He was tried for manslaughter but the jury convicted him only for battery, because the cause of death was a heart attack and the prosecution could not prove the beating caused the heart attack. Sometimes a good lawyer is worth the cost.

On this Alabama case, it matters whether the assault by the pregnant woman is a considered a misdemeanor or a felony. She absolutely could be criminally responsible for the death of her child. It is not a defense to say she was too stupid to think that her crime could have unintended consequences.
 
Last edited:
Self defense should be proportionate though.

I’ve seen men say, “let’s take this outside”. No one is expecting getting shot.
 
A person gets drunk, gets in a car, and winds up in an accident. People in the other vehicle are kills. Should the drunk driver get off with nothing?
 
In your case though if the rape victim dying of choking, they were the direct victim.

I could see if the woman attacked lost her baby due to the attack.

The pregnant woman didn’t shoot her self and didn’t directly attack her child.
 
How is that even remotely similar to someone shooting in self-defense?
 
Women don’t typically “take it outside,” though, I have often wish they did instead of the usual games we play with each other. I don’t think there are very many norms for women on women fist fights. Also, we have the picture of the woman that was shot, but not the shooter. For all we know, the shooter was a much smaller and weaker woman who could have been easily killed or injured by the one arrested.
 
That is why I also included the case of the two robbers. Legally it does not matter who fired the shot if the death occurred during the commission of a felony. A court will have to answer whether the shot was fired in a reasonable act of self-defense. Neither of us knows enough of the facts to make that judgment. It could go either way.
 
The case with the robber is strange because the one that was shot was perfectly free not to join the other one in robbing the people. The one that got away might have been the mastermind, but his buddy ultimately chose to do something that could and did get him killed.
 
In that actual case, the robber who was shot was the leader. The second man was actually a juvenile, but just barely. He was charged as an adult. I suspect the charge was or will be reduced in a plea bargain.

The felony murder rule is not uniform across all the states. Some states, like Michigan, Kentucky, and Hawaii have abolished it, and others, like Alabama and California have codified it in their criminal statutes. Yes, Alabama and California have some things in common.😲

 
That may have been true in the past, and I wish it was true today. Now people get killed almost every day for the act of “disrespecting” another. There is not much respect for the lives of others or even self today.

“Everyone who hates his brother is a murderer, and you know that no murderer has eternal life remaining in him.”
I John 3:15
 
I didn’t realize you witnessed it live.

Do tell us how it should have gone down.
 
Last edited:
If I had a baby strapped into a chest harness, initiated a fight with someone, got shot in self-defense, and said baby was caught in the crossfire, it would be entirely reasonable for me, not the person I was assaulting, to be charged with that child’s death. Even moreso in this case, where the baby was not being carried overtly in a chest harness, but discreetly in the womb. It would be entirely ridiculous for the battered victim to be charged with manslaughter while the mother walks away scot-free.
 
Or you can charge them both. The mother for putting a child in danger and the other person for shooting them in self-defense (you don’t even necessarily need to factor in the fact that she was pregnant). Stand Your Ground laws and gun laws would of course need to be moved to the dust bins of history beside other eccentric customs. As the laws currently exists it is difficult for anything reasonable to come from it no matter what you do.
 
Last edited:
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top