Toddler dies in hot car, mother not charged (Page 2)

Here's a little hypothetical for everyone:  Four different scenarios, the question is:  What should the person in each scenario be charged with, if anything? If different charges for individuals what's the difference?  (Not holding anyone to a knowledge of the law, or legal principles, just your thoughts)

(1) Single mother runs out of formula, runs up to the store to get formula.  She thinks she's only going to be gone a few minutes. She puts her toddler in the car seat.  Drives to the store, runs in to get the formula leaving baby in the car seat.  It's mid-day in August in Florida.  Car reaches temperature in excess of 120 degrees and cooks the baby.  Result baby dead. 

(2) Same scenario as case #1 but instead of going to the store to get formula, mom is running to her crack dealer.  She's out of the car the exact same time as the women in scenario #1.  Same result, child dies in the heat of the car.

(3) Man is watching his college football team on Saturday evening.  His team loses, he gets angry and grabs his pistol goes outside, and with the intent to just let off some steam fires three shots randomly.  One of the rounds strikes a passing motorist and kills him.

(4) a young 20 year old father is left home alone with his infant son.  The child starts crying and the man tries feeding the child, bathing the child, changing the child but nothing works.  The child still cries.  The father leaves the room to calm down.  But even in the next room he can hear the child crying.  At his wits end he rushes into the room with the child and shakes the child to get the child to stop crying, then he throws the child down onto the bed.  The child suffers fatal skull fractures and brain hemorrhages.

I tend to think it can happen.

I think the proper response would be "there but for the Grace of God Go I"....

but that's just my opinion...

Some of the posts suggest that intent determines if it's criminal. I'm not a lawyer, but I don't think it matters as to criminal or not. Intent just changes the severity of the crime.

 In this case, the mother was operating in a habitual mode. Have you ever driven to work and don't remember the drive? If the child had fallen asleep or was just quiet, the mom had lots on her mind thinking about the day ahead, etc. I can totally see how it could happen. But, that doesn't take the responsibility for the negligence away.

I feel terrible for the family. Even prison can't be worse than what they are going through.

1 involuntary manslaughter
2 involuntary manslaughter
3 involuntary manslaughter
4 voluntary manslaughter (heat of passion?)

I think that the sentences, not the charges, for 1, 2, and 3, would be where I make distinctions between them.  I chose voluntary for 4 because the father acted with malice towards the baby, whereas in 1, 2, and 3, the people did not act with malice towards their victim, for lack of a better term. 

Thank you...I have been reading this entire thread and kept hoping someone would bring up the fact that we are beings of habit.  I don't know the exact facts of this case, but I could very easily see someone who normally doesn't bring their child to work, going about their day, as if it was a normal work day.  Not remembering, that on that day, child care was closed and they were suppose to be bringing their baby to work.  In my opinion, it could happen to anyone.  This is not a case of, I am going to leave the kids in the car while I run into the grocery store...It goes back to our habitual nature. 

There is nothing that the courts could do to this woman, that could punish her more than she is punishing herself.  Don't tear a family apart more than it is already going to be torn.  My opinion.

The Mac - 2007-09-05 4:28 PM

What if the woman was doing something socially unacceptable rather than going to work at City Hall? 

Suppose she was going to a bar to tie a few on and, as in this case, really did forget about the child?  Would there be charges? 

Something very similar happened in Lake Worth last year.  The woman scored some drug or another and went home to sleep it off, leaving the baby in the back seat.  She was charged, convicted and given probation. 

Children forgotten in car seats seem to be unfortunately very common in Florida, but the penalty's seem to greatly vary.

Now, this was deliberate.  Shopping yesterday, we parked headon to a car with a sleeping toddler.  No parents.  Windows were cracked, but even at 5pm, heat index was in the high 90's.  Then we saw the baby's brother was in the car with her.  Came out 15/20 min later.  They were both still in the car, now both were asleep.  I really wanted to call 911.  That's just pure-D ignorance and I'm surprised they're not a headline this morning.

I'm very sorry for this woman's loss, and if the police investigation has determined there was no crime, that's what it is.  But it's somewhat frustrating when as these cases occur to see some result in punishment and others not.  But then, I haven't gone back and researched each occurance to see what the true variables were.  Then again, I'm anal about leaving my cats in the sunroom if the outside temp in over 90 degrees.

see the bold part of the post you quoted.  your post reads like you are absolving the mother of any and all responsibility for this.  are you?

 Well based on the earlier answer by the police officer.  I have to say scenario #1 is a crime because it's based on convenience not accident.  There was no reason for that to occur and it was wilful not accidental so I go with involuntary manslaughter. 

Scenario #2 is no different than scenario 1.  Same rationale except the mother was probably judgmentally impaired.  However in most cases the law doesn't excuse behavior due to the fact that you impaired yourself.  Additionally this death occurred during the performance of an unlawful act. Which makes it voluntary manslaughter.

Scenario #3 is voluntary manslaughter.  This is the killing of a person during an unlawful or wanton act.  Clearly discharging a firearm towards a public road is wanton and likely to be unlawful depending on local law so that's an easy one.  A person would reasonably expect someone to be killed as the result of their behavior.

Scenario #4 is voluntary manslaughter.  First it's assault and battery on a minor and then it's voluntary manslaughter (child dies) since this was a wanton act likely to result in the death of another person in a sudden heat.  If there was any evidence of previous harmful behavior it could be elevated to murder since there may be the ability to show actual malice.     

Just because you are angry does not give you any right to act as you may choose.  We are a society and societies function on the rule of law.  The rule of law is not suspended because you are upset, angry or sad.  Animals act according to emotion, people are expected to act in a civilized manner at all times regardless of their desire to stray from that standard.  It really upsets me when the legal system arbitrarily decides to suspend the rule of law to excuse horrendous behaviors that are clearly in violation of the law.  Assault and Battery appear to be suspended in court rooms when people attack the accused.  The funny part is often the accused sits there for acting in exactly the same manner but somehow he/she is more guilty? 

Parents who have accidents and have their children die have probably suffered enough.  Parents who allow their children to die for their convenience should be further punished.  I would say that the woman from City Hall clearly was negligent but her price will continue to e paid for many years to come.  I think this also applies to parents who back over their children or in swimming pool deaths.  In order to make this a universal point I think there needs to be a standard set.  For instance what is the reasonable standard to be sure that your child is not in the car.  Do you check the backseat every time you get out?, Do you walk around the truck before you back out?  Since there is no across the board standard the police and prosecutors have to do what is in the states best interest and I believe they made the right call.