Support NeoGAF

[InsaneZero]

The fact that you have to ask the question is why you examine it as a possible crime in the first place. That's the point being made.

Why we should be concerned with a situation that currently only exists as a hypothetical? Why should actual real people be hurt to prosecute imaginary people?

 

[riotous]

On the contrary

You are mixing up my statements. The nuanced view on crime and punishment is not very common; I didn't say how common forgiveness for this type of forgetfullness is other than "many" would have a hard time with it. The article you mention has examples of that.. parents who have trouble imagining that they ever could do it to a child.. it's the reason given for the judge not handing a particular case to a jury.

If you want to dismiss the entirety of the justice system with "lol 'merica", fine, but this disingenuousness is a waste of everybody's time and it behooves you not to muddle the conversation with this kind of reductionism anymore than it needs to be.

I didn't dismiss the entirety of the justice system with "lol 'merica" in any way shape or form.

Go muddle yourself.

 

[Dunedain_Ranger]

So weird. When my wife was pregnant, this was one of the things you wonder about: "man,I can't forget my child in the car!"

My son is almost 3 now, and never once have I forgot that he was in the back seat. Ever. Seems like a silly thing to worry about in hindsight. I still don't understand how it could happen, I talk to my boy all the time in the car.

Tragic.

It's just a mistake but all it takes is one mistake and it changes everything. At first I was really upset after reading it because I made so many assumptions. Most says it's like leaving a light on or wallet at home , however the thing I couldn't grasp is a nine month old unlike a wallet cries, laughs , throws his bottle while sitting in the back seat. Or it could have been sleeping the whole time which makes it easier to forget I guess.

 

[water_wendi]

So weird. When my wife was pregnant, this was one of the things you wonder about: "man,I can't forget my child in the car!"

My son is almost 3 now, and never once have I forgot that he was in the back seat. Ever. Seems like a silly thing to worry about in hindsight. I still don't understand how it could happen, I talk to my boy all the time in the car.

Tragic.

Here is how it happened for one person from the article in the first post:

On the day Balfour forgot Bryce in the car, she had been up much of the night, first babysitting for a friend who had to take her dog to an emergency vet clinic, then caring for Bryce, who was cranky with a cold. Because the baby was also tired, he uncharacteristically dozed in the car, so he made no noise. Because Balfour was planning to bring Bryce’s usual car seat to the fire station to be professionally installed, Bryce was positioned in a different car seat that day, not behind the passenger but behind the driver, and was thus not visible in the rear-view mirror. Because the family’s second car was on loan to a relative, Balfour drove her husband to work that day, meaning the diaper bag was in the back, not on the passenger seat, as usual, where she could see it. Because of a phone conversation with a young relative in trouble, and another with her boss about a crisis at work, Balfour spent most of the trip on her cell, stressed, solving other people’s problems. Because the babysitter had a new phone, it didn’t yet contain Balfour’s office phone number, only her cell number, meaning that when the sitter phoned to wonder why Balfour hadn’t dropped Bryce off that morning, it rang unheard in Balfour’s pocketbook.

 

[zma1013]

So weird. When my wife was pregnant, this was one of the things you wonder about: "man,I can't forget my child in the car!"

My son is almost 3 now, and never once have I forgot that he was in the back seat. Ever. Seems like a silly thing to worry about in hindsight. I still don't understand how it could happen, I talk to my boy all the time in the car.

Tragic.

It may not be in the car when it happens to you. Perhaps one day you forget to pick up your kid at the bus stop, or maybe you forget your kid is outside playing. It can happen. Just because it hasn't yet means nothing. The nature of forgetting is that you do not know there is a problem until you remember what it is that you forgot.

 

[Marty Chinn]

Because if you consider it negligence, then even covering up you'd still face harsh consequences. I don't understand what is so complicated about understanding this.

A potential murderer isn't going to look at taking a child endangerment charge, they'd look elsewhere for an excuse.. but if you give them such an easy route to legal acquittal, they'll take it.

But that's going on the assumption that this happens often that people are purposely killing their kids in the car and covering it up. Seems like you're creating a law/punishment without any evidence or proof that it changes anything. Also do you make the law specific where it applies to kids left in cars, or do you open it up to be a bit more open to interpretation which can be applied to any instance that results in a child death? There are a lot more far reaching consequences for introducing a law that doesn't help or fix anything but in turn makes punishing the people that do have accidents in a more severe manner when they likely wish the accident never happened.

 

[riotous]

Why we should be concerned with a situation that currently only exists as a hypothetical? Why should actual real people be hurt to prosecute imaginary people?

Child murderers aren't hypothetical.

 

[jond76]

Your kid never falls asleep in the car? Babies facing backwards and sleeping can be like they're not even there.

I'm don't mean this to sound mean but, do you have a child? I guess the point I was trying to make is that before I had a child it seemed like a reasonable thing to worry about. But once he was around I was so aware of him that having worried about it seemed silly in retrospect.

 

[riotous]

But that's going on the assumption that this happens often that people are purposely killing their kids in the car and covering it up.

I'm simply attempting to explain the reasoning behind the idea. You guys didn't seam to get it.

 

[Box of Kittens]

Everyone should read this article before commenting:

Fatal Distraction: Forgetting a Child in the Backseat of a Car Is a Horrifying Mistake. Is It a Crime?

Imho, these parents have already been given the worst sentence possible: they will have to live the rest of their lives knowing that they were responsible for the death of their child. Any other punishment is basically superfluous.

I absolutely agree that everybody should read this article before commenting. In fact, I came into this topic with the intention of posting it because it's such an important read. When you come to understand how this sort of thing happens, you can take steps to prevent something like it from ever happening to you. Because of what I've read about this subject, I make sure to check the back seat of my car every time I drive somewhere, regardless of whether I think my 8-month old son is with me. Unfortunately, as evidenced by many of the comments in this thread, people tend to react with their emotions here and decide these must be horrible parents and it couldn't possibly happen to them. Sending these parents to prison serves no purpose that I can see, educating people about how these tragedies happen and how to prevent them is a far better solution.

I'll repeat: Read the article in the first reply. You may even save a life one day because you did.

 

[CrankyJay]

Here is how it happened for one person from the article in the first post:

At the risk of sounding callous, the way it was written with sentences starting with "because" just makes it sound like a rationalization.

 

[Danneee]

Doesn't murder imply that it was planned?

 

[Haly]

At the risk of sounding callous, the way it was written with sentences starting with "because" just makes it sound like a rationalization.

You should read the entire article. It's very effectively specifically because of paragraphs like that, where the author walks you through the situation from the parent's point of view, their initial disbelief, acceptance, and subsequent breakdown.

You're right, it does sound like rationalization, because it's trying to communicate, clearly and factually, the circumstances leading up to the Balfour's tragedy. The article is trying to say that, if you looked at the situation objectively, you can see the coincidences conspiring together to cause the Balfors to make the mistake they did.

 

[InsaneZero]

Child murderers aren't hypothetical.

You don't have a single real-life scenario to use as a basis. That's the very definition of a hypothetical. Even then though, you still have to show that these cases are more than just an almost nonexistent minority to justify the costs of imprisonment.

EDIT: Actually, the most important thing about this hypothetical is that this type of action would be classified as intentional homicide through willful neglect. So these people would be charged differently anyway.

 

[Marty Chinn]

I'm don't mean this to sound mean but, do you have a child? I guess the point I was trying to make is that before I had a child it seemed like a reasonable thing to worry about. But once he was around I was so aware of him that having worried about it seemed silly in retrospect.

I've got two. A three year old and a 7 month old. I often drive the three year old while my wife drives the 7 month old. I can't count the number of times I grabbed the wrong diaper bag, didn't grab the bottle, took the route for my 3 year old instead of 7 month old, all because we switched kids for the morning, or I took both instead of just the one.

I try to be very mindful that they're in the car, but the fact is things slip up, especially when running late in the morning because suddenly your three year old decided to poop in their underwear instead of in the toilet and your wife left early because of an early unusual meeting.

You don't intend for these things to happen, and over the 1000 drop offs I've done, all it takes is one time for it to happen. You can be perfect 99.999999% of the time but all it takes is that .000001 time for it to result badly.

Unless you've been an absolute perfect parent, never slipped up, never forgot something, etc, it should be understandable how it could happen. I hope it never ever happens to me, but at least I understand how it happens. Especially after reading the article in the OP.

 

[spandexmonkey]

Doesn't murder imply that it was planned?

Not in the case of felony murder (different than just murder). If someone dies in the course of committing a felony (child cruelty in this case), you automatically receive felony murder. Perhaps the thread title should be updated since there is a distinction between the two charges?

 

[water_wendi]

At the risk of sounding callous, the way it was written with sentences starting with "because" just makes it sound like a rationalization.

Its not an excuse but its the reason and the chain of events that led to tragedy.

 

[riotous]

On the contrary, this is a well known phenomena (in certain circles), and rarely is the offending parent ever charged, as the ARTICLE WHICH SHOULD BE REQUIRED READING FOR THIS THREAD shows clearly.

I'll also add the article that I did (mostly) read doesn't say this.

It says they rarely get fully prosecuted; and murder charges are rare.

They do not claim people are rarely charge; they only provide one example where someone wasn't charged in fact.

edit: found this part:

There may be no act of human failing that more fundamentally challenges our society’s views about crime, punishment, justice and mercy. According to statistics compiled by a national childs’ safety advocacy group, in about 40 percent of cases authorities examine the evidence, determine that the child’s death was a terrible accident -- a mistake of memory that delivers a lifelong sentence of guilt far greater than any a judge or jury could mete out -- and file no charges. In the other 60 percent of the cases, parsing essentially identical facts and applying them to essentially identical laws, authorities decide that the negligence was so great and the injury so grievous that it must be called a felony, and it must be aggressively pursued.

So 60% of cases there are charges.. 40 percent there aren't.

 

[riotous]

You don't have a single real-life scenario to use as a basis. That's the very definition of a hypothetical. Even then though, you still have to show that these cases are more than just an almost nonexistent minority to justify the costs of imprisonment.

Nobody knows for a fact how many of the hundreds of these cases were purposeful.

Nobody knows for a fact how many of the hundreds of these cases weren't purposeful.

If you want to consider it hypothetical, it's all equally hypothetical.

We do know that people purposefully kill their children and lie about it. That isn't hypothetical; it's a real phenomenon. As real as mistaken deaths.

But AGAIN.. I'm not saying I believe it to be a great reason for charging parents in these cases. It's just one reason to consider. How rare it would occur as an excuse isn't really anything we can nail down with any sort of certainty (or how rare it is now for that matter in places where charges are often filed.)

 

[Tangeroo]

For those defending the guy who says he shouldn't face any punishment, what if he has a second kid and the exact same thing happens again? Mental lapse, ends up in the child dying. Same result? No punishment? Just curious.

And if your response is that it would never happen, then how could it have happened the first time?

 

[water_wendi]

For those defending the guy who says he shouldn't face any punishment, what if he has a second kid and the exact same thing happens again? Mental lapse, ends up in the child dying. Same result? No punishment? Just curious.

And if your response is that it would never happen, then how could it have happened the first time?

Has such a scenario ever occurred in reality before?

 

[InsaneZero]

Nobody knows for a fact how many of the hundreds of these cases were purposeful.

Nobody knows for a fact how many of the hundreds of these cases weren't purposeful.

If you want to consider it hypothetical, it's all equally hypothetical.

We do know that people purposefully kill their children and lie about it. That isn't hypothetical; it's a real phenomenon. As real as mistaken deaths.

The people you describe are murderers under the legal definition. People who have consciously and intentionally made the decision to kill. The people being talked about in this thread made decisions unconsciously that unintentionally lead to death. At the very worst, that's criminally negligent manslaughter. Two very different charges.

As for finding if a person is guilty of murder? That's the job of the justice system.

 

[Haly]

For those defending the guy who says he shouldn't face any punishment, what if he has a second kid and the exact same thing happens again? Mental lapse, ends up in the child dying. Same result? No punishment? Just curious.

At the risk of falling for some kind of... troll, I'm sure he would kill himself if this happened a second time, if he even survives this ordeal.

 

[riotous]

The people you describe are murderers under the legal definition. People who have consciously and intentionally made the decision to kill. The people being talked about in this thread made decisions unconsciously that unintentionally lead to death. At the very worst, that's criminally negligent manslaughter. Two very different charges.

As for finding if a person is guilty of murder? That's the job of the justice system.

I do not agree with the murder charge. I don't think anyone in this thread does. Nor the cruelty charge.

My point is that I'm not entirely comfortable with "no charge" being filed. One small part of that is it does open the door for people to get away with murder more easily. I don't need it repeated what is and isn't murder; it's getting a little condescending.

 

[jond76]

I've got two. A three year old and a 7 month old. I often drive the three year old while my wife drives the 7 month old. I can't count the number of times I grabbed the wrong diaper bag, didn't grab the bottle, took the route for my 3 year old instead of 7 month old, all because we switched kids for the morning, or I took both instead of just the one.

I try to be very mindful that they're in the car, but the fact is things slip up, especially when running late in the morning because suddenly your three year old decided to poop in their underwear instead of in the toilet and your wife left early because of an early unusual meeting.

You don't intend for these things to happen, and over the 1000 drop offs I've done, all it takes is one time for it to happen. You can be perfect 99.999999% of the time but all it takes is that .000001 time for it to result badly.

Unless you've been an absolute perfect parent, never slipped up, never forgot something, etc, it should be understandable how it could happen. I hope it never ever happens to me, but at least I understand how it happens. Especially after reading the article in the OP.

I'm not the perfect parent by any means, and I want trying to point fingers. Good knows I've left the baby bag at home, forgotten this or that... But my boy has been the star of my show, and I've never forgotten that. It probably helps that I only have like a 4 mile commute to the daycare.

I feel terrible for that father.

 

[Mister Zimbu]

Nobody knows for a fact how many of the hundreds of these cases were purposeful.

If nobody knows of any cases where it was purposeful, then that number is zero from the law's perspective.

That's how the law in America works, and how it should work, for good reason.

We don't jail people because they might have committed a crime.

 

[K.Sabot]

Never understood how someone could disregard the existence of a human being that important to you in a situation like that.

I don't have a kid but I do take care of my niece, and when she's in my care, my first thought before doing anything unrelated to the care of her is "what should I do with her while I'm doing this".

That said, this isn't murder and manslaughter at worst. I'm not sure about jailtime, but they're definitely gonna need some counseling and mental therapy after this ordeal.

 

[Monocle]

I agree. The punishment should be more severe. Like never being able to see his son alive again.

Wow, that's pretty damn harsh.

Oh wait...

 

[Marty Chinn]

I'm not the perfect parent by any means, and I want trying to point fingers. Good knows I've left the baby bag at home, forgotten this or that... But my boy has been the star of my show, and I've never forgotten that. It probably helps that I only have like a 4 mile commute to the daycare.

I feel terrible for that father.

Sounds like you have one kid. Things change exponentially when you have two. It's not just twice the work. It's more. One kid was easy and cake for us. Two has been a challenge. When you have two kids, you can no longer just focus on one kid. So at any given time you're attending to one, the other can be unattended have a lack of focus on.

Never understood how someone could disregard the existence of a human being that important to you in a situation like that.

I don't have a kid but I do take care of my niece, and when she's in my care, my first thought before doing anything unrelated to the care of her is "what should I do with her while I'm doing this".

That said, this isn't murder and manslaughter at worst. I'm not sure about jailtime, but they're definitely gonna need some counseling and mental therapy after this ordeal.

Taking care of your niece and having a kid aren't in the same ballpark. One has you planning out a set day and time, for a known timeframe. The other is 24/7. Since it's not your kid, and it's on a specific schedule, you're way more attentive. Just like you are with any event that happens occasionally versus something that is happening all the time.

 

[riotous]

We don't jail people because they might have committed a crime.

The crime I'm discussing would be negligence, not murder. Or some variation of deaths related to negligence. One reason to keep it as a crime, would be to disuade people from using "mistake" as an excuse who are lying. They'd all still be guilty of the crime.

And it is considered a crime in 60% of cases according to the second post in the OP.

The topic is: making it completely legal to accidentally leave your child in a car. Which is what many are suggesting in this thread.

I feel like people are losing sight of what is being discussed for some reason. Nobody is discussing throwing murder charges at people because they might have committed murder.

 

[jond76]

Sounds like you have one kid. Things change exponentially when you have two. It's not just twice the work. It's more. One kid was easy and cake for us. Two has been a challenge. When you have two kids, you can no longer just focus on one kid. So at any given time you're attending to one, the other can be unattended have a lack of focus on.
.

You are correct. I hadn't considered that.

 

[Delta Assault]

Jesus Christ that article is heartbreaking. 15-25 times a year...

My whole day just got ruined. =(

 

[Stinkles]

Never understood how someone could disregard the existence of a human being that important to you in a situation like that.

I don't have a kid but I do take care of my niece, and when she's in my care, my first thought before doing anything unrelated to the care of her is "what should I do with her while I'm doing this".

That said, this isn't murder and manslaughter at worst. I'm not sure about jailtime, but they're definitely gonna need some counseling and mental therapy after this ordeal.

I am going to get myself banned the next time I have to respond to some gaffer with no empathy or rational understanding of human weakness, suffice it to say that you have not walked a yard in that guy's shoes.

Taking care of your niece is not living your entire life. It's a single task, not a mode of living.

 

[hydragonwarrior]

Really feel bad for the guy, but its clear he needs to be charged with manslaughter at the very least. Thats a charge which acknowledges that this was likely unintended, but still holds him accountable. Letting him go just because he clearly feels bad not only would undermine all the other convictions for manslaughter where the convicted felt regret, it would undermine the social contract that underpins the law. Being responsible for a child means taking responsibility when you fuck up, and there is no bigger fuck up than letting your child die needlessly under your care. If society is going to place the protection of children at its foundation, then cases like this need to be dealt with firmly in a court of law. When you raise a child, you're taking on the responsibility of welfare, and if you fuck up you should be held accountable.

Jail should not be the only way to hold a person accountable, however. He's still not a menace to society versus someone who has killed with intent or someone who will assault someone else again. Unless they prove that, I do not believe jail is where he belongs.

I just don't like the whole black and white thinking of "commit crime, throw in jail, forget about them until they're 50" when it comes to justice.

 

[ninjapanda]

This is an absolute tragedy - not a crime.

The loss of his child from a memory lapse is enough punishment for a lifetime.

There was a similar case late last year in Australia. The father didn't realise his mistake until he turned up at the daycare centre to pick up his child at the end of the day only to be told he had not dropped the kid off in the morning. He had driven to pick up his child who in reality was dead, strapped safely in the baby seat just a metre behind him. I try not to think of the emotional distress that would have come directly after that discovery. I'm not sure any amount of counselling would drown the guilt or fill the emptiness you would have inside after such an event.

http://www.watoday.com.au/wa-news/m...ad-in-car-outside-daycare-20131003-2uubd.html

The reality is this can happen to any of us. However simple safe guards like leaving something you need like your phone or work bag next to the child in the back seat so you have to physically access the rear doors to retrieve it can make all the difference.

 

[Keio]

We have our first baby and to be honest for the first te I can understand how terrible things like this can happen. The sleep deprivation can be really bad - much worse than what I had when partying as a student etc. Parenting is super hard.

I feel terrible for the dad. What a tragedy and what an injustice to charge him with murder. Sure, you can do negligence if you want, but losing your kid is the worst punishment in the world.

 

[andthebeatgoeson]

A substantial proportion of the public reacts not merely with anger, but with frothing vitriol.

Ed Hickling believes he knows why. Hickling is a clinical psychologist from Albany, N.Y., who has studied the effects of fatal auto accidents on the drivers who survive them. He says these people are often judged with disproportionate harshness by the public, even when it was clearly an accident, and even when it was indisputably not their fault.

Humans, Hickling said, have a fundamental need to create and maintain a narrative for their lives in which the universe is not implacable and heartless, that terrible things do not happen at random, and that catastrophe can be avoided if you are vigilant and responsible.

In hyperthermia cases, he believes, the parents are demonized for much the same reasons. “We are vulnerable, but we don’t want to be reminded of that. We want to believe that the world is understandable and controllable and unthreatening, that if we follow the rules, we’ll be okay. So, when this kind of thing happens to other people, we need to put them in a different category from us. We don’t want to resemble them, and the fact that we might is too terrifying to deal with. So, they have to be monsters.”

After Lyn Balfour’s acquittal, this comment appeared on the Charlottesville News Web site:

“If she had too many things on her mind then she should have kept her legs closed and not had any kids. They should lock her in a car during a hot day and see what happens.”

http://m.washingtonpost.com/lifesty...e0fe3a-f580-11e3-a3a5-42be35962a52_story.html

Seems appropriate. Damn that article is fine journalism. One of the best articles I've read all year.

 

[Mister Zimbu]

The crime I'm discussing would be negligence, not murder. Or some variation of deaths related to negligence. One reason to keep it as a crime, would be to disuade people from using "mistake" as an excuse who are lying. They'd all still be guilty of the crime.

And it is considered a crime in 60% of cases according to the second post in the OP.

The topic is: making it completely legal to accidentally leave your child in a car. Which is what many are suggesting in this thread.

I feel like people are losing sight of what is being discussed for some reason. Nobody is discussing throwing murder charges at people because they might have committed murder.

Our objection to the jail time is that there's not reason for it. Society gains nothing from him being in jail. He gains nothing from being in jail, he learns nothing additional from being in jail, and people are not safer because he is in jail. The only reasons I've seen for jail time are:

1. To satiate people's bloodlust
2. Those using the logic of, "he committed a crime, that's why he should go to jail", which is terrible and harmful on its own

The issue I take with what you're saying is that he and others should go to jail for this because they may have done it on purpose. That's a harmful and dangerous line of thinking. If they think he did it on purpose, by all means investigate it and throw him in jail if they can prove it. Anything less than that though, he's already been punished enough. He's already permanently damaged his life, there's no reason to dig him a deeper hole.

If he does need further punishment, it should be at the very most a large amount of community service (I like the poster earlier who suggested giving talks to new/expecting parents) and a misdemeanor.

 

[riotous]

The issue I take with what you're saying is that he and others should go to jail for this because they may have done it on purpose.

It would be one reason to not make it completely legal to do; it's not the sole reason for the charges to be available to prosecutors in the first place.

The reason for a criminal charge would be considering the act negligent whether it was purposeful or not. Which is what I said in the very post you responded to. We are talking about the death of a child here.

Whether jail time is involved is something else; in most of these cases they plea to something lesser and don't spend time in jail.

 

[Marty Chinn]

It would be one reason to not make it completely legal to do; it's not the sole reason for the charges to be available to prosecutors in the first place.

The reason for a criminal charge would be considering the act negligent whether it was purposeful or not. We are talking about the death of a child here.

Whether jail time is involved is something else; in most of these cases they plea to something lesser and don't spend time in jail.

The problem with making it a criminal offense of negligence lies in did he purposefully neglect his kid. It's one thing to neglect your kid by leaving them alone or not feed them, it's another when you thought you dropped your kid off at daycare, but didn't, but were in full belief you did. The latter seems more of an accident than neglect.

If a kid was on a playground and fell off a structure and landed on his head and died. Is the parent neglectful for allowing the kid up there? Is the parent neglectful for not being in a position to try and catch the kid if he falls? Or is it just an accident? The act of allowing the kid on the structure, or even not allowing but he ran up there anyway shouldn't result in criminal offense if something happens.

 

[riotous]

The latter seems more of an accident than neglect.

neglect - fail to care for properly.

Leaving a child in a hot car is a failure to properly care for them.

Whether that then becomes legally a neglect charge is an opinion; but it's hardly even debatable that it isn't neglect. If it ins't, then leaving a child in a hot care is caring for them properly.

 

[Marty Chinn]

neglect - fail to care for properly.

Leaving a child in a hot car is a failure to properly care for them.

Whether that then becomes legally a neglect charge is an opinion; but it's hardly even debatable that it isn't neglect. If it ins't, then leaving a child in a hot care is caring for them properly.

So then you agree with the example that if you let your kid on a structure and he fell off and died, that would be neglect? You let the child up on the structure where there's a risk he could fall. That would be a failure to care for the child properly.

Or it's just an accident.

 

[Stinkles]

neglect - fail to care for properly.

Leaving a child in a hot car is a failure to properly care for them.

Whether that then becomes legally a neglect charge is an opinion; but it's hardly even debatable that it isn't neglect. If it ins't, then leaving a child in a hot care is caring for them properly.

That's right. Everything is binary. Throw away the key.

 

[riotous]

That's right. Everything is binary. Throw away the key.

Nobody said this. Especially cute because I just said it's a matter of opinion whether that type of neglect should be criminal.

Tired of the emotional condescending replies.

Unsubscribing, thanks for the conversation.

 

[Extra Sauce]

Part of me thinks this is inexcusable, another part feels awful for the father. I can only imagine how he felt when he realized what he did.

 

[HamsterPackage]

Leaving kids and animals in cars still happens all the time, And wow its sad. This just happened to two friends of mine.

http://www.sunnewsnetwork.ca/sunnews/canada/archives/2014/05/20140526-212105.html

http://globalnews.ca/news/1340902/s...-died-of-heatstroke-in-back-of-walkers-truck/

The Pitbull and the Boston Terrier were owned by friends of mine, so sad.

 

[cheststrongwell]

If he didn't do it on purpose, I hope he doesn't spend one day in prison.

 

[PontyfaxJr]

Leaving kids and animals in cars still happens all the time, And wow its sad. This just happened to two friends of mine.

http://www.sunnewsnetwork.ca/sunnews/canada/archives/2014/05/20140526-212105.html

http://globalnews.ca/news/1340902/s...-died-of-heatstroke-in-back-of-walkers-truck/

The Pitbull and the Boston Terrier were owned by friends of mine, so sad.

Awful. But as much as she didn't mean for it to happen, she knew she left them there and she MUST have known what happens to dogs left in cars.

 

[Crazyorloco]

I Seriously can't imagine leaving my daughter in the car. While she's there we are always chatting... Once I get out of the car I go right to her door to get her out. Every time.

 

[jond76]

I'm kinda baffled as to why they would even go for murder. Typically the DA will go for the highest charge they believe the can prove on court. No way will they be able to prove the elements of murder.

The only thing I can think of as to why they chose such a charge is so when it goes to a grand jury, they will find no evidence for murder and choose not to indict. Games like this are played all the time.