Minneapolis day care provider who hanged toddler receives 10 years of probation

[Rocco]

Minneapolis day care provider who hanged toddler receives 10...


She also hit 3 people with her minivan when she left, dragging one man for several blocks under the van.

Probation.

Pathetic.

 

[Laughing]

Wow, plenty is going on there but wow, just wow!

 

[whoizzit]

I haven't read the article yet but there better be some very compelling reason for anyone getting 10 yrs probation after a toddler is hanged. And a SD mother only got 40 yrs for beating her 2 yo son to death with a studded belt bc he wet the bed. WHY??? She should be locked up and never allowed to see the light of day. Ugh. South Dakota Mom Sentenced to 40 Years in Prison for Beating Son to Death For Wetting His Bed and worse coverage Her 2-year-old wet the bed and ‘gave her a sideways look.’ She killed him for it, South Dakota cops say

 

[katydid23]

I don't get it. I think this judge was too 'sympathetic' towards this attacker and cold hearted towards the victims she left in her wake.

I am very sorry if her husband was abusive. But hanging an inn0cent 2 yr old by the neck is not an acceptable response.

 

[Datchery]

I was scratching my head over this one, too. In fairness, she had already served twenty months while awaiting trial, which, while minimal given the crime, is at least some time in prison. I don't think the case would have received this much attention if headlines didn't create the impression that she was getting off with no jail time, which isn't accurate.

I still tend to think this was an absurdly light sentence. It sounds possible that she would have had some grounds for a mental illness defense. If she had gotten a jury to buy that she wasn't in control of her actions on that basis, fine. But she ultimately put in a guilty plea. That doesn't mean mitigating factors can't be considered, but being sentenced to 20 months of time served for attempted murder of a toddler plus other crimes would require a hell of a lot of mitigation. This woman is incredibly lucky that no one died. Either she was so mentally ill that she didn't understand what she was doing, or she should have to pay a higher price than this.

 

[katydid23]

I was scratching my head over this one, too. In fairness, she had already served twenty months while awaiting trial, which, while minimal given the crime, is at least some time in prison. I don't think the case would have received this much attention if headlines didn't create the impression that she was getting off with no jail time, which isn't accurate.

I still tend to think this was an absurdly light sentence. It sounds possible that she would have had some grounds for a mental illness defense. If she had gotten a jury to buy that she wasn't in control of her actions on that basis, fine. But she ultimately put in a guilty plea. That doesn't mean mitigating factors can't be considered, but being sentenced to 20 months of time served for attempted murder of a toddler plus other crimes would require a hell of a lot of mitigation. This woman is incredibly lucky that no one died. Either she was so mentally ill that she didn't understand what she was doing, or she should have to pay a higher price than this.

The sentence confused me because it seemed like the judge was sending mixed messages. From the OP link:


Assistant Hennepin County Attorney Christina Warren argued against the probation, saying that Karia should be sentenced according to guidelines to 153 months in prison, partly based on the fact that Karia waived mental illness as a defense and “admitted she acted with intent to kill the 16-month-old boy in her care” along with severely injuring three other people that day.


Judge Quam said the case was “one of the hardest cases I’ve ever had,” adding that Karia “was suffering extreme mental illness at the time, though she understood the consequences of her actions.”


So the court said the defendant waived mental illness as a defense. Yet the judge took mental illness into account when giving lenient sentence. So why not sent the defendant to mental hospital? I hardly think that out patient 'counseling' is going to help someone who hung a toddler by their neck in the basement .

 

[Datchery]

My understanding of a mental illness defense is that the standard is extremely high. You'd have to prove that you were so incapacitated that you didn't know that what you were doing was illegal. Even if you heard voices telling you that doing act X was necessary to save the world, you couldn't be found not guilty on that basis if you nonetheless remained aware that act X was a crime. So I can see where MI that didn't meet the standard for an insanity defense could still be considered as a mitigating factor.

The problem with insanity defenses from a prosecutorial standpoint, from what I understand, is that while it is a high bar to clear, if the defendant DOES clear it, their fate to a large extent moves beyond the criminal justice system's power to monitor. In theory, if a medical team decides this person's condition is now stable, the rest of us simply have to trust that that's true - there's no longer any legal basis for monitoring someone found not guilty of a crime. Which is why they presumably negotiated for her not to try for an insanity plea. At least now, there's considerable legal oversight over this woman.

But even so, it seems there could have been a middle ground. I haven't seen details of this woman's mental condition, but...she wound up pleading guilty of trying to kill a toddler in her care. I can see not giving her 15 years, under the circumstances, but wouldn't giving her 3 years plus the 20 months served have balanced compassion with an acknowledgment of the severity of her crime? Plenty of people serve much more time for non-violent offenses.