woman charged for miscarrying her child in Alabama (illegal, dollar, kids)

[Joe90]

Should Alabama charge every women who miscarries, if they can be shown to have acted in a reckless manner ?- tripping over the cat for example

[PullMyFinger]

Originally Posted by Joe90

Should Alabama charge every women who miscarries, if they can be shown to have acted in a reckless manner ?- tripping over the cat for example

That would be an accident.

[Rocko20]

Originally Posted by PullMyFinger

Who is responsible for the safety of that child? If she drove drunk same thing.

She put the child in danger.

Pregnant women everywhere currently in arguments should all have a jail sentence now...

Those babies are in danger!

[ohhwanderlust]

Originally Posted by PullMyFinger

Who is responsible for the safety of that child? If she drove drunk same thing.

She put the child in danger.

In civilized countries, simply standing up for yourself is not "putting your child in danger" of being shot.

[Joe90]

Originally Posted by PullMyFinger

That would be an accident.

Why isn't the cat outside if the women is pregnant? -you haven't tripped over a cat before?

[PullMyFinger]

Originally Posted by ohhwanderlust

In civilized countries, simply standing up for yourself is not "putting your child in danger" of being shot.

Alabama doesn’t see it that way.

[DC at the Ridge]

Originally Posted by Bitey

You are correct that there are several foreseeable outcomes of this confrontation. The death or bodily injury of this child was one of them, the criminal liability for which is not mitigated by the fact that there were other foreseeable outcomes.

What's more, it need not happen "every time" or even most time to be a foreseeable outcome. For example, 80% of shooting victims survive. That "only" 20% die doesn't mean death by shooting is not a foreseeable outcome.

Nor does it matter that there are other foreseeable outcomes. If I shoot you in the leg, one foreseeable outcome is that you say "ouch Charlie, that hurts!", go to a hospital, and get patched up. Another foreseeable outcome is I strike your femoral artery and you bleed out before medical personnel can get to you in time. I would still be liable for murder because the latter outcome was foreseeable even though the former outcome was also foreseeable.

Actually, it is mitigated by the fact that there were other foreseeable outcomes. The court case comes down to whether the woman could reasonably have expected this one foreseeable outcome, and "reasonable" will depend on whether other foreseeable outcomes were more likely.

Your shoot you in the leg story is ridiculous. If you shot me and I died, that is murder. In some states it might be manslaughter, or various degrees of murder, but I die, YOU killed ME.

[Ceece]

CRAZY! It's a test case, they usually are crazy.

[DC at the Ridge]

Originally Posted by Delahanty

I don't know what happens on the planet you're from, but there's no requirement here that one can only use a gun for protection if your attacker has one, too.

You don't even need a permit to carry in Alabama. The pregnant woman was the aggressor, who initiated the physical fight, escalated it, then was shot when the other woman shot her, in self-defense.

As for the manslaughter charge due to the death of the fetus, that's just nuts.

The pregnant woman was UNARMED. She was the aggressor, but she didn't threaten the other woman with a gun. In fact, she was sitting in a car when she was shot. One of the other posters on this thread has posited that she was threatening to use the car as a weapon. Which begs the question, if a car is aimed at you, how do you shoot the driver in the stomach????

[SFit]

Absurd. Stupid to get in a fight for anyone, much less a pregnant woman. But unless they have proof she started a fight in hopes of a miscarriage, this is pro-life authoritarianism on the rise.