timetokill
Banned
Yup, this.
-
Hey, guest user. Hope you're enjoying NeoGAF! Have you considered registering for an account? Come join us and add your take to the daily discourse.
Man charged with murder after tricking girlfriend into taking abortion drug.
- Thread starter Dram
- Start date
- Status
Yup, this.
el retorno
Member
The entire debate around abortion is the definition of where human life begins. IMO a embryo isn't a human life at least in the states eyes. They don't get legal protection until viability in my eyes.
Devolution
Member
Guess people didn't read my post. If the baby/fetus was far enough along past the date she can no longer get an abortion, murder charge. If not, then intent to harm or whatever else fits. A forced miscarriage is no joke. It can kill someone.
Coffee Dog
Banned
hahaha, you're godwinning! how fun.
As for the bolded, what human life was lost? A fetus is not a human life until it can survive outside the womb.
Wiktor
Member
Then every abortion is a murder. Otherwise you have a huge disparity between mother and father, which shouldn't exist in proper law systems. You can't have mother being allowed do to it and then having father spent his life in prison for doing exactly the same thing. Sure, you can bring up "but it was her body" but this doesn't even begin to explain the disparity.
Unless the child was in advances enough stage to make abortion illegal, the father shouldn't be charged with murder. Otherwise it's just terrible discrimination.There are many other charges you can bring up against him.
Dark Octave
Banned
14 years in prison or 18 working two jobs to pay child support.
His life was ruined either way.
His life was ruined either way.
anarckitty
Member
Hmm. That guy deserves jail time, but 14 years? I think that's a bit excessive.
Extra Sauce
Member
This case raises some difficult questions about abortion. If what he did is considered murder, should abortion be considered murder as well?
edit: I like how I phrased that post as if I was bringing something to the discussion. Reading the thread, virtually everyone raised the same question.
edit: I like how I phrased that post as if I was bringing something to the discussion. Reading the thread, virtually everyone raised the same question.
Dark Octave
Banned
What method of execution would you have used?
The problem for the prosecution is proving beyond a reasonable doubt that she was tricked into taking it. A very difficult task.
Mammoth Jones
Member
Murder is the unlawfully killing of a human being. Abortion is legal. I think the question is "is it killing?".
Do you have any idea what 14 years in prison is like?
speculawyer
Member
14 years?
That seems quite excessive. Remember, you are paying for his room & board and it is not cheap. I'd rather see a lot more punishment with fines and ankle-bracelets though this guy definitely deserved some time in the crowbar hotel as well.
That seems quite excessive. Remember, you are paying for his room & board and it is not cheap. I'd rather see a lot more punishment with fines and ankle-bracelets though this guy definitely deserved some time in the crowbar hotel as well.
For the sake of argument's sakes, what would everyone's thoughts be if he had stabbed her in the stomach and killed the baby that way, rather then tricking her into abortion? Pushed her down some stairs? Punched her in the stomach? I'm asking this in relation to some arguing about whether or not it should be considered murder.
Yes, that's what the law needs more of, hard black and white lines.
Dr.Guru of Peru
played the long game
Those scenarios would obviously change the nature of the case entirely. What argument are you trying to present here?
In an idea world, for sure. The law needs to be clear and unambiguous.kaepernichehs said:
oh, it most definitely is killing. The question is "is it a human being?"
Ambiguity in law is NOT a good thing.
boiled goose
good with gravy
Definitely not murder but should be a serious offense. I thought there was a charge for harming or killing a fetus?
Well ive never poisoned my gf with the intent of killing my child.
He should be charged for assault, battery and attempted murder (if the woman survives) on the woman's life in your hypothetical.
That's the thing, I don't see how it changes the scenario, but I can tell most people would look at it like it's a completely different circumstance. Either way he killed a fetus inside of the woman against her will. I guess what I'm really asking is why would those scenarios be different than this one?
speculawyer
Member
dp
boiled goose
good with gravy
In this case he should be charged with assault plus killing the fetus. Still not murder.
This charge should be very serious though. I am someone very pro reproductive rights. Full body autonamy without question for women all the way. In this case he exerted his will over her body by tricking her. He should feel the full weight of the law but let's not call it murder.
D
Deleted member 325805
Unconfirmed Member
How far along was she? If she was still in the legal realm of abortion how could it possibly be murder? 14 years seems extremely harsh.
boiled goose
good with gravy
How serious is it to kill someone elses dog?
Dr.Guru of Peru
played the long game
Because your scenarios involve a physical assault against a woman.
Sec. 1841. Protection of unborn children
(a) (1) Whoever engages in conduct that violates any of the provisions of law listed in subsection (b) and thereby causes the death of, or bodily injury (as defined in section 1365) to, a child, who is in utero at the time the conduct takes place, is guilty of a separate offense under this section.
(2) (A) Except as otherwise provided in this paragraph, the punishment for that separate offense is the same as the punishment provided under Federal law for that conduct had that injury or death occurred to the unborn childs mother.
(B) An offense under this section does not require proof that
(i) the person engaging in the conduct had knowledge or should have had knowledge that the victim of the underlying offense was pregnant; or
(ii) the defendant intended to cause the death of, or bodily injury to, the unborn child.
(C) If the person engaging in the conduct thereby intentionally kills or attempts to kill the unborn child, that person shall instead of being punished under subparagraph (A), be punished as provided under sections 1111, 1112, and 1113 of this title for intentionally killing or attempting to kill a human being.
(D) Notwithstanding any other provision of law, the death penalty shall not be imposed for an offense under this section.
(b) The provisions referred to in subsection (a) are the following:
(1) Sections 36, 37, 43, 111, 112, 113, 114, 115, 229, 242, 245, 247, 248, 351, 831, 844 (d), (f), (h)(1), and (i), 924 (j), 930, 1111, 1112, 1113, 1114, 1116, 1118, 1119, 1120, 1121, 1153 (a), 1201 (a), 1203, 1365 (a), 1501, 1503, 1505, 1512, 1513, 1751, 1864, 1951, 1952 (a)(1)(B), (a)(2)(B), and (a)(3)(B), 1958, 1959, 1992, 2113, 2114, 2116, 2118, 2119, 2191, 2231, 2241 (a), 2245, 2261, 2261A, 2280, 2281, 2332, 2332a, 2332b, 2340A, and 2441 of this title.
(2) Section 408(e) of the Controlled Substances Act of 1970 (21 U.S.C. 848 (e)). (3) Section 202 of the Atomic Energy Act of 1954 (42 U.S.C. 2283).
(c) Nothing in this section shall be construed to permit the prosecution
(1) of any person for conduct relating to an abortion for which the consent of the pregnant woman, or a person authorized by law to act on her behalf, has been obtained or for which such consent is implied by law;
(2) of any person for any medical treatment of the pregnant woman or her unborn child; or
(3) of any woman with respect to her unborn child.
(d) As used in this section, the term unborn child means a child in utero, and the term child in utero or child, who is in utero means a member of the species homo sapiens, at any stage of development, who is carried in the womb.
(a) (1) Whoever engages in conduct that violates any of the provisions of law listed in subsection (b) and thereby causes the death of, or bodily injury (as defined in section 1365) to, a child, who is in utero at the time the conduct takes place, is guilty of a separate offense under this section.
(2) (A) Except as otherwise provided in this paragraph, the punishment for that separate offense is the same as the punishment provided under Federal law for that conduct had that injury or death occurred to the unborn childs mother.
(B) An offense under this section does not require proof that
(i) the person engaging in the conduct had knowledge or should have had knowledge that the victim of the underlying offense was pregnant; or
(ii) the defendant intended to cause the death of, or bodily injury to, the unborn child.
(C) If the person engaging in the conduct thereby intentionally kills or attempts to kill the unborn child, that person shall instead of being punished under subparagraph (A), be punished as provided under sections 1111, 1112, and 1113 of this title for intentionally killing or attempting to kill a human being.
(D) Notwithstanding any other provision of law, the death penalty shall not be imposed for an offense under this section.
(b) The provisions referred to in subsection (a) are the following:
(1) Sections 36, 37, 43, 111, 112, 113, 114, 115, 229, 242, 245, 247, 248, 351, 831, 844 (d), (f), (h)(1), and (i), 924 (j), 930, 1111, 1112, 1113, 1114, 1116, 1118, 1119, 1120, 1121, 1153 (a), 1201 (a), 1203, 1365 (a), 1501, 1503, 1505, 1512, 1513, 1751, 1864, 1951, 1952 (a)(1)(B), (a)(2)(B), and (a)(3)(B), 1958, 1959, 1992, 2113, 2114, 2116, 2118, 2119, 2191, 2231, 2241 (a), 2245, 2261, 2261A, 2280, 2281, 2332, 2332a, 2332b, 2340A, and 2441 of this title.
(2) Section 408(e) of the Controlled Substances Act of 1970 (21 U.S.C. 848 (e)). (3) Section 202 of the Atomic Energy Act of 1954 (42 U.S.C. 2283).
(c) Nothing in this section shall be construed to permit the prosecution
(1) of any person for conduct relating to an abortion for which the consent of the pregnant woman, or a person authorized by law to act on her behalf, has been obtained or for which such consent is implied by law;
(2) of any person for any medical treatment of the pregnant woman or her unborn child; or
(3) of any woman with respect to her unborn child.
(d) As used in this section, the term unborn child means a child in utero, and the term child in utero or child, who is in utero means a member of the species homo sapiens, at any stage of development, who is carried in the womb.
ElectricBlue187
Member
You really don't see any grey area between stabbing a pregnant woman in the stomach and slipping her a pill? The distinction is common sense, the former is life threatening to the woman, the latter not so much.
It is attempted murder- he poisoned the women and she could have died from complications of the drug he tricked her into using. Further, it could cause damage to her reproductive system removing her ability to bring another child to term.
While the fetus is not a person, it is a factor in this case because it was his motive for the crime. He killed of a portion of her body which could have lead to her death.
If someone slipped you a drug with the intent of destroying your kidneys, would that not be classified as attempted murder via poison?
NobleGundam
Banned
Wow that's horrible..
D
Deleted member 231381
Unconfirmed Member
I worry that this could be used to set the precedent for anti-choice legislation. The guy needs to be given an incredibly harsh sentence for what he did (destroying that woman's bodily autonomy), but I really feel it shouldn't be called murder; otherwise there's definitely going to people trying to argue the point backwards against abortion. I know it's just a matter of the name of the charge, but names are important.
ElectricBlue187
Member
Intent matters. He clearly was not intending to murder her. Yes, it could've caused life threatening complications but that didn't happen and I'm not sure how far you can get in court on what might've happened under different circumstances. The threat of complications is probably enough to lead to manslaughter or something, not murder of the woman
Mammoth Jones
Member
I mean about abortion. Obvious this guy was guilty of murder.
Well obviously there would be more charges, but this question is more in regards to the fetus.
The personhood, or lack thereof, of a fetus is not central to the Roe v Wade decision. The bodily autonomy of an individual (specifically, a pregnant woman) is.
What if we switch the role in this case. Women doesn't want to have kids, the man desires to sire a child one day. She slips him a drug that destroys the sperm making part of his testicle. He goes to the emergency room cause there is blood in his urine and finds out what really happened. How would she be charge?
Brian Griffin
Member
Thanks for posting this. It clears it up pretty well.
SquiddyCracker
Banned
By your logic, all abortions = attempted suicide.
If he lives? Battery. A non consented medical procedure is battery. If he dies from complications then it is manslaughter.
Brian Griffin
Member
Read nateeasy's post above. According to the law the fetus is considered a human being when killed in the manner that he did. So it's not assault, it's murder. 14 years is appropriate for murder.
The law's position is the part he's not sure he agrees with.
SquiddyCracker
Banned
Rimon-hanit
Member
Wow that is a tough one I don't see how the prosecution will pull it off sound more like aggravated assault.
No- medical abortions are done with the consent of the women. This women did not give her consent and was purposely give a different drug to harm to her body.
Flo_Evans said:
I'll give you the manslaughter charge (cause honestly I always get the fine line between manslaughter and murder confused).
I don't agree with "non consented medical procedure" cause it was not performed by a doctor or hospital. It was a dude who switched labels and gave the drug to women. Unless your referring to the doctor is diagnosed the bacteria infection. Did he go along with his son's plan, or was he duped by the son too ( I know the son falsified the prescription)?
- Status
Similar threads
- Locked