|
This discussion has been archived.
No new comments can be posted.
|
 |
|
|
|
by LSBeene on 07:40 AM January 5th, 2005 EST (#1)
|
|
|
|
|
We knew it was only a matter of time ...
I mean, isn't what he did is give her an illegal "back alley" abortion?
Isn't THAT what happened?
This wasn't someone who killed a 'fetus' .... errr, a PERSON (they're different .. right?)
This wasn't a druggie who shot a woman's stomach and she lost her child.
This was THEIR idea carried out over **2 WEEKS**.
But ...
The mother, also sixteen years old, will not be charged with a crime.
This was NOT the stated intent of the law. But, hey, if it gets the D.A. some headlines, we know what's more important ... right.
He could claim that he can't charge her (since the intent of the law and the letter won't allow it, but then, neither did the intent of the law talk about a VOLUNTARY back alley abortion.
How many times have we seen where a prosecutor has reached into his "bag o' tricks" and found some creative application of another law to make justice? PLENTY.
This is a Travesty, pure and simple.
Steven
Guerilla Gender Warfare is just Hate Speech in polite text
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
by Anonymous User on 11:21 AM January 5th, 2005 EST (#2)
|
|
|
|
|
Maybe they should instead charge him with practicing medicine without a license.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
by The_Beedle on 11:44 AM January 5th, 2005 EST (#3)
|
|
|
|
|
What a freakin' tool.
Anyone want to chime in about how Men's Rights are only fighting liberals? This prosecutor is somewhere to the right of Attila.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Incitement and conspiracy are crimes elsewhere in the world . . . Why not the US ?
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
by jname967 on 02:16 AM January 6th, 2005 EST (#5)
|
|
|
|
|
I just saw on MSNBC, that their was a poll taken from the community where this happened... 91% agree the GIRL should be charged as well. This is proof that not everyone is deluded in regards to the issue of whose fault it is. It's the big wigs that are being prejudice here.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
by Luek on 12:14 PM January 6th, 2005 EST (#6)
|
|
|
|
|
Prosecutor Smith is relying on law created by the Michigan Legislature in 1999. According to that law, only the person making the intentional conduct against the pregnant individual is criminally liable. The pregnant individual herself, however complicit in the termination, is not.
Just what toxic waste is in the water table up there in Michigan to make them so damn insane and misandric? Remember that this is the same sad state that has Michael Cox, scrouge of deadbeat dads and billboard fame, as the state Attorney General! There has just got to be a pollutate in the food chain up there.
|
|
|
|
|
[an error occurred while processing this directive]
|
Garth writes "Two teens, a mother and father to be, decide to end a pregnancy using the do-it-yourself method.