Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
Judge Michael Gross of Criminal Court told Ms. Sorensen, 30, that charges would be dropped and that the record of the charges would be sealed if she remained out of trouble for six months. The judge said that Ms. Sorensen would not have to remain in the United States or return to court at the end of the six months.
That's a plea bargain, not an acquittal or dismissal.
So, yeah, it apparently was against the law.
No mention of any plea bargain in the documents
"The charges against the tourist, Annette Sorensen, were dropped at the request of the Manhattan District Attorney, Robert M. Morgenthau, and prosecutors noted that the dismissal was not opposed by the City Administration for Children's Services."
and
"''No purpose would be served by the prosecution of this case at this time,'' said David Austen, the assistant district attorney prosecuting the case.
Judge Michael Gross of Criminal Court told Ms. Sorensen, 30, that charges would be dropped and that the record of the charges would be sealed if she remained out of trouble for six months. The judge said that Ms. Sorensen would not have to remain in the United States or return to court at the end of the six months."
Charges Against Danish Mother Are Dropped - The New York Times
I have traveled in Europe, and never once saw people leaving babystrollers outside of a restaurant, with a baby inside. At least not for the length of time this woman was inside the restaurant. It's not like she ran in, ran back out quickly or something. She was enjoying herself drinking and dining for a considerable period of time. It's bizarre that she is trying to pin this on a cultural misunderstanding. Her message is this: "you Americans are just ignorant bigots". Instead, she needs to stop promoting this as a safe practice for parents; it's not.
It may not be done much today (for obvious reasons), but well into the 1950's and even beyond mothers in many European countries left their babies in prams outdoors, and yes often "alone".
In fact it was common enough in the United States as well going into the 1940's.
Not just stores, restaurants or whatever, but often babies would be left outdoors (front or back garden) to take their naps in fresh air and sunshine. The idea was to send baby out for an "airing" to benefit from fresh air. This as opposed to the conditions indoors which when you consider sources of home heating and cooking (all those coal or wood fueled fires) probably didn't offer the best of indoor air conditions.
People believed then in the power of "fresh air" and "ventilation". It was one reason why homes back then were so drafty and or people kept windows open even in dead of winter.
The other reason for leaving baby out in the sunshine to "air" was so it would get the benefits of vitamin D, which we all know comes from exposure to sunshine. Before good modern man made multivitamins/vitamin D came along mothers routinely gave their infants and children the dreaded cod liver oil.... Leaving baby out in sunshine and or sending your children to play in same was an easier and less distasteful way of ensuring they got vitamin D.
No one is saying the practice was 100% safe. In fact yes, babies were kidnapped from their prams.
That's a plea bargain, not an acquittal or dismissal.
So, yeah, it apparently was against the law.
No a "plea bargain", would require her to enter a plea of guilty to some charge in exchange for a reduced sentence. She did not plead guilty to anything, and the charges were indeed dismissed.
I have traveled in Europe, and never once saw people leaving babystrollers outside of a restaurant, with a baby inside.
I have seen it countless times in Denmark, Sweden and Finland. Clearly you have not been to these places. Europe is a pretty big place and very different from one country to the other.
That was during the time the NYC police were strip searching pretty much all females, regardless of the charges. They should have charged most of those jackasses with assault.
They weren't required to use a lady cop for those searches?
Well, folks, after all this back-and-forth on this thread, I've got a hankering to actually check out the book! I can just imagine what she says; she must have felt she'd fallen into some primitive, backward society that somewhat routinely molests women, and treats ordinary people like criminals. A police state. Former E European backwaters come to mind. I'm sure it was a nightmare for her, and fairly traumatic.
Could it all have been avoided, by exercising what we would call common sense? It makes me wonder why her American husband didn't say anything. Even if you accept that as a student, she couldn't be expected to know the norms and the risks (I'm not saying this isn't debatable), her hubs certainly did. So what's the deal, there? Was he a wuss? Didn't want to "advise" his ex, and, if met with resistance, put his foot down? I mean come on--it takes two to tango. He was the tango partner. It was his child, too. So what's his excuse?
This woman is an idiot. Anyone who would leave an unattended baby (or child ) out there alone doesn't deserve to have children.
I just stayed in a hotel, and there were families staying there with young kids because they were there for some sports competitions. I would get on the elevator and there would be a young kid in there, all alone, and they would be about 6 or so years old........no parent in sight. How anyone could allow a child that young to go out without some adult watching them is beyond me. Then they wonder how kids get abducted or worse.
This isn't Mayberry anymore, nor is it 1950.
It was never Mayberry.
Statistically, this is one of the safest times and places in history to be a child.
Obviously the risk vs. reward margin varies by situation, but it's not necessary nor developmentally appropriate to watch a typical school-aged child every second. They learn to be independent by doing things independently.
One of my fellow students in grad school was from Germany. He told the story of when he and his wife went to a neighbor's party after their young children went to sleep (they left them in the home alone while they were next door). They didn't understand what people were upset about.
It's been 20 years, so she's had plenty of time to revise her story, while other people who knew about it then, are long gone or don't remember.
America does not have to follow the laws or customs of Denmark, or any other country.
Quote:
Originally Posted by normstad
Yeah, but you should see the conniption American citizens have when they are arrested at the Canadian border trying to bring their handguns in.
You're correct, a citizen's right stops at the border of it's country. Then they have to abide by the laws of the country they enter, and never mind what you think your Constitution allows.
So you are willing to accept the logic of the argument, as long as you are able to put some anti-American spin on it.
I won't speak to the legality of her actions but it does sound like she handled the whole situation like a real d-bag.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
