Mother Leaves Baby in Car; Baby Dies

[WiregrassTiger]

http://nypost.com/2014/06/25/dad-knew-son-was-trapped-inside-hot-car-warrant/
http://www.nbcnews.com/news/us-news/facts-will-show-death-kid-hot-car-not-negligence-says-n140491
That, plus the fact that he "forgot" him between taking him to breakfast and the 0.2 miles to his work, plus the smoking gun that he was googling how long it takes to kill an animal in a hot car...

You have to be a fudgeing idiot to defend this as an accident. Plain & simple. You have to be so invested in your predetermined position that this guy is a hero and deserving of our sympathy that you have shut off your brain in order to defend him.

Period.

And TW didn't forget her kid and kill it. If she had, that would be criminal negligence. But she didn't.

This guy very well may be guilty of murder, I don't know. But if these reports about the googlz, checking in at lunch and breakfast are true, then he is. I won't make my decision based on news reports though.

And, if TW had forgotten her kid, she would NOT have been guilty of anything other than making a mistake. There should be no crime for an honest mistake. And anyone who thinks otherwise is a fudgeing idiot. And likely sucks richards.

[GH2001]

He went to check on him at lunch?  It says that?

Fwiw...the warrant is not evidence.

They are looking for evidence of knowledge or intent...they may have found it.  Maybe.

No it didn't literally say that. Its called paraphrasing.

Evidence, facts whatever you call it in the general sense. The dude went back to the car at lunch.  THAT is not forgetting the child was in there. That shit is willful.

Yes, I know none of this is "official" as far as evidence and the guy will get his day in court to explain all of this away, but knowing all of this I don't know how anyone can defend this asshat as a victim. Give me a freaking break.

[GH2001]

This guy very well may be guilty of murder, I don't know. But if these reports about the googlz, checking in at lunch and breakfast are true, then he is. I won't make my decision based on news reports though.

And, if TW had forgotten her kid, she would NOT have been guilty of anything other than making a mistake. There should be no crime for an honest mistake. And anyone who thinks otherwise is a fudgeing idiot. And likely sucks richards.

Not a news report. A warrant. Issued to arrest him....and charge him with murder.  With facts.

http://i2.cdn.turner.com/cnn/2014/images/06/25/harris,.justin.criminal.warrant.6-25-14.pdf

[CCTAU]

As Kaos said, youre off the rails dude. And I also usually agree with you on most things.

And this is NOTHING like Zimmerman. That involved self defense and a lot of gray area. This involves the death of a toddler and possible neglect. And he IS innocent until proven guilty. I think most of what were saying is in response to the people who have made this guy out to be some kind of facebook hero, throwing money at him without knowing anything. They are worse than those who were proclaiming guilt of murder before anything actually came out.

If you go back and look in this thread, I said there was a middle ground somewhere. Pretty sure Chad and THS did as well. I don't think there was anyone on here that came right out and said " a child is dead so hang the mf'er!".

Read back through. Hang him, death penalty, etc..

So to wait until the evidence backs up murder is off the rails?

And this is EXACTLY like Zimmerman. He was tried and deemed guilty in the court of public opinion BEFORE ANY EVIDENCE OR TRIAL (which turned out to be wrong BTW).

Just like many of you are doing here.


I am not defending the guy. I am just stating that we should wait for the truth (if it is ever reached)

Many of you already know the truth. the rest is just posturing by the government.


I will wait and see. You guys load up your ropes and go hang out on the doorsteps of the jail.

[JR4AU]

http://nypost.com/2014/06/25/dad-knew-son-was-trapped-inside-hot-car-warrant/
http://www.nbcnews.com/news/us-news/facts-will-show-death-kid-hot-car-not-negligence-says-n140491
That, plus the fact that he "forgot" him between taking him to breakfast and the 0.2 miles to his work, plus the smoking gun that he was googling how long it takes to kill an animal in a hot car...

You have to be a fucking idiot to defend this as an accident. Plain & simple. You have to be so invested in your predetermined position that this guy is a hero and deserving of our sympathy that you have shut off your brain in order to defend him.

Period.

And TW didn't forget her kid and kill it. If she had, that would be criminal negligence. But she didn't.

It would help if you would read more carefully.

[WiregrassTiger]

Not a news report. A warrant. Issued to arrest him....and charge him with murder.  With facts.

http://i2.cdn.turner.com/cnn/2014/images/06/25/harris,.justin.criminal.warrant.6-25-14.pdf

You seem to be using the apples and oranges. I am not defending this guy. I'm just not convicting him because I haven't read much more about this than what's on here. And FYI, lots of warrants do not lead to guilty verdicts.

Let me clearly say, I am NOT saying that THIS guy is innocent of murder.

This is what I AM saying. There are ACCIDENTS  and there is NEGLIGENCE.

Let me try this. ACCIDENTS=APPLES and NEGLIGENCE=ORANGES

If you think that my comparisons of most of the following (friendly fire, car wrecks, industrial accidents) to accidentally leaving a kid in a hot car are not apples to apples, then you will just have to continue to disagree with me. Which I can assure you, I don't care either way.

But, if you can see the comparison, then it's not apples and oranges.

I would think that most people could make the connection but I also thought that most people wouldn't vote for Obama the second term.

[JR4AU]

You seem to be using the apples and oranges. I am not defending this guy. I'm just not convicting him because I haven't read much more about this than what's on here. And FYI, lots of warrants do not lead to guilty verdicts.

Let me clearly say, I am NOT saying that THIS guy is innocent of murder.

This is what I AM saying. There are ACCIDENTS  and there is NEGLIGENCE.

Let me try this. ACCIDENTS=APPLES and NEGLIGENCE=ORANGES

If you think that my comparisons of most of the following (friendly fire, car wrecks, industrial accidents) to accidentally leaving a kid in a hot car are not apples to apples, then you will just have to continue to disagree with me. Which I can assure you, I don't care either way.

But, if you can see the comparison, then it's not apples and oranges.

I would think that most people could make the connection but I also thought that most people wouldn't vote for Obama the second term.

Accident = negligence  < criminal negligence.

All moot points if he intended to kill the child.

[CCTAU]

Accident = negligence  < criminal negligence.

All moot points if he intended to kill the child.

Which will be determined by the evidence and maybe a trial. But up until that point in time, he is innocent.

That does not mean I want him to be my kid's scout leader. It does not mean there is no suspicion of wrong-doing. It just means we cannot hang him until he is proven guilty.

Either way, God bless that baby. I pray he fell asleep without any suffering. And may God be with the mother. I cannot imagine what she is going through.

[JR4AU]

Which will be determined by the evidence and maybe a trial. But up until that point in time, he is innocent.

That does not mean I want him to be my kid's scout leader. It does not mean there is no suspicion of wrong-doing. It just means we cannot hang him until he is proven guilty.

Either way, God bless that baby. I pray he fell asleep without any suffering. And may God be with the mother. I cannot imagine what she is going through.You

Ifn  you aint agin him yer fer him

[AUChizad]

Read back through. Hang him, death penalty, etc..

Links? Quotes?

You're full of shit, Councillor.

It would help if you would read more carefully.

I get you're playing the lawyer semantics word-for-word zero room for interpretation and logic game, but it takes exactly two brain cells to rub together that this guy who was researching how long it takes to kill something in his car, probably undershot based on whatever his Google results told him, and thought he'd be "in the clear" by lunch. He went into his car again to "put something in it", and somehow completely didn't see his child, yet again? You don't believe that if you're being honest.

[JR4AU]

Links? Quotes?

You're full of shit, Councillor.
I get you're playing the lawyer semantics word-for-word zero room for interpretation and logic game, but it takes exactly two brain cells to rub together that this guy who was researching how long it takes to kill something in his car, probably undershot based on whatever his Google results told him, and thought he'd be "in the clear" by lunch. He went into his car again to "put something in it", and somehow completely didn't see his child, yet again? You don't believe that if you're being honest.

RIF

[AUChizad]

RIF

I read it the first time. Still right.

I get you're trained to pick a side and stick with it, not letting facts interfere with your pre-determined position.

The rest of us call that willfully ignorant.

[WiregrassTiger]

Links? Quotes?

You're full of shoot, Councillor.
I get you're playing the lawyer semantics word-for-word zero room for interpretation and logic game, but it takes exactly two brain cells to rub together that this guy who was researching how long it takes to kill something in his car, probably undershot based on whatever his Google results told him, and thought he'd be "in the clear" by lunch. He went into his car again to "put something in it", and somehow completely didn't see his child, yet again? You don't believe that if you're being honest.

I think that everyone on here (at least I hope) want the guy to get fried if the reports about the googlz, breakfast at fil-a and lunch visit to the car are accurate.

My main difference with you, aside from your blatant racism and homosexual tendencies, is that you think that even if someone truly accidentally left their kid in the car that they deserve jail. I don't.

[Kaos]

On the googling with the supposition that it was initially accidental.

What if he realized at 4:30 that "oh crap I forgot my kid" and then in a spasm of self preservation decided to see how deep he likely was in trouble.  So if a dog suffocates in three hours I got a problem here. My kid has been out there for like eight. What to do now?

Nah. He's still a scum. Even if he was just checking to see how bad it was likely to be, the fact that he didn't go immediately to the car and seek help while still at the job ruins that line of thinking. Even colder like that. 

[JR4AU]

I read it the first time. Still right.

I get you're trained to pick a side and stick with it, not letting facts interfere with your pre-determined position.

The rest of us call that willfully ignorant.

Surprised you got that from my posts...or youve not read them all.  Ive moved on from it being an accident.  It loks like he may have intended it.  Whole different game now. 

[AUChizad]

My main difference with you, aside from your blatant racism and homosexual tendencies, is that you think that even if someone truly accidentally left their kid in the car that they deserve jail. I don't.

I think that IF it were a total accident, which it weren't, that he would culpable of some wrongdoing for being a negligent father. As I said, if the law says that criminal negligence is a misdemeanor and thus a monetary fine or very light jail time is appropriate, then that's appropriate.

Something was off from the beginning with me, because people can say all day that "it can happen to anyone", but how many people does it really actually happen to? Not almost. Actually. Why does this thread exist? Because the two cases where it happened in the past few years were rare and alarming enough to bring it to our attention. Most people are decent enough parents to remember they are in fact parents before 7 hours of baby baking takes place.

[AUChizad]

Surprised you got that from my posts...or youve not read them all.  Ive moved on from it being an accident.  It loks like he may have intended it.  Whole different game now.

You seem to be pretty confrontational with anyone in this thread taking the facts and applying them logically to determine this guy's guilt for someone who has "moved on from it being an accident".

[WiregrassTiger]

I think that IF it were a total accident, which it weren't, that he would culpable of some wrongdoing for being a negligent father. As I said, if the law says that criminal negligence is a misdemeanor and thus a monetary fine or very light jail time is appropriate, then that's appropriate.

Something was off from the beginning with me, because people can say all day that "it can happen to anyone", but how many people does it really actually happen to? Not almost. Actually. Why does this thread exist? Because the two cases where it happened in the past few years were rare and alarming enough to bring it to our attention. Most people are decent enough parents to remember they are in fact parents before 7 hours of baby baking takes place.

Being a decent parent has nothing to do with a human beings predisposition to make dumb ass mistakes. I don't know if you are a parent or not but my guess is that you are not, so you cannot likely relate to TW's story. I can easily see how someone who has worked long hours and in what they think is their normal routine of going to work, forgets that they were supposed to drop the sleeping baby off at the daycare. And they normally never make that stop.

Let's not confuse this particular case with a scenario of a definitive "forgot the baby was in the car" case. The key in my opinion is "knowingly" doing something that reasonable people would consider endangering a child.

[JR4AU]

You seem to be pretty confrontational with anyone in this thread taking the facts and applying them logically to determine this guy's guilt for someone who has "moved on from it being an accident".

LOL. 

[AUChizad]

Ifn  you aint agin him yer fer him