Teen Guilty of Fetal Murder

Message Bookmarked
Bookmark Removed
Has this been covered here yet?

Prosecutor's closing statement: "Hold him fully accountable for this most unholiest of crimes."

That the verdict seems in accord with the Texas law is just the icing.

Hunter (Hunter), Tuesday, 7 June 2005 18:51 (twenty years ago)

Uh, I first read the thread title as "Teeny".

Sorry, teeny.

Jordan (Jordan), Tuesday, 7 June 2005 18:56 (twenty years ago)

Part of me wants to know why this happened in the first place (the "stepping on" part), then that part of me gets completely smacked down by the rest of me going "Why the fuck do you want to know?"

donut debonair (donut), Tuesday, 7 June 2005 19:32 (twenty years ago)

OMG. :-(((((

nathalie's baby (stevie nixed), Tuesday, 7 June 2005 19:33 (twenty years ago)

society fucking sucks.

Sterling Clover (s_clover), Tuesday, 7 June 2005 19:39 (twenty years ago)

This is horrifying on every level I can think of.

The Ghost of Dan Perry (Dan Perry), Tuesday, 7 June 2005 19:44 (twenty years ago)

"Most unholiest?"

I'm actually unsure which particular elements of this story people are reacting badly to -- there are like five distinct parts to be depressed about. Verdictwise I was going to be pretty much unupset if the kid had done this without the cooperation of the girlfriend -- "non-consensual abortion" is pretty unholy from any political perspective -- but as it stands, the story boils down to the same "back-alley" scenario that can be seen as a pretty good reason for keeping proper abortion available, affordable, safe, etc.

nabiscothingy, Tuesday, 7 June 2005 19:44 (twenty years ago)

Even on the grammar analysis level this is horrifying.

The Ghost of Dan Perry (Dan Perry), Tuesday, 7 June 2005 19:46 (twenty years ago)

So this, if left standing, would leave only the thin line of home-induced vs. proper-medical standing between "fetal murder" and "abortion."

nabiscothingy, Tuesday, 7 June 2005 19:48 (twenty years ago)

I thought the grammatical error along with the religious rhetoric all coming from an officer of the court was pretty great too.

A blogger contextualizes this as:

In 2003, Texas passed an anti-abortion law that instituted a 24-hour waiting period; required doctors to show women pictures of fetuses, tell them about adoption procedures, and warn them that an abortion could lead to breast cancer; and forced abortion providers to keep the identities of all their patients in their records. And one more thing, as the Fort Worth Weekly reported at the time:

The bill as passed also includes another requirement that managed to escape the floodlights of controversy and debate: Abortions from 16 weeks onward now can be performed only in hospitals and ambulatory surgical centers.

The clause is a major Catch-22. Very few Texas hospitals perform elective abortions, and the few that do charge extremely high fees and require that the patients go through complicated ethics reviews. And of the state's hundreds of surgical centers, none performs abortions.

So, with no place to get an abortion after 16 weeks, what does a panicky, 17-year-old girl do if she's four months pregnant? Erica Basoria decided to try to induce a miscarriage. When that didn't work, she asked her boyfriend to step on her stomach. A week later she miscarried.

Whether the unavailability of abortion services was due to that law in this case, I don't really know, but presumably this girl would not do this if a safe affordable abortion was available.

Hunter (Hunter), Tuesday, 7 June 2005 19:48 (twenty years ago)

This is a terribly written and very unclear article.

That aside, I doubt this decision will stand if it is appealed. Otherwise you could convict a man for driving his wife to an abortion clinic, or, for that matter, a doctor for performing abortions.

Hurting (Hurting), Tuesday, 7 June 2005 19:50 (twenty years ago)

Ick.

giboyeux (skowly), Tuesday, 7 June 2005 19:51 (twenty years ago)

Sorry, that link above should go to:

http://www.washingtonmonthly.com/archives/individual/2005_06/006447.php

Hunter (Hunter), Tuesday, 7 June 2005 19:51 (twenty years ago)

i don't understand the reasoning behind this either:

Under state law, a woman cannot be charged for causing the deaths of her own fetuses for any reason.

does this mean if she had been successful in causing the miscarriage by herself there would have been no trouble?

caitlin oh no (caitxa1), Tuesday, 7 June 2005 19:53 (twenty years ago)

It definitely seems that way.

rett bratner (deangulberry), Tuesday, 7 June 2005 19:56 (twenty years ago)

does this mean if she had been successful in causing the miscarriage by herself there would have been no trouble?

As far as I can tell: yes.

It's stories like this that make me really really hate America's justice system... Life sentence? LIFE SENTENCE?!??!??!! HE'S SEVENTEEN!!!!

I hate mandatory sentencing. I also hate most prosecutors. Slimy defense lawyers are so so much more respectable than preening power-hungry DAs.

giboyeux (skowly), Tuesday, 7 June 2005 19:57 (twenty years ago)

I really think this is going to be struck down. They're attempting to circumvent Roe v. Wade. It won't work.

Hurting (Hurting), Tuesday, 7 June 2005 20:02 (twenty years ago)

i want to go into lawyering

caitlin oh no (caitxa1), Tuesday, 7 June 2005 20:13 (twenty years ago)

I just watched Legally Blonde last night and it was surprisingly awesome. I was totally sold on the completely absurd false portrait it paints of law school and the legal professions.

Hurting (Hurting), Tuesday, 7 June 2005 20:15 (twenty years ago)

i'm insulted that my suggestion made you think of legally blonde

caitlin oh no (caitxa1), Tuesday, 7 June 2005 20:25 (twenty years ago)

I think I, too, want to go into lawyering. It sorta seems like the only way anyone can change anything these days.

giboyeux (skowly), Tuesday, 7 June 2005 20:26 (twenty years ago)

i'm insulted that my suggestion made you think of legally blonde

-- caitlin oh no (caitx...), June 7th, 2005.'

NO!!! I just saw it last night! I didn't mean it like that!

Hurting (Hurting), Tuesday, 7 June 2005 20:34 (twenty years ago)

people be lawyerin'

rett bratner (deangulberry), Tuesday, 7 June 2005 20:36 (twenty years ago)


You must be logged in to post. Please either login here, or if you are not registered, you may register here.