GA - Suspicion over heat death of Cooper, 22 mo., Cobb County, June 2014, #11

[legalmania]

Just wondering if taking the whole carseat would easier in an emergency than trying to extricate a child? Again...no kids and I have never even seen a carseat up close, lol.

I would rip the entire seat out if I had to get one of my kids out. I was never more than 10 ft. from the car when my kids were in there. I never forgot one of my kids in the car. I always worried that if there was an accident that the paramedics wouldn't be able to get the contraption that I had for my son apart. I was so glad when he out grew the car seat. I even report people who leave their dogs in the car, they die also. He's some stats of people leaving children in their cars. http://www.ggweather.com/heat/.

 

[flourish]

I have a question does anyone here have children in day care and if you do does the day care call you if your child is not going to be there?

Some do, some don't. I teach preschool, sometimes we call, sometimes we don't; we're supposed to call but time constraints prevail sometimes. I think the consensus is some day cares call, some don't. We don't know if Little Aprons called the Harrises or not or what the policy there is.

 

[MsMarple]

So, some posted a link to the a file containing the warrants released today (that look like they were filed Friday).

Anyone notice anything special about the murder charge? Specifically, the lack of it being a felony murder charge? I hope like hell I'm reading this right :happydance:

http://imgur.com/1IzpvDJ

It's still listed as section 16-5-1 and there's no mention of upgraded charges in msm. Could it be a result of the July 1 changes in law? Oh oh, you've got homework to do now.

 

[fruity]

True but that may be the least of her problems...

Of course but it shows that Panitch is wrong.

“Knowledge of a crime isn’t prosecutable. A cover-up is."

Further, I got this from Wikipedia, with regards to being an accessory to a crime.

An accessory must generally have knowledge that a crime is being, or will be committed. A person with such knowledge may become an accessory by helping or encouraging the criminal in some way, or simply by failing to report the crime to proper authority. The assistance to the criminal may be of any type, including emotional or financial assistance as well as physical assistance or concealment.

In the United States, a person who learns of the crime and gives some form of assistance before the crime is committed is known as an "accessory before the fact". A person who learns of the crime after it is committed and helps the criminal to conceal it, or aids the criminal in escaping, or simply fails to report the crime, is known as an "accessory after the fact". A person who does both is sometimes referred to as an "accessory before and after the fact", but this usage is less common.

To be convicted of an accessory charge, the accused must generally be proved to have had actual knowledge that a crime was going to be, or had been, committed. Furthermore, there must be proof that the accessory knew that his or her action, or inaction, was helping the criminals commit the crime, or evade detection, or escape.

In many jurisdictions a person may not be charged as an accessory to a crime committed by his or her spouse. This is related to the traditional privilege not to testify against an accused spouse, and the older idea that a wife was completely subject to the orders of a husband, whether lawful or illegal.


http://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Accessory_(legal_term)

 

[PigPong]

Here's the code http://law.justia.com/codes/georgia/2010/title-16/chapter-5/article-1/16-5-1

I'm well aware of the code. Have you seen official documents with the charges listed as homicide murder instead of felony murder?

There might be one out there.... but I haven't seen it.

 

[PigPong]

It's still listed as section 16-5-1 and there's no mention of upgraded charges in msm. Could it be a result of the July 1 changes in law? Oh oh, you've got homework to do now.

It would still be listed as 16-5-1. What I am pointing out is that the charge now reads homicide murder instead of felony murder.

And I've read the new law but I'm not super familiar with it. My understanding though was that it was a drop down from homicide and felony murder, specific only to cases of child abuse. Similar to how the felony murder statute reads but specific to child abuse.

P.S. I so wish I had time to do homework on it now, but I gotta get up at 5.

 

[RainCheck]

It would still be listed as 16-5-1. What I am pointing out is that the charge now reads homicide murder instead of felony murder.

And I've read the new law but I'm not super familiar with it. My understanding though was that it was a drop down from homicide and felony murder, specific only to cases of child abuse. Similar to how the felony murder statute reads but specific to child abuse.

P.S. I so wish I had time to do homework on it now, but I gotta get up at 5.

I found the new law! http://www.legis.ga.gov/Legislation/20132014/144947.pdf

If homicide is committed in conjunction with 2nd degree child cruelty you don't have to prove malice intent! Is that a good summary?

 

[RainCheck]

 

[RainCheck]

 

[Oblio]

Wait!, As someone working in the health care profession the mother would be a mandated reporter!

That is when she is wearing her professional hat and only applies to what she sees as a healthcare worker. Not what she sees when she is wearing her mom or civilian hat.

 

[MsMarple]

It would still be listed as 16-5-1. What I am pointing out is that the charge now reads homicide murder instead of felony murder.

And I've read the new law but I'm not super familiar with it. My understanding though was that it was a drop down from homicide and felony murder, specific only to cases of child abuse. Similar to how the felony murder statute reads but specific to child abuse.

P.S. I so wish I had time to do homework on it now, but I gotta get up at 5.

Yeah, I'm confused too and I haven't even begun trying to wrap my head around which version applies to this case. I'm nervous it may go into appeal either way, but as my late mother-in-law used to say, "Don't borrow trouble."

Go get your rest; if anything's changed it'll be all over the net soon. You're becoming the goto person for the legal stuff but it shouldn't be at the expense of your health. :loveyou:

 

[Oblio]

That is how I understand it.

 

[Karmady]

I'm well aware of the code. Have you seen official documents with the charges listed as homicide murder instead of felony murder?

There might be one out there.... but I haven't seen it.

If it had been upgraded, we'd have heard about it...and then some jmo

 

[RainCheck]

RH picked a really bad time to do this! This new amendment to 16-5-1 seems like it was custom made just to be able to convict him! The police don't have to prove malice intent they only have to prove he commited 2nd degree child cruelty. He'll do 10 to 30 years if he's convicted of the current charges. I can't see him not being convicted in that case!

 

[PigPong]

I found the new law! http://www.legis.ga.gov/Legislation/20132014/144947.pdf

If homicide is committed in conjunction with 2nd degree child cruelty you don't have to prove malice intent! Is that a good summary?

Good job! So to me, it's one of three things.

1) A typo (from omitting "felony")

2) A result in the change of the new law (meaning a drop from felony murder to this new murder definition, i.e. 2nd degree. (which carries a lighter sentence)

3) an upgrade to a straight murder charge ( please, please, please).

I'm hoping because it says neither felony murder or 2nd degree murder, that we've reached the point so many of us have been hoping for....

 

[PigPong]

If it had been upgraded, we'd have heard about it...and then some jmo

I know I'm not the only one but I find things before it gets reported all the time. I have been tweeting about this much because I've been spending so much time here. But I find stuff that's before it's been reported all the time. I have all of like 60 followers on twitter and about 1/3 of them are reporters.

And I know I'm not unique in finding stuff.

I also know I could be wrong. Hence the reason I said I hope to hell I'm right...

 

[Karmady]

RH picked a really bad time to do this! This new amendment to 16-5-1 seems like it was custom made just to be able to convict him! The police don't have to prove malice intent they only have to prove he commited 2nd degree child cruelty. He'll do 10 to 30 years if he's convicted of the current charges. I can't see him not being convicted in that case!

It's the opposite of that. The old law didn't have a second degree charge. It was felony murder with a life sentence or the DP. The new law is much more lenient.

 

[RainCheck]

Yeah, I'm confused too and I haven't even begun trying to wrap my head around which version applies to this case. I'm nervous it may go into appeal either way, but as my late mother-in-law used to say, "Don't borrow trouble."

Go get your rest; if anything's changed it'll be all over the net soon. You're becoming the goto person for the legal stuff but it shouldn't be at the expense of your health. :loveyou:

They are charging him with 16-5-1 together with 16-5-70(c) with the new amendment that went into effective July 1, 2014 that 2nd degree murder during the commission of 2nd degree child cruelty. It does not matter if there was malice intent. All that matters is the child died due to 2nd degree child cruelty. The punishment is a minimum of 10 years and a maximum of 30 years. It's still listed as 16-5-1 but in conjunction with 16-5-70(c) it's 2nd degree murder and 2nd degree child cruelty.

 

[PigPong]

If it had been upgraded, we'd have heard about it...and then some jmo

I know I'm not the only one but I find things before it gets reported all the time. I have been tweeting about this much because I've been spending so much time here. But I find stuff that's before it's been reported all the time. I have all of like 60 followers on twitter and about 1/3 of them are reporters.

And I know I'm not unique in finding stuff.

I also know I could be wrong. Hence the reason I said I hope to hell I'm right...

 

[fruity]

That is when she is wearing her professional hat and only applies to what she sees as a healthcare worker. Not what she sees when she is wearing her mom or civilian hat.

Nope. As a mandated reporter myself I've undergone yearly training and we are told repeatedly that this is not the case. Having said that, the penalties vary depending on location.