the charges: 2nd Degree Child Cruelty and Murder - What does it all mean?

[gngr~snap]

1) Disagree with Daniel Oran...
View attachment 54874

2) I really don't like that free online version of Blacks. Must find my hard copy ASAP and see what it says.

3) Your first definition still works for me. The last one... You have any Georgia case law re: "reckless?" I don't have WestLaw, much as I jones for it... and Zicam isn't doing it for me...

Why is GA law so weird?


As you see, the statute not only requires you to commit some dangerous act, but also requires that it deviate from the standard of care a reasonable person would use. Thus, there are really two parts of the law the prosecutor must focus on and prove- first, the act complained of, and second that the act is not one a reasonable person would have done.


http://www.zwdefense.com/Cumming-Cr...Reckless-Conduct-Charges-Defending-Them-.aspx

So it's a dangerous act that deviates from what is expected by a reasonable person?

Y'all be glad that I was a triage and phone nurse!
I got potty training tips for days!!!
Hey, buddy... See the fruit loops? SINK EM!


All posts are MOO. Sent via Insignia Flex Tablet.

 

[gitana1]

1) Disagree with Daniel Oran...
View attachment 54874

2) I really don't like that free online version of Blacks. Must find my hard copy ASAP and see what it says.

3) Your first definition still works for me. The last one... You have any Georgia case law re: "reckless?" I don't have WestLaw, much as I jones for it... and Zicam isn't doing it for me...

Your link doesn't work. But it doesn't matter. I hope this doesn't sound too snippy but I've been practicing law for 12 years. I'm aware of what reckless means! As for Georgia law:

The Crime of Reckless Conduct in Georgia

1. Statute

Causes bodily harm to or endangers the bodily safety of another person by consciously disregarding a substantial and unjustifiable risk that his act or omission will cause harm or endanger the safety of the other person and the disregard constitutes a gross deviation from the standard of care which a reasonable person would exercise in the situation. O.C.G.A. 16-5-60(b).361

2. Criminal Negligence

Act of criminal negligence, not an intentional act. Lindsey v. State, 262 Ga. 665 (1993). Criminal negligence necessarily implies, not only knowledge of probable consequences which may result from the use of a given instrumentality, but also willful or wanton disregard of the probable effects of such instrumentality upon others likely to be affected thereby. Criminal negligence is something more than ordinary negligence. Criminal negligence is the reckless disregard of consequences, or a heedless indifference to the rights and safety of others, and a reasonable foresight that injury would probably result. Bohannon v. State, 230 Ga. App. 829 (1998). http://www.avvo.com/legal-guides/ugc/the-crime-of-reckless-conduct-in-georgia

Criminal negligence involves more than simple carelessness or inattention. It involves recklessness. Examples of recklessness would be shooting a firearm up into the air in a crowd of people, getting in one's car, wasted, and driving at high speeds and wildly, or playing Russian roulette.

No way is there going to be a felony murder charge for simple carelessness and inattention.

 

[CHERIE.T]

Why is GA law so weird?


As you see, the statute not only requires you to commit some dangerous act, but also requires that it deviate from the standard of care a reasonable person would use. Thus, there are really two parts of the law the prosecutor must focus on and prove- first, the act complained of, and second that the act is not one a reasonable person would have done.


http://www.zwdefense.com/Cumming-Cr...Reckless-Conduct-Charges-Defending-Them-.aspx

So it's a dangerous act that deviates from what is expected by a reasonable person?

Y'all be glad that I was a triage and phone nurse!
I got potty training tips for days!!!
Hey, buddy... See the fruit loops? SINK EM!


All posts are MOO. Sent via Insignia Flex Tablet.

gngr! :lol:

 

[PigPong]

Your link doesn't work. But it doesn't matter. I hope this doesn't sound too snippy but I've been practicing law for 12 years. I'm aware of what reckless means! As for Georgia law:

The Crime of Reckless Conduct in Georgia

1. Statute

Causes bodily harm to or endangers the bodily safety of another person by consciously disregarding a substantial and unjustifiable risk that his act or omission will cause harm or endanger the safety of the other person and the disregard constitutes a gross deviation from the standard of care which a reasonable person would exercise in the situation. O.C.G.A. 16-5-60(b).361

2. Criminal Negligence

Act of criminal negligence, not an intentional act. Lindsey v. State, 262 Ga. 665 (1993). Criminal negligence necessarily implies, not only knowledge of probable consequences which may result from the use of a given instrumentality, but also willful or wanton disregard of the probable effects of such instrumentality upon others likely to be affected thereby. Criminal negligence is something more than ordinary negligence. Criminal negligence is the reckless disregard of consequences, or a heedless indifference to the rights and safety of others, and a reasonable foresight that injury would probably result. Bohannon v. State, 230 Ga. App. 829 (1998). http://www.avvo.com/legal-guides/ugc/the-crime-of-reckless-conduct-in-georgia

Criminal negligence involves more than simple carelessness or inattention. It involves recklessness. Examples of recklessness would be shooting a firearm up into the air in a crowd of people, getting in one's car, wasted, and driving at high speeds and wildly, or playing Russian roulette.

No way is there going to be a felony murder charge for simple carelessness and inattention.

Look, I argue my face off. It's just part of my learning process. Don't take my arguing and sarcasm personal.

I concede being properly schooled on "reckless" and I can't wait to read the case law. Thanks!

I miss Westlaw so much. I'd a budget my usage for my school work and then just read what interests me..

If I had the time, I'd be in the GA State Law Library. Love it in there. But, with a 2 and 4 year old, full time job, and working on the house... it doesn't happen.

 

[PigPong]

There is quite a bit of GA caselaw on "reckless" and gitana's right - it goes way beyond simple negligence; being inattentive or careless is not sufficient for criminal negligence. Criminal negligence is essentially knowing the substantial risk of serious harm to a child, and intentionally engaging in the conduct despite the known risk.

For a discussion on criminal negligence and recklessness, See Kain v. State, 650 SE 2d 749 - Ga: Court of Appeals 2007

Thank you, sir. Or ma'am. Or sir'am.

Seriously, much appreciated. Looking forward to reading at lunch or after work.

 

[JerseyGirl]

The Georgia Trial Lawyers Association is partnering with child safety advocates to pressure the White House and the US Department of Transportation to require car makers to install devices that would detect a child left unattended in a car. They've launched a petition drive on Change.org.

http://www.11alive.com/story/news/l...14/ross-harris-cooper-hot-car-death/12650533/

 

[gngr~snap]

Look, I argue my face off. It's just part of my learning process. Don't take my arguing and sarcasm personal.

I concede being properly schooled on "reckless" and I can't wait to read the case law. Thanks!

I miss Westlaw so much. I'd a budget my usage for my school work and then just read what interests me..

If I had the time, I'd be in the GA State Law Library. Love it in there. But, with a 2 and 4 year old, full time job, and working on the house... it doesn't happen.

So you have plenty of free time don't ya! lol

Sorry... I cringe hearing that. 12 days on 2 days off full time work + afterhours office calls having 2 bitty bits, that were a year apart... Taking calls from the answering service in the closet for quiet...
Exhale! That was 21years ago.
Rock it man! Respecting what you are doing!

It gets better! Unless when baby #1 turns 18 you are bringing baby #5 home...
nope couldn't go there!

Seriously thanks for your input!

 

[PigPong]

So you have plenty of free time don't ya! lol

Sorry... I cringe hearing that. 12 days on 2 days off full time work + afterhours office calls having 2 bitty bits, that were a year apart... Taking calls from the answering service in the closet for quiet...
Exhale! That was 21years ago.
Rock it man! Respecting what you are doing!

It gets better! Unless when baby #1 turns 18 you are bringing baby #5 home...
nope couldn't go there!

Seriously thanks for your input!

Coming from a family with a ton of nurses, I can't convey the amount of respect I have for what you do!

Lol, there will be no baby number 5! I love my girls to death... and my wife wants more... but she was on bed rest both pregnancies and the last pregnancy was the last 4 months. So, my youngest will be 5 before we try again, if we do.

 

[gngr~snap]

Coming from a family with a ton of nurses, I can't convey the amount of respect I have for what you do!

Lol, there will be no baby number 5! I love my girls to death... and my wife wants more... but she was on bed rest both pregnancies and the last pregnancy was the last 4 months. So, my youngest will be 5 before we try again, if we do.

I had a preemie, then 6 months later umm... hello! #2
I was on bedrest from Cinco de mayo + cerclage until 10/7/92

Do you even understand how awful it when all there is to watch on TV is Maury Povich RE runs...
I wanted 4 kids.
Was not about to tempt fate again.
Matter of fact, my water broke 23 years ago today at 25 weeks.

I get that the man isn't the one incubating the baby, but I can't get how a woman that has that baby inside of her, ever being able to harm it.

As far as Ross goes, that is a very passive aggressive way to kill a child and meanwhile establish alibi's throughout the day.
This is where I can find him guilty on all counts,charge him with the max penalties. He is truly a depraved individual in my book.

What's bugging me is that not one news agency has said Knock knock... hello?
HD Corporate can be seen from Chic Fil a, the intersection and the lunchtime Publix...
No way a bell never went off.
moo

 

[PigPong]

The Georgia Trial Lawyers Association is partnering with child safety advocates to pressure the White House and the US Department of Transportation to require car makers to install devices that would detect a child left unattended in a car. They've launched a petition drive on Change.org.

http://www.11alive.com/story/news/l...14/ross-harris-cooper-hot-car-death/12650533/

I tried looking for the petition but didn't see it. Did anyone else find it? I wonder what kind of device would be required? And if it would be uniform or just fit certain specifications?

I did, however, find this article listing such devices on the market. It might belong in the car seat thread but I'm putting it here because we're talking (and I say this loosely) potential legislation.

I personally don't think it's a great idea. Some people are just.going to become dependant on the technology... and when it fails...

http://www.cbsnews.com/news/how-technology-could-help-prevent-kids-deaths-in-hot-cars/q

 

[PigPong]

Deleted - double post.

 

[hopingicanhelp]

There is quite a bit of GA caselaw on "reckless" and gitana's right - it goes way beyond simple negligence; being inattentive or careless is not sufficient for criminal negligence. Criminal negligence is essentially knowing the substantial risk of serious harm to a child, and intentionally engaging in the conduct despite the known risk.

For a discussion on criminal negligence and recklessness, See Kain v. State, 650 SE 2d 749 - Ga: Court of Appeals 2007

So if I'm understanding correctly, there is some consensus among our legal eagles here that the prosecution (to be safe) will need to prove something that indicates RH was "intentionally engaging in the conduct despite the known risk" ... ??

 

[AnnieMagnolia]

Thank you, sir. Or ma'am. Or sir'am.

Seriously, much appreciated. Looking forward to reading at lunch or after work.

I am guessing ma'am! Curiosity is killing me now!

 

[lawstudent]

I'm studying for the bar now and the states of mind, i.e. reckless, knowing, wanton, negligent etc., are a huge part of it. It's making my head spin, especially since it differs by jurisdiction. It seems like a lot of these standards get pretty twisted together because the words are not very objective, as you could probably guess. Prosecutors will go for the highest one, and the jury will go with it if they don't think the person acted right. It's really hard to worry in advance about satisfying the standard because we have to know what the prosecution's theory is as to what acts actually occurred. That ends up really framing how the mindset comes into play, even though it's supposed to be the opposite to some extent.

 

[Lovejac]

I am guessing ma'am! Curiosity is killing me now!

You guessed right!

 

[lawstudent]

Here's the new law quoted from Pigpong's post on the general thread:

(a) A person commits the offense of murder when he unlawfully and with malice aforethought, either express or implied, causes the death of another human being.

(b) Express malice is that deliberate intention unlawfully to take the life of another human being which is manifested by external circumstances capable of proof. Malice shall be implied where no considerable provocation appears and where all the circumstances of the killing show an abandoned and malignant heart.

(c) A person commits the offense of murder when, in the commission of a felony, he or she causes the death of another human being irrespective of malice.

(d) A person commits the offense of murder in the second degree when, in the commission of cruelty to children in the second degree, he or she causes the death of another human being irrespective of malice.

(e)(1) A person convicted of the offense of murder shall be punished by death, by imprisonment for life without parole, or by imprisonment for life.

(2) A person convicted of the offense of murder in the second degree shall be punished by imprisonment for not less than ten nor more than 30 years.

I believe generally that changes in punishments are retroactive, but not drastically different results (i.e. death penalty, switch from felony to misdemeanor, sex offender registries). So changing the years spent in prison I would think is retroactive.

Is (d) the only type of second degree murder Georgia has? The way I read that is more like they are trying to make sure that anyone who abuses a child and ends up killing them ends up with some type of murder charge, whether malice can be shown or not, because they want it to be taken seriously. They're not trying to give anyone a break - cruelty in the second degree must not be a felony, then? They're trying to create a felony-murder type doctrine for any sort of child abuse, but legally can't just declare it first degree murder if it's not a felony. If malice can be shown on top of it, then I would guess the underlying cruelty charge would be in the first degree, and it would be murder 1?

My guess is they will up the charges so that (d) isn't needed if it does apply. If they feel they can't up them because this wasn't first-degree child cruelty, then it seems like the story is totally different than what have been hearing, and then it may not be considered second degree murder. The way the statute is written is not to downgrade cruelty to to children as I read it. It's trying to make sure juries don't avoid murder and go for a lesser charge of like a manslaughter when it seems somewhat accidental. The way this case is coming out, I kind of doubt second-degree is going to be the way it turns out.

If he planned it, it should just end up being murder - it would seem like the other stuff would merge in. You don't charge someone with cruelty and then try to up it to murder under some felony statute when you allege it is a very planned and deliberate action. It just gets merged into regular murder if that was the obvious intent all along.

 

[AnnieMagnolia]

You guessed right!

I knew minor4th was a mom, not a dad when she described how she is always thinking about her kids, where are they, what do they need, what are they going to eat! That was the first time I realized it.

 

[AnnieMagnolia]

As I am reading the Alabama law, criminal negligence causing a homocide would fall under felony c which would receive 1-10 years. That is without the intent, as I understand it. He would at least qualify for that, right?

 

[gngr~snap]

As I am reading the Alabama law, criminal negligence causing a homocide would fall under felony c which would receive 1-10 years. That is without the intent, as I understand it. He would at least qualify for that, right?

Alabama law? Or Georgia law? Just want to clarify.

All posts are MOO. Sent via Insignia Flex Tablet.

 

[AnnieMagnolia]

Alabama law? Or Georgia law? Just want to clarify.

All posts are MOO. Sent via Insignia Flex Tablet.

Oops! All this talk about Alabama in this case and I am looking up the wrong state! Sorry. :sorry::blushing: