Support NeoGAF

[Zoe]

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.

They didn't charge him with murder, they charged him with felony cruelty to children. Felony murder gets added automatically because the child died.

 

[Marty Chinn]

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.

Now imagine having two kids and you don't always take the other kid, so the other kid will be on the other side of the car and you won't be right next to that door when you get out of the car.

Also, I bet the father involved also couldn't imagine he'd ever leave his kid in the car either.

 

[dr3upmushroom]

This is horrible, I can't even imagine what the child must have suffered through... How do you leave your kid and not remember?

 

[Marty Chinn]

This is horrible, I can't even imagine what the child must have suffered through... How do you leave your kid and not remember?

Read the article in the OP. It explains how this happens.

Edit: Here, just in case:

http://www.washingtonpost.com/lifes...e0fe3a-f580-11e3-a3a5-42be35962a52_story.html

 

[Dennis]

This is horrible, I can't even imagine what the child must have suffered through... How do you leave your kid and not remember?

I couldn't even think about it if I was the father.

I honestly think I might commit suicide.

 

[andthebeatgoeson]

I couldn't even think about it if I was the father.

I honestly think I might commit suicide.

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

Each instance has its own macabre signature. One father had parked his car next to the grounds of a county fair; as he discovered his son’s body, a calliope tootled merrily beside him. Another man, wanting to end things quickly, tried to wrestle a gun from a police officer at the scene. Several people -- including Mary Parks of Blacksburg -- have driven from their workplace to the day-care center to pick up the child they’d thought they’d dropped off, never noticing the corpse in the back seat.

 

[lewisgone]

I'm not saying he should, but I would kill myself. I couldn't live with that, no way in a million years.

 

[Shig]

Thanks for that link.

4. If you see a chile alone in a car, don't hesitate to call 911.

Urgh, no sir, I don't like this one.

Go read this:
http://www.salon.com/2014/06/03/the_day_i_left_my_son_in_the_car/

The digest version: This mom left her son in the car at his repeated insistence as she dipped into a store, in clear conscience of every variable. It was daylight, her car was in a safe, visible area, the windows were cracked. She went in for one item, as planned, and came right back out.

In this speck of time, someone saw the kid and called 911.

The cops showed up on her doorstep shortly after and she was thrust into a years-long nightmare scenario of financial penalty and moral browbeating. Y'see, in the eyes of the law, the person that leaves their kid in the car for a minute with care taken that they are safe is every bit the same reprehensible scourge of parental villainy as the one who leaves their kid in an airtight deathtrap for hours.

Which is patently absurd.

So your rule wants for some interpretation, in lieu of the lack of it allowed by the law. Does the kid look uncomfortable? Are the conditions severe? Have you, personally, observed the child left alone for any vaguely unreasonable extended period of time, or are you immediately assuming it upon first sight, with no reason or evidence given? Why are you eager to tie up and hassle everyone involved with a initiating a 911 dispatch, but unwilling to even entertain the notion of approaching the car to take one damn second to ask the functioning human being inside if they're OK, and potentially avoiding the whole situation altogether?

The very act of leaving a child in a car is not inherently negligent. Your parents probably left you in a car, once or thrice upon a time. Do you wish that some 'good samaritan' had come along in those moments, sicced the dogs of justice upon them, and dragged them through the streets for their malfeasance?

 

[Marty Chinn]

Urgh, no sir, I don't like this one.

Go read this:
http://www.salon.com/2014/06/03/the_day_i_left_my_son_in_the_car/

The digest version: This mom left her son in the car at his repeated insistence as she dipped into a store, in clear conscience of every variable. It was daylight, her car was in a safe, visible area, the windows were cracked. She went in for one item, as planned, and came right back out.

In this speck of time, someone saw the kid and called 911.

The cops showed up on her doorstep shortly after and she was thrust into a years-long nightmare scenario of financial penalty and moral browbeating. Y'see, in the eyes of the law, the person that leaves their kid in the car for a minute with care taken that they are safe is every bit the same reprehensible scourge of parental villainy as the one who leaves their kid in an airtight deathtrap for hours.

Which is patently absurd.

So your rule wants for some interpretation, in lieu of the lack of it allowed by the law. Does the kid look uncomfortable? Are the conditions severe? Have you, personally, observed the child left alone for any vaguely unreasonable extended period of time, or are you immediately assuming it upon first sight, with no reason or evidence given? Why are you eager to tie up and hassle everyone involved with a initiating a 911 dispatch, but unwilling to even entertain the notion of approaching the car taking one damn second to ask the functioning human being inside if they're OK, and potentially avoiding the whole situation altogether?

The very act of leaving a child in a car is not inherently negligent. Your parents probably left you in a car, once or thrice upon a time. Do you wish that some 'good samaritan' had come along in those moments, sicced the dogs of justice upon them, and dragged them through the streets for their malfeasance?

I'm not sure where I stand on this one. I'm torn.

On one hand, I totally feel for the mother and have been through that similar situation of the kid saying one thing and then doing another and now you're tied because you're out and the kid won't cooperate. I've also been in the situation where I've arrived and the kid was asleep after having trouble sleeping. So I totally understand where she's coming from.

On the other handing, having a 7 month old and a 3 year old, I just couldn't imagine leaving them in the car by themselves. Not even the fear of them dying but the fear that they would be kidnapped or something even worse. I just couldn't leave my kids in the car like that. I've given up and turned around in situations like that. I also understand the scenario she was in was time sensitive and going to result in a lot of issues if she didn't get the task done.

Then there's the issue as someone who sees the child in the car, especially a young toddler or baby, you just don't want to take the risk of not reacting and leaving a kid in the car only to find out they died later. That would be heart breaking.

So I'm really torn about this because I feel for the mother, but I just don't think I'd ever leave them in the car at that the age of 1 and 4 and can understand it being called in.

 

[Aureon]

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

A parent that wants their child dead has a million ways to go about it.
Prosecuting incidents because it may be a deterrent to imaginary people who'd also have a whole array of other options to go on their heinous crime is ridicolous.

In my book, it's better to let a guilty man walk free rather than imprison a innocent man. By far.

 

[GodofWine]

I can't imagine that feeling of utter horror and despair would ever let go of him...he's going to suffer everyday of his life.

I have a 5 and 2 year old, if i did this id probably be fit for a life in a padded room. But id want to be there for my other child..now..

If i killed my only child i doubt id make it a month before a ate 3 bottles of Tylenol PMs, seriously, life would be unbearable.

 

[andthebeatgoeson]

Urgh, no sir, I don't like this one.

Go read this:
http://www.salon.com/2014/06/03/the_day_i_left_my_son_in_the_car/

The digest version: This mom left her son in the car at his repeated insistence as she dipped into a store, in clear conscience of every variable. It was daylight, her car was in a safe, visible area, the windows were cracked. She went in for one item, as planned, and came right back out.

In this speck of time, someone saw the kid and called 911.

The cops showed up on her doorstep shortly after and she was thrust into a years-long nightmare scenario of financial penalty and moral browbeating. Y'see, in the eyes of the law, the person that leaves their kid in the car for a minute with care taken that they are safe is every bit the same reprehensible scourge of parental villainy as the one who leaves their kid in an airtight deathtrap for hours.

Which is patently absurd.

So your rule wants for some interpretation, in lieu of the lack of it allowed by the law. Does the kid look uncomfortable? Are the conditions severe? Have you, personally, observed the child left alone for any vaguely unreasonable extended period of time, or are you immediately assuming it upon first sight, with no reason or evidence given? Why are you eager to tie up and hassle everyone involved with a initiating a 911 dispatch, but unwilling to even entertain the notion of approaching the car to take one damn second to ask the functioning human being inside if they're OK, and potentially avoiding the whole situation altogether?

The very act of leaving a child in a car is not inherently negligent. Your parents probably left you in a car, once or thrice upon a time. Do you wish that some 'good samaritan' had come along in those moments, sicced the dogs of justice upon them, and dragged them through the streets for their malfeasance?

We'll just have to disagree. That Washington Post article mentioned a death on a day with 60 degree weather. We shouldn't be trying to determine when a kid is in danger. The justice system should be able to correct, not have people try and figure this out. You are identifying the wrong variable. I've been all over this thread talking about prosecutorial overreach. I'm sure the cops who found this dad and his dead kid are not pushing for charges. But in 5 minutes, the car can be 100 degrees. You don't know when you might save a child. And that story is about a woman who allowed her child to convince her it was okay for the child to stay?

I would rather a kid be saved than an adult to have a difficult year. That kids death will haunt the entire family for years. And we have to move towards not leaving our kids in cars, period. Just not safe. Things can change. What if something happens (medical emergency or robbery) and no one realizes the kid is in the car? Even cracked windows can't save the kid.

 

[Shotgun Kiss]

Because if you put him in prison, other parents will forget less.

I'm pretty sure that the pain and guilt of causing your child to die is far more of a deterrent than prison time, so that argument holds no weight at all. Incidents like this happen because of forgetfulness, and if the death of your child isn't enough to prevent that, prison time won't be either.

However, it could be argued that prison sentences prevents people from using this as a means of murdering their child, making it look like an accident, and getting off scot-free.

I'm not making that particular argument in an attempt to justify a prison sentence; I'm reluctant to argue one side or the other here, as there are all kinds of things to take into consideration on both sides. This is just one of them.

 

[OuterLimits]

A similar story was on the news this week where I live. A 2 year old girl died.

Apparently the car window was left open slightly but the 2 year old girl got stuck between the window and door frame trying to get out of car. The temperature was in the upper 90s that day.

 

[Karsticles]

We'll just have to disagree. That Washington Post article mentioned a death on a day with 60 degree weather. We shouldn't be trying to determine when a kid is in danger. The justice system should be able to correct, not have people try and figure this out. You are identifying the wrong variable. I've been all over this thread talking about prosecutorial overreach. I'm sure the cops who found this dad and his dead kid are not pushing for charges. But in 5 minutes, the car can be 100 degrees. You don't know when you might save a child. And that story is about a woman who allowed her child to convince her it was okay for the child to stay?

I would rather a kid be saved than an adult to have a difficult year. That kids death will haunt the entire family for years. And we have to move towards not leaving our kids in cars, period. Just not safe. Things can change. What if something happens (medical emergency or robbery) and no one realizes the kid is in the car? Even cracked windows can't save the kid.

My Mom probably left me in the car a hundred times during my childhood. It was never a problem. I am not saying I will do that, but I think that calling the authorities over that is rather extreme.

 

[Haly]

All Shig is saying is, it's not smart to assume the worst and call the cops every time you see a kid in a car, I mean, I know I've asked my parents to let me stay in the car tons of times. If everyone practiced that "rule" you proposed, I would have ruined my family by now.

This kind of reflexive thinking leads to accidents, like yelling "Fire!" in a crowded theatre. Your intent is in the right place, but the fallout from your actions far outweigh the likely benefits. It's easy to overlook the likelier, more benign interpretations of a situation for fear of a "worst case scenario", so it's important that you don't jump right into it without analyzing the situation. That's not to say you shouldn't care at all if you see a child in a car, but you should always practice sensible judgement. It's better to involve and engage yourself on a conscious level, than to follow "rules", which is, ironically, similar to the kind of automated thinking that leads to tragedies like the on in the OP.

 

[iamblades]

I'm pretty sure that the pain and guilt of causing your child to die is far more of a deterrent than prison time, so that argument holds no weight at all. Incidents like this happen because of forgetfulness, and if the death of your child isn't enough to prevent that, prison time won't be either.

However, it could be argued that prison sentences prevents people from using this as a means of murdering their child, making it look like an accident, and getting off scot-free.

I'm not making that particular argument in an attempt to justify a prison sentence; I'm reluctant to argue one side or the other here, as there are all kinds of things to take into consideration on both sides. This is just one of them.

Even talking about deterrence in cases like this is pointless, as the whole reason stuff like this happens is because your subconscious mind takes over in routine situations. The subconscious mind has no concept of deterrence, it is merely enacting the same series of actions it regularly does.

Has no one in this thread ever gotten into their car to drive somewhere and all of a sudden you were 10 miles down the road with basically no memory of how you arrived there?Have you ever been driving along a road you take often and turned where you usually turn before realizing that you aren't going that way this time? Where your subconscious mind just took over and starting acting with no direction from your conscious mind?

These cases are not negligence in the traditional sense, negligence is knowingly engaging in risky behavior, not with the intent to cause harm, but with the knowledge that harm may come. This is more about a tragic flaw in the way the human brain is wired that allows the conscious brain to be completely oblivious to the potential danger until it is too late.

 

[Shig]

I would rather a kid be saved than an adult to have a difficult year.

It doesn't have to be a binary choice. Like I said, why is the basic act of just asking the kid "Hey, are you OK?" an unspoken sin in exploring any of these situations? I know a stranger talking to a kid is taboo, but if there's good intention, a moment of upfront concern can save a whole lot of people from a lot of headaches.

And we have to move towards not leaving our kids in cars, period. Just not safe.

It's just such a false dichotomy that the kid that's taken into the store is being better taken care of than the kid left in the car.

Mom leaves little Ben unsupervised in the car for 5 minutes, call the fuzz, string her up, she's a godless monster.

Mom does her grocery shopping while little Ben wreaks havoc in the toy aisles a football field away from her gaze, she's a responsible parent and heaven help anyone who might suggest otherwise.

What if something happens (medical emergency or robbery) and no one realizes the kid is in the car? Even cracked windows can't save the kid.

The most likely thing to happen by a country mile when a child is in a car is that they'll be party to a car accident. If we're going to legislate on what-if scenarios, the very act of transporting a kid should meet with heavy prosecution.

 

[Pepboy]

It doesn't have to be a binary choice. Like I said, why is the basic act of just asking the kid "Hey, are you OK?" an unspoken sin in exploring any of these situations? I know a stranger talking to a kid is taboo, but if there's good intention, a moment of upfront concern can save a whole lot of people from a lot of headaches.

I don't think it should be up to the bystander (likely untrained) to determine the health condition of the child. Plus as others have mentioned, a car can get hot very quickly. How is the bystander supposed to also evaluate whether the parent will be back in 5 minutes or 20? Are they supposed to come back later and check?

I agree it shouldn't be binary, but I think it's better in general for the officials to determine the extent of negligence. In a case where the mother already moves the car before police even show up, it should be a non-issue. But I see that as the fault of an overzealous prosecutor, not the bystander.

 

[TheChewyWaffles]

So horrible. A parent's worst nightmare.

 

[tokkun]

Whether it's murder or something else, he should be charged. He had a child and he should accept the responsibility.

To what end? What is the benefit to society?

 

[Stinkles]

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.

Your definition is still sitting there while you run cream on your rhetorical owie.

 

[Nealand Liquor]

Being negligent is not a valid excuse to go scott free.

This.

You make a choice of being a father, you're responsible for their well being. Also an entire workday went by before he realised that his kid was still in the car. It sounds cruel but that kid will never grow up, raise a family or anything.

He messed up bigtime and paid the price. Its not like it was a fire, carcrash or a freak of nature kinda thing. Its entirely his own fault.

Yes this. Totally.
Good thing we have jails around, cause without those this guy wouldn't, in anyway, pay for his crime. Without Jail how would this man suffer?



Smh

 

[Nealand Liquor]

To what end? What is the benefit to society?

Having the highest number of incarcerated of any country in the world. World Champs bro! USA USA!

 

[andthebeatgoeson]

My Mom probably left me in the car a hundred times during my childhood. It was never a problem. I am not saying I will do that, but I think that calling the authorities over that is rather extreme.

I also was left in the car many times. And I used to ride in the front seat with my sister, no seatbelt in a car full of drunks. We have made progress. You can't use your LUCKY anecdotal experience as proof. We also never used to wear helmets while biking or skiing. I was just lucky.

It doesn't have to be a binary choice. Like I said, why is the basic act of just asking the kid "Hey, are you OK?" an unspoken sin in exploring any of these situations? I know a stranger talking to a kid is taboo, but if there's good intention, a moment of upfront concern can save a whole lot of people from a lot of headaches.

It's just such a false dichotomy that the kid that's taken into the store is being better taken care of than the kid left in the car.

Mom leaves little Ben unsupervised in the car for 5 minutes, call the fuzz, string her up, she's a godless monster.

Mom does her grocery shopping while little Ben wreaks havoc in the toy aisles a football field away from her gaze, she's a responsible parent and heaven help anyone who might suggest otherwise.

The most likely thing to happen by a country mile when a child is in a car is that they'll be party to a car accident. If we're going to legislate on what-if scenarios, the very act of transporting a kid should meet with heavy prosecution.

Again, the response being over agressive is the police or DA's fault. Not sure why you want to risk a kid dying because of some other response. Sure, the parent is usually a good or great parent. And the most likely thing to happen is the kid will be fine. Only 40 of these happened last year. But it takes minutes for the car to become deadly. We need to adapt to the idea that leaving kids in cars is not safe. It will take awhile and it shouldn't cost so much but we shouldn't have regular citizens making that determination of fault and need for punishment on the street. If you see something not safe, call the police.

And parents, don't leave your kid in the car.

I say this as a guy who did it a few years ago. Now, knowing the risks, I take my kid in. It's a pain in the butt but one we have to make. I'm sorry if the police or DA takes things too far. It's at this point, we probably need to address the overly aggressive elements of the justice system. DA's are elected officials. We need to stop yelling at the wind and actually demand better job performance. Some prosecutors become overly aggressive to look 'strong on crime' and people's lives suffer due to career aspirations. That's terrible, immoral and should be the focus, not the people in the street seeing potentially dangerous situations.

 

[RumblingRosco]

Why hasn't there been a car that detects if something is in the back seat and sounds a car alarm if the car is turned off for more than a minute with said stuff still in the back? Seems like it should be very simple to program.

Fuck, should have patented the idea just to make sure no fuckhead company patents it and locks other car makers from including it.

 

[andthebeatgoeson]

Why hasn't there been a car that detects if something is in the back seat and sounds a car alarm if the car is turned off for more than a minute with said stuff still in the back? Seems like it should be very simple to program.

The people who would make that, worry if it fails. Would be a huge liability suit. And for 40 something cases, they probably don't want to risk it. Humans have a way to fuck things up.

Update:
He'll spend the next month in jail.

The father accused of killing his 22-month-old son by leaving him in a hot SUV will spend at least the next month in the Cobb County jail.
Justin Ross Harris, 33, of Marietta, was silent and showed no outward emotions during his brief appearance Thursday night before a judge. Because he’s been charged with murder, Harris could not be granted bond, Magistrate Judge John Strauss said.
Harris’ attorney, Mattox Kilgore, confirmed he and his client understood he was not eligible for bond. Harris will remain in the Cobb jail until his next court appearance, scheduled for July 15 in Superior Court.

http://www.ajc.com/news/news/breaking-news/child-believed-left-in-car-in-cobb-has-died/ngNdR/
Damn, homie.

 

[RumblingRosco]

The people who would make that, worry if it fails. Would be a huge liability suit. And for 40 something cases, they probably don't want to risk it. Humans have a way to fuck things up.

The same could be said if air bags fail, seat belts fail, or the car frame fails. I think there should be some level of protection that should be able to be added.

 

[CrankyJay]

Parents will just have to set up their own systems for this if it's something that worries them.

It would be so simple to just set up a daily reminder on the phone at the time you would normally drop your child off at daycare or something.

 

[Sho_Nuff82]

Why hasn't there been a car that detects if something is in the back seat and sounds a car alarm if the car is turned off for more than a minute with said stuff still in the back? Seems like it should be very simple to program.

Fuck, should have patented the idea just to make sure no fuckhead company patents it and locks other car makers from including it.

My car passively turns off the passenger side airbag if no one is sitting there, so I don't see why this would be impossible.

 

[Bregor]

The same could be said if air bags fail, seat belts fail, or the car frame fails. I think there should be some level of protection that should be able to be added.

This would have the effect of shifting the legal responsibility for the children to the car manufacturer. No manufacturer would tolerate this.

 

[Sho_Nuff82]

This would have the effect of shifting the legal responsibility for the children to the car manufacturer. No manufacturer would tolerate this.

Unless the feature was mandatory, there's no way you could bring a case over a malfunction. It would be touted as an "additional safety feature" like a blind spot camera.

 

[CrankyJay]

This would have the effect of shifting the legal responsibility for the children to the car manufacturer. No manufacturer would tolerate this.

Unless the feature was mandatory, there's no way you could bring a case over a malfunction. It would be touted as an "additional safety feature" like a blind spot camera.

I don't think this type of death happens enough to warrant this type of addition to a car, it's just that the death is so unthinkable and horrific it gets a lot of attention on the news whenever it happens.

 

[andthebeatgoeson]

The same could be said if air bags fail, seat belts fail, or the car frame fails. I think there should be some level of protection that should be able to be added.

Parents will just have to set up their own systems for this if it's something that worries them.

It would be so simple to just set up a daily reminder on the phone at the time you would normally drop your child off at daycare or something.

My car passively turns off the passenger side airbag if no one is sitting there, so I don't see why this would be impossible.

This would have the effect of shifting the legal responsibility for the children to the car manufacturer. No manufacturer would tolerate this.

Fennell believes that prosecuting parents in this type of case is both cruel and pointless: It’s not as though the fear of a prison sentence is what will keep a parent from doing this.

The answer to the problem, Fennell believes, lies in improved car safety features and in increased public awareness that this can happen, that the results of a momentary lapse of memory can be horrifying.

What is the worst case she knows of?

“I don’t really like to . . .” she says.

She looks away. She won’t hold eye contact for this.

“The child pulled all her hair out before she died.”

For years, Fennell has been lobbying for a law requiring back-seat sensors in new cars, sensors that would sound an alarm if a child’s weight remained in the seat after the ignition is turned off. Last year, she almost succeeded. The 2008 Cameron Gulbransen Kids’ Transportation Safety Act -- which requires safety improvements in power windows and in rear visibility, and protections against a child accidentally setting a car in motion -- originally had a rear seat-sensor requirement, too. It never made the final bill; sponsors withdrew it, fearing they couldn’t get it past a powerful auto manufacturers’ lobby.


There are a few aftermarket products that alert a parent if a child remains in a car that has been turned off. These products are not huge sellers. They have likely run up against the same marketing problem that confronted three NASA engineers a few years ago.

In 2000, Chris Edwards, Terry Mack and Edward Modlin began to work on just such a product after one of their colleagues, Kevin Shelton, accidentally left his 9-month-old son to die in the parking lot of NASA Langley Research Center in Hampton, Va. The inventors patented a device with weight sensors and a keychain alarm. Based on aerospace technology, it was easy to use; it was relatively cheap, and it worked.

Janette Fennell had high hopes for this product: The dramatic narrative behind it, she felt, and the fact that it came from NASA, created a likelihood of widespread publicity and public acceptance.

That was five years ago. The device still isn’t on the shelves. The inventors could not find a commercial partner willing to manufacture it. One big problem was liability. If you made it, you could face enormous lawsuits if it malfunctioned and a child died. But another big problem was psychological: Marketing studies suggested it wouldn’t sell well.

The problem is this simple: People think this could never happen to them.

http://www.washingtonpost.com/lifes...e0fe3a-f580-11e3-a3a5-42be35962a52_story.html
This article posted by luxarific is kind of long but all encompassing. Really covers many angles. I encourage people to give it a read.

 

[crazygambit]

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 had read that article before and I'm glad you posted it. It's really scary how easily our mind can get confused and we won't think about it until it's too late.

Car manufacturers should really do something about it. I can't imagine figuring out an alarm that goes off if the car is stopped and locked with a child seat with weight in it, would be too hard to implement.

I don't think this type of death happens enough to warrant this type of addition to a car, it's just that the death is so unthinkable and horrific it gets a lot of attention on the news whenever it happens.

I'm thinking the cost of the solution is low enough that even 1 child saved would make it worthwhile, but that's just me.

How much do you think 1 child's life is worth?

 

[CrankyJay]

I'm thinking the cost of the solution is low enough that even 1 child saved would make it worthwhile, but that's just me.

How much do you think 1 child's life is worth?

Priceless, but it doesn't matter what I think. It's up to companies and board of directors and the shareholders they're accountable for.

 

[NimbusD]

I don't think this type of death happens enough to warrant this type of addition to a car, it's just that the death is so unthinkable and horrific it gets a lot of attention on the news whenever it happens.

That article about parents forgetting that everyone keeps posting talks about it. There have been products that people try to bring to market, but no one ever bites because no one believes that they would be the 'monster' that would forget a helpless child in a car. I think it'd be the same thing with pushing legislation to make something a required feature that protects children. No one thinks they'd be the one to forget a child, they're not a horrible person so why bother.

 

[Toxi]

I don't know how to feel about this. The article linked in this thread is extremely informative, but I'm not a parent and I have no idea how difficult it is to keep track of your child (Though this thread gives a good idea). Prison time would not serve as a deterrence because the very "crime" is horrible, but at the same time, I don't understand the difference between this and the trucker example Besada posted. I don't think either of them serving jail time is a deterrence, but at the same time I don't know where that line of thinking ends.

I hope this gives me pause if I ever have to take care of a kid.

Not the same thing at all. A driver is ACTIVELY driving in a knowingly dangerous state of mind.

There are plenty of situations where people do not realize how tired they actually are. Hell, being tired affects your ability to understand how tired you are.

You really think the reason people don't kill their kids is because of the legal system?

I don't. But it's not like people only don't crash on the road because of the legal system either.

 

[Ikael]

If we would convict people for being stupid, we would all be in prision. Seriously, he has had more than enough punishment, me thinks. This is a textbook example of "the punishment being inside the sin itself". Imprisioning him would do nothing in order to improve society or making children safer.

 

[Zaptruder]

A legal system that compounds harm is an amoral system of law.

The real problem is that most people have shit conceptions about morality. Largely inconsistent affairs derived from arbitrary principles that are applied ad-hoc per difficult situation.

And so in complex situations, you get sub-optimal solutions.

The real head-fuck is that, this isn't even that complex a situation.

An accident occurred and a child died. So the law compounds the tragedy by charging the parent of the dead child with some tortured application of the law (applied because the system incentivizes itself, through the ignorance and apathy of the crowd, to make such tortured applications) that automatically necessitates him been charged with murder.

Fucking provide that man with the social support needed to overcome the grief that he must be feeling in this tragic circumstance.

This is about as bad as Saudi Arabia sentencing women to jail for been raped and reporting it.

 

[Dunlop]

Horrible decision.

As mentioned he will have to live with this for the remainder of his life. It was obviously not on purpose. It effectively destroys the family (which the death of their baby might have already done) and removes a productive member of society to become a tax burden as you pay for his incarceration.

He needs serious counselling, not jailtime

 

[phisheep]

I don't know how to feel about this. The article linked in this thread is extremely informative, but I'm not a parent and I have no idea how difficult it is to keep track of your child (Though this thread gives a good idea).

I have three children. When they were young it wasn't all that difficult to keep track of them - it is kind of hardwired into your system.

But that's not the question.

The question is how easy is it to lose track of them momentarily (and it only takes a moment). And the answer is that is is very easy indeed.

I've done it - without any horrific consequences - probably many times.

Prison time would not serve as a deterrence because the very "crime" is horrible, but at the same time, I don't understand the difference between this and the trucker example Besada posted. I don't think either of them serving jail time is a deterrence, but at the same time I don't know where that line of thinking ends.

Like you, I am kind of at a loss as to what the proper legal response should be. But I'm pretty sure that whatever it is it should not be automatically be a felony murder charge without prospect of bail.

That might just be an appropriate response if the accused was a single parent of only one child - if only for their own protection - but if there's a couple or if there are other children then I can't see that this would do anything but make everything worse all round. Piling infamy and incarceration on top of grief at a time when consolation and reconciliation within the family is probably what is most needed seems to me to be downright cruel.

I hope this gives me pause if I ever have to take care of a kid.

It's given me pause for sure.

 

[CyclopsRock]

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.

Quite. If our justice system is meant to be about rehabilitation, it's hard to imagine these parents will strike again with their evil crimes. Are they are danger to others or themselves? I think that's hard to argue. Punishment for the sake of punishment doesn't benefit anyone.

 

[SolidC213]

I don't understand how he could forget the baby was in the car.

I would imagine that he was just a quiet kid or took a nap on the ride to day care.

So so sad. I start thinking about this and I get teary eyed.

 

[Marty Chinn]

Parents will just have to set up their own systems for this if it's something that worries them.

It would be so simple to just set up a daily reminder on the phone at the time you would normally drop your child off at daycare or something.

The thing though, is this often happens when there is a change in the routine. Like the other parent dropping off instead. A daily reminder wouldn't catch this.

 

[CrankyJay]

Quite. If our justice system is meant to be about rehabilitation, it's hard to imagine these parents will strike again with their evil crimes. Are they are danger to others or themselves? I think that's hard to argue. Punishment for the sake of punishment doesn't benefit anyone.

It's painfully obvious it's not just about rehabilitation, but some fucked up sense of justice.

 

[katy_koala]

"'They tend to be the doting parents, the kind who buy baby locks and safety gates.' These cases, she says, are failures of memory, not of love."

This makes my heart hurt so much.

 

[Box of Kittens]

I don't know how to feel about this. The article linked in this thread is extremely informative, but I'm not a parent and I have no idea how difficult it is to keep track of your child (Though this thread gives a good idea). Prison time would not serve as a deterrence because the very "crime" is horrible, but at the same time, I don't understand the difference between this and the trucker example Besada posted. I don't think either of them serving jail time is a deterrence, but at the same time I don't know where that line of thinking ends.

One thing to keep in mind is that, at least in the US, there are strict limits on how many hours a trucker can drive in a day and they are required to maintain logs of how their time is spent. If a trucker exceeded the daily driving limit (and presumably falsified their log to do so) then there is a conscious decision you can point to on the part of the truck driver. In these cases of children left in back seats we're not talking about any conscious decision but very much a flaw in how human memory works.

Honestly I haven't given enough thought to the issue of a tired truck driver who causes an accident to say what the appropriate response should be. I also find it completely irrelevant in this case. We should decide how to respond in these cases based solely on what is appropriate to them. The death of a child is a tragedy, but given what we know about how such things happen, incarceration has no positives and many negatives. A person is unjustly punished, the taxpayers have to bear the cost of incarceration, any additional children are now deprived of a parent, and it won't serve as a deterrent. There's just no point. How other situations are handled (justly or not) is really a separate matter.

 

[RoninChaos]

Yesterday I had to call my wife and have her check whether I left the burner on when I left the house. I had to eat in a hurry and then run to work, and had this nagging doubt that I might not have clicked the burner off and left a pan on it. That could burn the house down while we were both out.

Turns out I turned it off. But I wasn't sure, and our house and all our possessions were on the line. All it took was my being in a hurry to risk all that. The same kind of situation leads to kids being left in cars, despite responsible parents being paranoid and checking. It, very rarely, happens even when we are careful. Locking the parents up doesn't solve this. It's part of being human and living in modern life.

I would agree with this.

This happened not far from my job and people were all talking about how absolutely distressed the dad was. Apparently he had to be restrained when he realized his baby was dead.

It's amazing what we can be forgetful of if something else is on our minds. These things are cropping up a little more now than in the past, and I hope folks who have the tendency to be forgetful and have kids are able to look at this situation and find ways to not have it happen to them. Something as simple as putting something in the back seat that you need before you leave your car would force you to check if your child is back there. Something like a laptop bag for work or a purse.

Anyway, I feel very, very badly for this person. This is the kind of thing i don't think I would ever be able to recover from.

 

[JaggedSac]

Because if you put him in prison, other parents will forget less.

Lol