IMOO NV's parents will protect her in anyway whatever. Most parents feel like they owe it to their children to protect them, it's instinctive. Unfortunately, sometimes parents don't know whom they raised until their child is an adult. I hope that investigation's access to NB's medical records will give more answers to what really happened that day.
Yes, I would agree that her parents’ support doesn’t indicate innocence, which is why I cited the Pamela Smart case. You can be guilty and still have your family proclaiming your innocence, even decades after conviction as in the aforementioned case.
True, it’s pretty much par for the course.
Agree. I do wonder if NV might have communicated with her own father ( a cardiologist though, not a pediatrician) about Avi’s injuries. I don’t know how close they were, but she might have texted with her dad about what was going on once the parents had taken Avi to the ER. Just for friendly advice or support.
I dont understand why people do things like this. I mean, I know the reasons are pathological, but still in my mind I have to ask: why would you choose to be in a position where harm to a weaker person is possible? Nothing and no one MADE her be there. Those little baby boys are so darling; I'm sorry for what she did to them...
Ph.D. Student Visiting Friend During School Break Is Accused of Murdering Baby, Abusing Slain Child's Twin
Nicole Virzi was babysitting for a friend at the time of the infant's death.people.com
A Ph.D. student is accused of murdering an infant boy and abusing his twin brother while babysitting for a family friend in Pittsburgh.
View attachment 513025
How is it known that the DA is using twisted logic to seek the death penalty? I missed that info somewhere.
I want to know more about this felonious history! Was she considered a juvenile when other incidents occurred? Is that why they haven't been found?
'The defendant has a significant history of felony convictions involving the use or threat of violence to the person. The victim was a child under 12 years of age.'
Further details of these previous convictions were not shared. A public records check for Virzi only showed up details of the charges she faces over Leon's killing.
Woman accused of murdering friends baby faces death penalty
Nicole Virzi, 29, has been accused of murdering six-and-a-half-week old Leon Katz and injuring his twin brother while she babysat that them at the family's Pittsburgh home.www.dailymail.co.uk
The District Attorney’s office provided four reasons for seeking the death penalty in their notice. Those reasons were:
- The defendant committed the killing while in the perpetration of a felony.
- The offense was committed by means of torture.
- The defendant has a significant history of felony convictions involving the use or threat of violence to the person.
- The victim was a child under 12 years of age.
Prosecutors seeking death penalty in case against woman accused of killing baby in Shadyside
Prosecutors are seeking the death penalty against a woman who was charged in the killing of a 6-week-old baby.www.wpxi.com
There isn't a felonious history IMO. It's my belief that some are taking what was said in the article out of context. I pointed all that out in this post:
PA - Leon Katz, infant, murdered, and twin, injured by babysitter, Pittsburgh- June 24, 2024
The DA says "and the defendant has a significant history of felony convictions involving the use or threat of violence." What is that all about? eta: Ohh, apparently this has something to do with thinking ahead towards the sentencing phase. It's all very confusing.
The most important part of the article I quoted in my linked post above was:
Although Ms. Virzi does not have a criminal history, if a jury finds her guilty of the charges <snip>
The source to keep things together: DA seeks death penalty against San Diego woman accused in Shadyside newborn's death
www.post-gazette.com
I'm not so sure about the injuries to the twins genitalia. Couldn't that have happened while she was at the store? I may have missed it, but was it fresh blood? Maybe that's why she sent the picture, so by the time he got to her, it would have had time to dry? But the head injury, wasn't she the only one there at the time? If it was an accident, why didn't she just say that? Wasn't she the only one there with the other twin? How did she possibly think she wouldn't be blamed, what could she have been thinking? And, with both twins severely injured on the same day, with her only visiting, how did she think she could do this? It just doesn't make any sense, although I have no other possible scenarios, does anyone else? This is MOO, she may not have done anything, although I don't know how. Katt MOODA seeks death penalty against San Diego woman accused in Shadyside newborn's death
The Allegheny County District Attorney’s Office will seek the death penalty against a California woman accused of killing her friend’s newborn...
It has really not been proven in a court of law that those injuries were intentionally done as abuse or torture. You might be surprised that child abuse experts are sometimes not as sure as they sound. They still could be proven wrong. If she is found to be guilty of abusing those precious infants, yes lock her up, although IMO, I still don't think this is a DP case.
Today, this woman's life is balanced on a see saw of opinions at this point. I mean if she is somehow found innocent of intentionally abusing the twins, her life will still not be the same. She was negligent at the very least. But now her name and reputation is marred by the implications she had a criminal history when she doesn't at this point.
The twisted logic maybe because of the State's stated intentions. I don't know why the Prosecution announced it's DP intentions as they did. People already mistakenly got the idea she has a significant criminal history of felony convictions, and in reality at this point, her attorney said no criminal history. She isn't some hardened criminal, but it just seems like the Prosecution is going to go after her like she already is. She has no prior criminal history per her attorney.
All MOO and BBM.
I agree. There might be fuzzy areas between accidental injury and abusive injury but I don’t think these are in that fuzzy area. I think the medical professionals could tell. There are some injuries that couldn’t be accidental to a baby that’s too young to move around on its own. I mean I think JMO iiuc that someone could fall down the stairs or faint or something while holding their baby and that the injuries would not be so awful to point to abuse. Like even accidents that would scare the heck out of most parents aren’t going to be as severe as an abusive action. That’s how the doctors can tell the difference. JMO, I’m not that kind of doctor and not claiming any expertise. But from what I’ve learned through like PSA type stuff, you really cannot hurt a baby that badly on accident (unless you’re like in a car accident or something).
True as far as it goes, but the defense is arguing that since 2001 there has been a marked bias and incentives toward viewing injuries as stemming from child abuse, and in many cases proven wrong. This is the crux of the defense, and there will be expert testimony.
It's me again, but I just thought of this. If they do offer her a plea deal and she takes it, then it appears that she must be guilty, right? How would she prove her innocence if it never goes to trial? Isn't that how it works, they offer a plea, she takes it and that's the end. If she really didn't do it, why would anyone take a deal? If she did it and it goes to trial she could possibly offer some extenuating circumstances that resulted in the injuries. It seems to me, either way, she would be better off having a trial, no? MOO. Thanks. KATT
If she is innocent and her defense believes she is, it would be wrong to take a plea deal.
Yeah, I’m interested to learn more about that. I think regardless of where someone puts the subjective threshold, there’s still going to be an objective threshold at some point too just based on physics, right?
