Grandmother to be charged with Capital Murder

[Maureen]

and to face death penalty

www.wcti12.com/news/30524487/detail.html?update

I'm torn on this. I think it's horrible what happened to her and I definitely think that the grandmother should be charged with something but I'm not sure if I agree with a capital murder charge. I don't think the grandmother intended to kill the girl. Negligent homicide or something along those lines seems more fitting. It's just weird to me. There are so many cases where parents do something that is knowingly dangerous and it results in a child's death and it seems like they either get off easily or are charged with something far less than what they should be and then here you have this case where I don't think the grandmother knew it would result in her death and she's charged with capital murder. I don't get it.

[meaniepants]

They ran her around the house for HOURS with no water or breaks. Fry her.

Maybe if she made her run a lap around the block or do some jumping jacks for 5 minutes but 3 HOURS?? That's crazy. She deserves what she gets.

[Maureen]

Now see I think that's just like those people who are like "shoot her on sight" etc. Our justice system is suppossed to be fair and balanced not based off our emotions. Unless they can prove intent, I think it doesn't fit. Negligent homicide or kanslaughter of some sort? Yes but not capital murder. Not when you have regular baby killers being charged with lesser crimes for more brutal acts.

[susie]

I agree it should be manslaughter, something similar. What she did was horrible, but I don't think she meant to kill her granddaughter.

[meaniepants]

I see what you're saying. The DA is taking a risk. If he loses because the jury doesn't think she had intent. BUT on the other hand his argument could be if you make a person run nonstop for 3 hours with no breaks or water what did you expect to happen?

[Maureen]

Mar 1, 2012 13:15:05 GMT -5 @meaniepants said:

I see what you're saying. The DA is taking a risk. If he loses because the jury doesn't think she had intent. BUT on the other hand his argument could be if you make a person run nonstop for 3 hours with no breaks or water what did you expect to happen?

That's where the lesser homicide charges come into play. They may not be able to prove that the grandmother knew/didn't know that her "punishment" would result in death but they can prove that it did in fact result in her being placed on life support which ultimately lead to her death.

[justmesharon]

I would not doubt if you are punishing a child that severely for just eating some chocolate there was other abuse happening. I do say life in prison no parole.