GUILTY GUILTY OF ABUSE OF A CORPSE ONLY OH - Annabelle Richardson, newborn, found in grave 7 May 2017 #3

[lonetraveler]

Just a guess but maybe they think Skylar didn't know it was illegal.

That's my thought as well, that and the way she told the doctor about burying the baby in the backyard.

 

[dixiegirl1035]

Ohio statute, abuse of a corpse:

" No person except as authorized by law shall treat a human corpse in a way that the person knows would outrage family (or) community sensibilities."

So, no, it's not against this particular law (the only related charge against her) to bury her baby in the backyard.

That Skylar didn't wrap up her baby versus the fact she buried her baby rather than throwing her in the trash, and that she put flowers on the grave. Outraged sensibilities are rather subjective.

Thanks, but they use the word *knowledge* in their question. And then they didn't up follow up with what knowledge they were talking about. And I don't see the word knowledge in what you posted.

"Chanley Shá Painter‏ @ChanleyCourtTV 4m4 minutes ago
JURY QUESTION:
Can we please have simplified definition of abuse of a corpse?
Is it against the law to bury a body in your backyard without knowledge?
ANSWER: The court can not provide other definitions."

 

[Cindizzi]

Does someone here have the jury directions, in addition to the legal verbiage of such? That they could put up

Lawriter - ORC - 2927.01 Abuse of a corpse.
Was she charged with abuse of a corpse solely on the idea of the baby being burned? Is that what the jury is grappling with? I would think that just the backyard burial in shallow grave where animals could get to it would constitute abuse.

 

[Seattle1]

I think they have that information, and I think somebody in the jury would speak up and say her father was outraged at least!

I promise the community sensibilities were offended and/or outraged -- it was a near lynch mob.

 

[Hope4More]

Speculating, but I think this means they are trying to figure out if Skyler putting the baby in the backyard grave fits the legal definition of abuse of a corpse (whether she did in fact bury the baby has not been disputed). I think this means they don't believe she burned or "tried to cremate" the baby, which MAY also reflect that they are considering whether what she said in the police interrogations (the second one, in particular) was believable--because I think most reasonable people/jurors would agree that burning a baby's body with a lighter is abuse of a corpse.

Good point, up to a point about the burning allegation.

If all the jurors believed Skylar tried to burn her baby, there would be no need to ask whether just burying her baby in the backyard was illegal.

But I wouldn't assume much beyond that about what jurors might be thinking about Skylar's "confession" as a whole.

 

[dixiegirl1035]

Of course, none of us knows, but I assumed they’d start with the 1st charge and work their way down the list.

I don’t even understand the “without knowledge” part of Q2.

That's what I love about being here, is that everybody has a different opinion to listen to and learn.

I myself, would start with the Lesser charges and work my way up logically. We each do things differently.

 

[Seattle1]

I get something different (than what your discussing) when I click the link.

Link works for me -- you need to read entire article to understand legal sticking point with the way this charge is written /defined by the Ohio criminal code.

 

[SassynOz]

I just now after not watching any of this trial have discovered that if you have. Roku or roku tv the law and crime app is there to add for free. Ugh so now I have it of course it’s on verdict watch. But I know now so FYI for all others.

 

[osu]

Another photo of BSR and mother in court this morning.

Local 12/WKRC-TV on Twitter

 

[Mauig’ma]

I promise the community sensibilities were offended and/or outraged -- it was a near lynch mob.

I imagine it’ll be the same if she’s found not guilty. I myself will be outraged and disappointed.

 

[ApplebyJ]

Verdict is in. I have a bad feeling she’s going to walk :-(

 

[Sommar]

I sincerely hope Skylar's brother moves away from that dysfunctional home.

Amen!

 

[osu]

BREAKING: Verdict is in from the jury. #SkylarRichardson @dayton247now

Molly Reed on Twitter

 

[Hope4More]

Thanks, but they use the word *knowledge* in their question. And then they didn't up follow up with what knowledge they were talking about. And I don't see the word knowledge in what you posted.

"Chanley Shá Painter‏ @ChanleyCourtTV 4m4 minutes ago
JURY QUESTION:
Can we please have simplified definition of abuse of a corpse?
Is it against the law to bury a body in your backyard without knowledge?
ANSWER: The court can not provide other definitions."

What I quoted was the exact statute. The fact the jury didn't/couldn't state clearly what they mean by " without knowledge" is a perfect example of why the judge isn't going to chance wading into the waters of appeal by answering a question the jury might not even be asking.

 

[kim.kitchenstupman]

I feel sick.

 

[osu]

We are being told there is a verdict is the Brooke Skylar Richardson case. The jury is being brought back to the courtroom now. @Enquirer

Cameron Knight on Twitter

 

[dixiegirl1035]

Perhaps not even guilty of abuse of corpse.

I learned this charge is tricky after another Ohio teen plead no contest to abuse of corpse, and tampering with evidence in 2015.

The charge has a legal sticking point having to do with law not mentioning whether the person commits the act knowingly.

Teen pleads no contest to abuse of corpse, tampering

Would love to read up on that! But the link you have just goes to the main page today of that publication and does not pull up an article. FYI thank you.

I guess it's time to Google is this is clear as mud. Perhaps the search words would be abuse of a corpse Ohio and knowledge?

 

[Hope4More]

BREAKING: Verdict is in from the jury. #SkylarRichardson @dayton247now

Molly Reed on Twitter

Whoa!!!!!!!!!

 

[Weki]

I'm still looking for the legal definition that the judge gave that might have been printed out by the media, or was posted earlier by somebody in the thread for this charge. Did I miss it?

The instructions from the judge on count 5 : Abuse of a corpse is as follows:

The defendant recklessly treated a human corpse in a way that would outrage reasonable community sensibilities without being authorized by law to do so. Authorized by law or a county coroner or designated members of the staff, physicians, surgeons, accredited medical students, embalmers certified to remove organs for transplant purposes, persons authorized to remove certain human organs by consent of the deceased according to law and all other persons acting under authority of law. Recklessly has already been defined for you. There may be one or more causes of an event, however if the defendant's act or failure to act was one cause then the existence of other causes is not a defense.

It's hard from this to determine if burying a body in your backyard qualifies as abuse of a corpse. Additionally, she said she tried to cremate the body and my understanding was that this charge was related to those claims.

Maybe someone has the definition of "recklessly" that might help.....

 

[Wishbone]

verdict!!