GUILTY WY - Samuel McGehee for mutilating one son, suffocating another, Casper, 2008 & 2009

New Posts

kai

kai

Well-Known Member
Joined
Jul 14, 2009
Messages
2,960
Reaction score
2,336
http://www.trib.com/news/local/article_194350a5-cea1-5d34-aa99-97d5c65a3dcc.html

"Authorities say Samuel McGehee covered his son's head with a coat after the child wouldn't take a nap after being fed. An autopsy revealed that the boy, who had been left alone in the room for roughly four hours, died from asphyxiation.

"You might as well put that kid's head in a plastic bag," District Attorney Michael Blonigen said Tuesday during a preliminary hearing in Natrona County Circuit Court.

A judge Tuesday ruled enough evidence exists for McGehee to stand trial for the child's death. The case has been bound over to Natrona County District Court."

More at above link :furious:
 
:doh: No words...

He should have been in prison for mutilating his son last year. IMO

(She sounds pretty whacked too, doesn't she.)
 
From the linked article. (which is very difficult to read).

A detective testified that in March 2008, McGehee, concerned about the family's financial state, decided to circumcise his other son at home..<snipped due to graphic nature of circumcision>
Click to expand...


and some how, these parents were allowed access to their children after the above event?

This crime leaves me wondering why we don't make judges, or DCF or those who make the decisions to send these children BACK to their abusive parents are not somehow held criminally responsible for failing to protect children after their parents have already abused them. Perhaps if we did so when the abuse is founded those who are in charge of protecting children will actually take their responsibility seriously. Someone will have to explain to me just how parents in this type of situation do not lose parental rights.


RIP little guy. Heaven has another angel. May we all learn something from your senseless passing. I'm fighting back tears.
 
OKAY....WTF! That article says he was JUST NOW formally charged with the 2008 abuse of the 3 month old!!! WTH is wrong with people???

I am beside myself with anger! This poor baby was 9 months old and wouldn't go to sleep after he was fed. He needed to be burped you effin' , not suffocated with a coat! That baby had fibers from the coat under his fingernails from trying to get it off of him!!!

Rest in peace sweet child, you didn't deserve this.
 
This is sooo disturbing....I can't comment right now.

Those poor little babies. :(
 
This is horrible. Beyond words.

As I've said many times..some people should not be parents.
 
Why, why, why were these people allowed to keep their babies? The father looks looney toons to me. Freaks!
 
I couldn't read the whole article, I was getting too sick to my stomach. And the horror of the circumcision is beyond words. That child will be scarred for life. I know there are millions of parents out there that choose to have the procedure done, but we chose not too. Dam nurse tried to take him away to do it too -- like it was a normal thing! (yah, we're of european desent). If these idiots couldn't afford it then DON'T DO IT. That's down right brutality.

But above all, this horrible evil bio-dad killed his baby because he wouldn't take a nap. Just maybe he wanted to be cuddled and loved, and not left alone.

I hope he gets whats coming to him. Mummy too -- she had to have been aware of the 2008 crime!

Mel
 
On that day, McGehee told investigators he had consulted with several doctors who said they wouldn't circumcise the then-3-month-old infant until he was at least 9 months old. The dangers, Jenkins said doctors told McGehee, included excessive bleeding of blood vessels in the penis.
Click to expand...

That's somewhat bizarre. Usually the older the child, the more difficult and prone to risks the procedure. It's more painful and a more vascular event for an older child. I've read on several occasions that circumcision should always be done before one year of age. I think this guy is just a sicko looking for justification to torture his son.

And the horror of the circumcision is beyond words. That child will be scarred for life. I know there are millions of parents out there that choose to have the procedure done, but we chose not too.
Click to expand...

Apples and oranges. This was a mutilation done without pain relief. He butchered the baby's penis. I'd rather not read a circumcision debate and I'm not sure it's even relevant here, but comparing this to a circumcision in a clinical setting is like saying a woman who steals a baby out of its mother's womb with a kitchen knife gave her a "c-section." My sons both have had circs and this boy will have one, and so far we've had no scarring, bleeding issues, etc. They were healed three days after the birth for both. I don't think we could say that for this poor little baby boy. How awful.
 
MomofBoys said:
That's somewhat bizarre. Usually the older the child, the more difficult and prone to risks the procedure. It's more painful and a more vascular event for an older child. I've read on several occasions that circumcision should always be done before one year of age. I think this guy is just a sicko looking for justification to torture his son.



Apples and oranges. This was a mutilation done without pain relief. He butchered the baby's penis. I'd rather not read a circumcision debate and I'm not sure it's even relevant here, but comparing this to a circumcision in a clinical setting is like saying a woman who steals a baby out of its mother's womb with a kitchen knife gave her a "c-section." My sons both have had circs and this boy will have one, and so far we've had no scarring, bleeding issues, etc. They were healed three days after the birth for both. I don't think we could say that for this poor little baby boy. How awful.
Click to expand...

I totally agree! I would love to know who the "doctors" were that supposedly told him that they would not perform a circumcision until the baby was 9 months old. It has always been my understanding that the younger the better. My son was circumcised before we ever left the hospital and it was healed within about 3 or 4 days. What this father did was not a circumcision but a mutilation. Sick, sick, sick IMO.

Also one has to wonder if the coat was not forcefully held over his face given the evidence. That or else it had to be one heavy as heck coat for the child to have suffocated under it. Some people just should not have children and this man is one of them IMO.
 
Melly53 said:
I totally agree! I would love to know who the "doctors" were that supposedly told him that they would not perform a circumcision until the baby was 9 months old. It has always been my understanding that the younger the better. My son was circumcised before we ever left the hospital and it was healed within about 3 or 4 days. What this father did was not a circumcision but a mutilation. Sick, sick, sick IMO.

Also one has to wonder if the coat was not forcefully held over his face given the evidence. That or else it had to be one heavy as heck coat for the child to have suffocated under it. Some people just should not have children and this man is one of them IMO.
Click to expand...

My assumption is he used the/a doctor as an excuse to circumcise/mutilate his child. Now, he murders his other child. A healthy nine month old baby could push a blanket or coat off his face unless it was wrapped or forced and held on his face preventing his ability to remove the covering. This man had evil intention toward his children. Did no one notice how wacked this guy was or question his behaviors? Hard to believe these two horrific incidents are isolated events.
 
Just unbelievably sick.

Circumcision is not a bad thing, however, torture is. That should have been a red flag to someone that whatever reason he gave, he tortured the little boy. And now, after documented torture of a child, he was allowed unsupervised contact...I wish I could be surprised that there is now a dead child. But, not so much.

(And I meant the non-medical circumcision was torture. I don't see anything wrong with it, if it's done by somebody that knows what they're doing. I don't want to debate it either.)
 
as a nurse with urology experience, i just wanted to say that pediatricians do circumcisions at birth.

but if for some reason it is not done in the hospital at birth (low birth weight, financial reasons, baby has medical probs), a urologist will perform the circumcision. some urologists will not perform a circumcision without anesthesia (usually just IV sedation for a circumcision).

Most doctors will not put an infant under any anesthesia unless medically necessary....circumcisons are not "usually" medically necessary. That probably explains why the doctor told this family they would not perform circ until 9 months of age. The doc prolly wanted to use anesthesia and wanted to wait until the baby was older so that the anesthesia would be safer.

Our policy was 1 year of age before any circs were performed.
 
Why aren't these stories making it on the national news shows? This is such a disturbing article to read. :furious:
 
I have no words, other than both the parents should be steralized, locked upand be shown pictures of their child ever day. How can people do thes atrocious and evil things?
 
but if for some reason it is not done in the hospital at birth (low birth weight, financial reasons, baby has medical probs), a urologist will perform the circumcision. some urologists will not perform a circumcision without anesthesia (usually just IV sedation for a circumcision).
Click to expand...

Oh, interesting. That makes sense. Our ped explained that we needed to make the decision at birth because the older they get, the more problematic it is. He said at a year of age, he'd need general anesthesia instead of local. He made it seem like the sedation is something he wanted to avoid. So what you're saying makes me look at it the other way. We always planned on having it done at birth, but I think this was something he brought up at our new patient interview when I was still pregnant.
 
Between the other thread regarding the man executing his daughter because he was mad at his wife and this...............I'm just speechless. Mad, sad and sick......I know it is not healthy but I feel hatred for these killers.
 
Thanks for the link, SCM, but I can't go there, LOL. I've never encountered a truly civil circumcision debate and while that might be one, I can't risk my BP rising during pregnancy, LOL. I just think it's one of those discussions where there's no middle ground. My sister and I have different stances and we won't even bring it up to each other.

On topic, though---I just can't imagine why this didn't come out earlier. It's just ghastly and such a huge red flag that I can't fathom that these children weren't under supervision.
 
WTF was she even with this loser if he did major damage to their other child? Why was he even free?!! I am sick to my stomach over this.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

DNASolves

Who is Escambia County John Doe (1989)?

Members online

... and 65 more.
Total: 1,186 (members: 66, guests: 1,120)

Online statistics

Members online
66
Guests online
1,120
Total visitors
1,186
Totals may include hidden visitors.

Forum statistics

Threads
591,784
Messages
17,958,861
Members
228,606
Latest member
wdavewong
Back
Top