From: "S. M. Halloran" <mitch@duzen.com.tr>
Date: Wed, 12 Nov 1997 20:38:37 +0800
To: Paul Bradley <paul@fatmans.demon.co.uk>
Subject: Re: Bell vs. Woodward--justice?
In-Reply-To: <v03102800b08d18c99cbf@[207.167.93.63]>
Message-ID: <199711121324.PAA14037@ankara.duzen.com.tr>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain



On 11 Nov 97, Paul Bradley <paul@fatmans.demon.co.uk> was found to have 
commented thusly:

> 
> > Apparently shaking a baby to death is a lesser crime than opposing
> > government fascism and having a continuing interest in chemistry.
> 
> Apparently so, I must say in this particular case I see a cause for an 
> aquittal based on reasonable doubt, but I`m not a juror so I didn`t see 
> all the evidence so my opinion is not really valid. The general principle 

The question is why she shook the baby at all.  If you have a sick 
baby, you call the emergency medical services, period!   And especially 
if the child is not your own.

This 19-year old was way out of her league and not at all fit for 
child care activities.  I am a firm believer that baby care for 3 year 
olds and less should be licensed.  The requirements for the license 
would be minimal.  It just merely shows that you understand that babies 
less than 1 year of age often cry--some hardly at all, others damn near 
all the time--and that 97% of the time there is a reason that can be 
found and the solution implemented, and the other 3% of the time the 
reason is beyond our understanding, but things will just seem to take 
care of themselves.  The licensing procedure might also be a way of 
checking if you have the minimal temperment to deal with infants and 
small children.

I frankly think the 19 year-old is guilty of negligent homicide (that 
is, causing the death of the baby because of ignorance of proper baby 
care).  I could go on and on about my idea of proper 
parenting (and baby care), but I don't think the people on this list 
would like the drift.

> It makes a mockery of the judicial system that a judge can overturn a 
> verdict like Zobel has done in the Woodward case, sure, allow her to 
> appeal, but giving an appointed official the power to decide a verdict 
> makes me sick, and a sentence of 279 days for manslaughter is a joke.

Having lived on the outside of America now for some time, I know that 
those who are not Americans have a hard time figuring out our justice 
system.  But although each state has its own set of penal codes, they 
are pretty much uniform in their agreement about trial procedure 
regarding disposition of felonies.  I think there is a reasonable 
argument that the prosecution should be interested in justice or in 
being a representative of The People of the State of ...:  does the 
prosecutor really believe that the accused committed the crime, or is 
there a district attorney election coming up and this murder rap has to 
go down soon?

What about the judge?  His first purpose is to make sure the law is 
followed, especially with respect to trial procedure.  But with the law 
is JUSTICE!  It has always been my belief that the ultimate goal of 
these sacred occasions is justice.  In California--from where I come 
and a state which often leads in setting standards of 
jurisprudence--the judge has the absolute right to overturn a 
guilty verdict or modify it in some way rather than let it go to an 
appellate court and make those guys mad.

The judge in this case never overturned the verdict (an action 
appealable in any case) but said she was guilty of the crime of shaking 
the baby to death, but not intentionally.  Since the 19 year old 
doesn't deny shaking or "rough handling" the baby, there is no 
reasonable doubt.  In my state, she is guilty of voluntary 
manslaughter.  I also would have sentenced her to receive instruction 
on how to be a better parent and how to "chill out" whenever a baby 
cries.  gawdhelpusall, but one day this woman may be a mother!

I am rather curious to know where public opinion lies in the UK, just 
to get a fix on cultural differences.

Mitch Halloran
Research Biochemist/C programmer/Sequoia's (dob 12-20-95) daddy
Duzen Laboratories Group
Ankara   TURKEY
mitch@duzen.com.tr