# Should This Woman Be Charged With Child Neglect?



## MisterMills357 (Apr 15, 2015)

*Woman charged with child neglect; 3-year-old daughter found wandering streets at night.*

CHARLESTON, W.Va. (WSAZ) *--* A woman from Ohio faces child neglect charges after police say her 3-year-old daughter was found wandering the streets of Charleston late at night without shoes. Deanna Newton, 33, of Findlay, Ohio, is charged with child neglect creating risk of injury. Charleston Police say Newton put her daughter to bed around 10:30 p.m. Tuesday and left the apartment to go to a friend's house. The 3-year-old child got out of bed and walked out the door barefoot*.* The toddler went about half a mile east on Piedmont Road until she attempted to cross the street in traffic. A passerby spotted the child, stopped and called 911 about 11 p.m. Tuesday. Newton was taken to the South Central Regional Jail. Her bond is $25,000.

My answer is that she is as dumb as a rock, but should not be charged; and that the case should be dropped, since the kid was unharmed. That is certain to be an unpopular opinion with a lot of folks here, but we are all human, and subject to making mistakes. My nephew walked out the door once, just like this kid, and the cops found him, and my brother was charged with child neglect.

But, my nephew has always had a foolhardy streak, even when he was 4, and it remains in him. And this case sounds like another dopey kid, who walked away. Yes, I know that she should not have left the kid alone, so give her 20 hours of community service, and let the case be dropped. And that is what I think, now it is your turn to voice your opinion, should you care to.

http://www.wsaz.com/content/news/Wo...ughter-found-wandering-streets-487458311.html


----------



## Bleach (Jul 5, 2018)

I'd say no. You can't watch the kids 24/7 no matter what the socialists claim.


----------



## MisterMills357 (Apr 15, 2015)

Bleach said:


> I'd say no. You can't watch the kids 24/7 no matter what the socialists claim.


Please click no, in the poll, and that is a good opinion, you can't watch the 24/7.


----------



## Denton (Sep 18, 2012)

She put the child to bed and then went to a friend's house. Does that sound like a responsible parent?

Nothing happened to the child is the reason for saying no? So, had something happened, you would have responded differently? Your viewpoint is altered by pure chance?


----------



## MisterMills357 (Apr 15, 2015)

Denton said:


> She put the child to bed and then went to a friend's house. Does that sound like a responsible parent?
> 
> Nothing happened to the child is the reason for saying no? So, had something happened, you would have responded differently? Your viewpoint is altered by pure chance?


She doesn't sound like a responsible sort, but since the kid was unharmed; I say give her 20 hours of community service, and drop it. This is a case where mercy is deserved, IMHO. There is way too much heavy handedness in America these days.


----------



## Denton (Sep 18, 2012)

MisterMills357 said:


> She doesn't sound like a responsible sort, but since the kid was unharmed; I say give her 20 hours of community service, and drop it. This is a case where mercy is deserved, IMHO. There is way too much heavy handedness in America these days.


OK, so if something had happened to the child, what would you have done?


----------



## Bleach (Jul 5, 2018)

Denton said:


> OK, so if something had happened to the child, what would you have done?


Why speculate? Nothing happened. it's a done deal. Every body lived, no liberals were hurt.


----------



## paraquack (Mar 1, 2013)

Since she decided to leave her child alone, YES! However:
when my son was 4 years old, we got a call from a neighbor at 6:00 AM, on a Sunday, waking us. My son was 2 houses 
away standing in the middle of the residential intersection, directing traffic. Pulled on pair of jeans and ran barefoot
down the street and grabbed him. He had managed to unlock the doorknob and then dragged a chair from the kitchen
to the front door to unlock the dead bolt. Never got a real answer as to why. First time, last time,because four hours 
later there was a barrel bolt on both the front and back doors. Today, I probably be arrested for the barrel bolts. I 
should have realized then that my son wasn't banging on all cylinders. That took me a few more years.


----------



## Denton (Sep 18, 2012)

Bleach said:


> Why speculate? Nothing happened. it's a done deal. Every body lived, no liberals were hurt.


Pay attention; read the responses. The reason given for leniency is nothing happened to the child. Again, my question is, what would have been the response had the child been grabbed, raped, murdered and left in a ditch? Would the response be different?


----------



## MisterMills357 (Apr 15, 2015)

Denton said:


> OK, so if something had happened to the child, what would you have done?


Depending on circumstances, and how bad the child was hurt, she would be in some pretty deep and really hot water, with me at least. A jury would have eaten her alive if the kid was killed or molested, and I am not condoning carelessness; I am saying that in this instance, I would be lenient. We have lost our ability to do that in America, to be merciful, and lenient.


----------



## MisterMills357 (Apr 15, 2015)

Bleach said:


> Why speculate? Nothing happened. it's a done deal. Every body lived, no liberals were hurt.


Speculation is a good thing, and it is a worthwhile trait; I speculate all of the time, but in this case, I am sticking to what happened; versus what might have happened. [I am just noting that I speculate, because you were addressing someone else. I am sorta butting in here.]


----------



## Coastie dad (Jan 2, 2016)

Charged? I'm going to say no, only because I'm a little old fashioned.
By the time I was done chastising her, berating her, telling her in detail what could have happened to the little girl because I deal with it constantly, and publicly humiliating her, she would welcome the mandatory parenting classes at her expense.

He'll, we've all made stupid mistakes and thanked God we didn't lose a child or them get injured. Saying that isn't true is like saying you've never had an accidental/negligent discharge. Looking back on some of the stuff I thought was ok...holy crap.
Now leaving a child unattended in order to go to a friend's place? No. That is irresponsible. She should not get away freely. This lesson should leave a mark.


----------



## MisterMills357 (Apr 15, 2015)

Coastie dad said:


> Charged? I'm going to say no, only because I'm a little old fashioned.
> By the time I was done chastising her, berating her, telling her in detail what could have happened to the little girl because I deal with it constantly, and publicly humiliating her, she would welcome the mandatory parenting classes at her expense.
> 
> He'll, we've all made stupid mistakes and thanked God we didn't lose a child or them get injured. Saying that isn't true is like saying you've never had an accidental/negligent discharge. Looking back on some of the stuff I thought was ok...holy crap.
> Now leaving a child unattended in order to go to a friend's place? No. That is irresponsible. She should not get away freely. This lesson should leave a mark.


Well said, as usual.


----------



## Coastie dad (Jan 2, 2016)

Thank you sir.


----------



## Denton (Sep 18, 2012)

MisterMills357 said:


> Depending on circumstances, and how bad the child was hurt, she would be in some pretty deep and really hot water, with me at least. A jury would have eaten her alive if the kid was killed or molested, and I am not condoning carelessness; I am saying that in this instance, I would be lenient. We have lost our ability to do that in America, to be merciful, and lenient.


You and I see it a bit differently.
Yes, a jury would have eaten her lunch had something happened to the child, and rightfully so. Nothing happened to the child, but that fact is not due to the mother's due diligence. As a matter of fact, it is due to the mother's neglect that the child's well-being was placed in the happenstance that a good samaritan found the child instead an evil bastard.

Yeah, you could say I grew up in a Norman Rockwell neighborhood, but even the "dumbest" of the parents in my childhood neighborhood would never have left a three-year-old alone at the house while they went to a friend's house. Never. Even the trash that now inhabits the houses in the neighborhood would think of doing that. While they miss the mark on so many things, they never do that.

Yes, a jury would eat the mother's lunch had the child been harmed but it would have been due to the mother creating the conditions for the child's harm.


----------



## Denton (Sep 18, 2012)

Coastie dad said:


> Charged? I'm going to say no, only because I'm a little old fashioned.
> By the time I was done chastising her, berating her, telling her in detail what could have happened to the little girl because I deal with it constantly, and publicly humiliating her, she would welcome the mandatory parenting classes at her expense.
> 
> He'll, we've all made stupid mistakes and thanked God we didn't lose a child or them get injured. Saying that isn't true is like saying you've never had an accidental/negligent discharge. Looking back on some of the stuff I thought was ok...holy crap.
> Now leaving a child unattended in order to go to a friend's place? No. That is irresponsible. She should not get away freely. This lesson should leave a mark.


Disregarding whether or not we have all done dumb things, what we are now discussing is what the punishment should be and not whether she should be charged.
_You_ can't do any of those things you suggest. The system is the one that punishes offenders and that is why we have laws.


----------



## Coastie dad (Jan 2, 2016)

Screw the system and it's worthless laws. We have a legal system, not a justice system. Once that mother is charged, that kid gets entered into the system. And the system now owns that kid. You want that? 
And if I get to offer my OPINION, you get to like it or not. If you start telling me I have to follow certain guidelines I swear I will climb a frikkin statue on a holiday and let the whole world know I don't like it! 
Dadblasted moderators....won't give me no freedom of speech...won't come to my defense when the bullies is a picking on me...then tells me I caint do this and I caint do that....problem with this world now....i need to put a foot up an ass....better go check on those bottle calves...mutter mutter....grumble grumble.....


----------



## MisterMills357 (Apr 15, 2015)

Coastie dad said:


> Thank you sir.


Certainly, and this poll is getting some pretty hot replies; but I expected that when I posted it. And there you have it, Americanism-- with everyone voicing what they think.


----------



## Coastie dad (Jan 2, 2016)

@Denton

I've got to charge my tablet..I'll be back. Because I KNOW there will be hot conversation on this thread!:vs_box:


----------



## Bleach (Jul 5, 2018)

Commenting on some of the posts here, there is no issue of free speech. For some reason people think they can say whatever they wish without consequences. That's just not true. People say you can't yell fire in a crowded theater but you certainly can! You will suffer the consequences if people are hurt. Then again, if it _is _on fire, go for it. Free speech is free speech, but the issue arises here that if you come into my house and start saying things a

i do not approve of or that I don't like you will leave! Same rules apply here.


----------



## Coastie dad (Jan 2, 2016)

I just said he was stopping my free speech. He is because I said so. All the requirements necessary. Now be nice or I'll leave and go find another forum where I am loved and respected.


----------



## Prepared One (Nov 5, 2014)

She is 33 years old! The queen of stupid for leaving a 3 year old alone. At 33 I don' know that I couldn't be convinced this wasn't the first indecent and I am willing to bet there is a history of some sort. She was stupid and lucky, the kid was just lucky. I would say she needs to be charged and she better hire a good lawyer.


----------



## Coastie dad (Jan 2, 2016)

Now, I'm going to be serious for a minute. I reckon the most of you know my background well enough. 
What happens when this woman is charged? What is the sequence of events? What happens to the child? Is this a first time incident, or a repeat?
How much power do we give the government?


----------



## Prepared One (Nov 5, 2014)

Coastie dad said:


> Now, I'm going to be serious for a minute. I reckon the most of you know my background well enough.
> What happens when this woman is charged? What is the sequence of events? What happens to the child? Is this a first time incident, or a repeat?
> How much power do we give the government?


I would like to know what the background is as well. Do we destroy this woman with a jail sentence and put this kid into the system doomed to fail? Is this a one off incident on her part that justifies leniency and maybe some form of oversight? I think unlikely at her age. At 33, on it's face, it would suggest she has not gotten smarter with age.


----------



## Coastie dad (Jan 2, 2016)

I agree for the most part but with the caveat that we are seeing women waiting longer to bear children. This also may mean that they have had just that many more years to be irresponsible and have never learned to be mature enough to take care of a child.


----------



## jimb1972 (Nov 12, 2012)

If it were just the child getting out I would say no, I have an escape artist myself. Leaving home with a child in bed alone is why I think charges are appropriate.


----------



## Annie (Dec 5, 2015)

jimb1972 said:


> If it were just the child getting out I would say no, I have an escape artist myself. Leaving home with a child in bed alone is why I think charges are appropriate.


I do understand about little escape artists. That's a whole different (and scary) sort of a thing. But I'd bet dollars to doughnuts that little girl was out in the streets looking for her stupid arse mama.


----------



## Coastie dad (Jan 2, 2016)

One of the questions I have bouncing around in my pointed head is still at what point do we allow the government more and more control over our lives, at what point have we ceased to be a community of taking responsibility to do what's right, as opposed to allowing the government to create and enforce more laws so that we don't have to deal with other individuals?
Why can't I, as a neighbor, do those things Denton says I can't? Why can't I correct a mother's grievous error without fear of legal reprisal?
If a child were to wander into the street because her mother was busy doing laundry for the elderly lady across the hall, should i allow the child to wander until the police arrived, then expounded on the inadequacy of the mother in hopes she be criminally charged and the child placed in protective custody of the state, then whisked away to a stranger's house for an indeterminate time? How will that effect said child? Or do we not care that we are advocating for the same nanny state we rail against?


----------



## jim-henscheli (May 4, 2015)

Where’s the father?


----------



## Old SF Guy (Dec 15, 2013)

Coastie dad said:


> One of the questions I have bouncing around in my pointed head is still at what point do we allow the government more and more control over our lives, at what point have we ceased to be a community of taking responsibility to do what's right, as opposed to allowing the government to create and enforce more laws so that we don't have to deal with other individuals?
> Why can't I, as a neighbor, do those things Denton says I can't? Why can't I correct a mother's grievous error without fear of legal reprisal?
> If a child were to wander into the street because her mother was busy doing laundry for the elderly lady across the hall, should i allow the child to wander until the police arrived, then expounded on the inadequacy of the mother in hopes she be criminally charged and the child placed in protective custody of the state, then whisked away to a stranger's house for an indeterminate time? How will that effect said child? Or do we not care that we are advocating for the same nanny state we rail against?


There is a difference in Government and Police. Government are your legislatures, judges, and leaders you elect, while the police are hired to police the city, and ensure laws are obeyed for the good of the community.

Now that may or may not have changed over the years based on where you live, but it is the intent. This keeps folks like Denton from having to go engage this lady and apply his own brand of punishment. Should she be charged, yes. She was negligent in her care of the child? Yes! You don't leave a 3 year old at home alone.

Now all of your responses regarding not charging her are based on one of two concerns. 1) It may be her first offense, the child wasn't harmed, etc. The second is that the Government would not raise her kid any better.

This is prejudging an outcome before an event. Either way I think it important to understand why the lady did what she did and to show her it is not acceptable. This is best done by charging her. A first offense should and could be met with leniency, but that is for the judge and Jury to decide.

Laws not enforced or enforced by exceptions are not deterrents. I don't think the woman should lose her child, but she should be on record for having done this once and been punished, so that if it happens again it can be met with harsher punitive action.

Think about it...Its like not giving someone a DUI just because they did have an accident. Would you support that?


----------



## stowlin (Apr 25, 2016)

Sad case of piss poor parenting but what do I know as I have no kids and it’s not for me to judge her. I think society has a right to demand she, mom, get some counseling on how to care for a child as in you don’t put them to bed and head out when they are three.


----------



## Gunn (Jan 1, 2016)

The child needs to be taken from her. She is not responsable enough to have a child. And she needs to be sterilized.


----------



## Denton (Sep 18, 2012)

Coastie dad said:


> One of the questions I have bouncing around in my pointed head is still at what point do we allow the government more and more control over our lives, at what point have we ceased to be a community of taking responsibility to do what's right, as opposed to allowing the government to create and enforce more laws so that we don't have to deal with other individuals?
> Why can't I, as a neighbor, do those things Denton says I can't? Why can't I correct a mother's grievous error without fear of legal reprisal?
> If a child were to wander into the street because her mother was busy doing laundry for the elderly lady across the hall, should i allow the child to wander until the police arrived, then expounded on the inadequacy of the mother in hopes she be criminally charged and the child placed in protective custody of the state, then whisked away to a stranger's house for an indeterminate time? How will that effect said child? Or do we not care that we are advocating for the same nanny state we rail against?


We are not talking about the government having more and more contol over our lives, here. Child negligence isn't a new thing, and neither is charging an idiot with it. This isn't Big Brother, this is Idiot Mother.
Do I want to see the child in the System, you asked. No, I do not. Then again, I would have preferred the mother been there for the child rather than running the roads, leaving a three-year-old at the house, alone.
Keep in perspective, her being charged doesn't mean they are elternally separated or the child is in the system, forever.


----------



## Smitty901 (Nov 16, 2012)

She left a 3 year old on it;s own. Charge her . Of course this happens in Milwaukee often. We just had another couple case in the news. Case below they found 2 in 2 days. Nothing is ever done about it.

3-year-old found walking alone on Milwaukee street


----------



## 6811 (Jan 2, 2013)

19 years as a child abuse detective in Baltimore City I have handled hundreds of cases like this...

Here are the list of her chàrges..

1. Child abandonment
2. Reckless endangerment
3. Child neglect

A 3 year old cannot be left unsupervised or left alone in a house.... The parent knowingly and intentionally left the home to see a friend knowing her child will be alone and unsupervised. A reasonable and prudent person will not do this. This parent is 33, not 15... I would love to see her lose custody temporarily while she serves time. I say she is lucky the child was not hurt. Some of the cases I handled had a very sad outcome.


----------



## Coastie dad (Jan 2, 2016)

Denton said:


> We are not talking about the government having more and more contol over our lives, here. Child negligence isn't a new thing, and neither is charging an idiot with it. This isn't Big Brother, this is Idiot Mother.
> Do I want to see the child in the System, you asked. No, I do not. Then again, I would have preferred the mother been there for the child rather than running the roads, leaving a three-year-old at the house, alone.
> Keep in perspective, her being charged doesn't mean they are elternally separated or the child is in the system, forever.


I have my perspective. I just want to put some other perspectives out there.


----------



## Urinal Cake (Oct 19, 2013)

Is she a junkie? 
Is she on welfare?
Did she vote For Barry Soetoro?
If yes to any of the above Jail no Bond.

If just the opposite (Maybe even photographed wearing ONLY a MAGA hat) No harm no Foul!


----------



## Prepared One (Nov 5, 2014)

jimb1972 said:


> If it were just the child getting out I would say no, I have an escape artist myself. Leaving home with a child in bed alone is why I think charges are appropriate.


I agree it's not like she was busy in the kitchen and the kid got out the door. She knowingly left the child alone. Hell, my brother and I did that all the time. He would bolt for the front door and I would hit the back. My Mom couldn't catch both of us. :devil:


----------



## Lunatic Wrench (May 13, 2018)

If she was at home and the kid got out then no, but seeing she left the apartment and not just outside then YES, the kid being ok is irrelevant.

What if kid go up and into something under the sink, medication, climbed up on the counter for something to eat and fell and got seriously injured. What about a fire, burglary, home invasion, or the lady got hit by a car, was unconscious, murdered and had no ID, how long could that child have been alone in the house before someone knew the kid was there.
Granted most of this is unlikely, but it happens all the time, _oh but only to other people._


----------



## Coastie dad (Jan 2, 2016)

Notice how everyone seems to be of the notion " if this, then that" when making a decision? 

Without all the facts it's kind of difficult to render a sound judgement. Emotions tend to cloud our judgement.

Reckon this is how the media works their magic?


----------



## Denton (Sep 18, 2012)

Coastie dad said:


> Notice how everyone seems to be of the notion " if this, then that" when making a decision?
> 
> Without all the facts it's kind of difficult to render a sound judgement. Emotions tend to cloud our judgement.
> 
> Reckon this is how the media works their magic?


Remember, this is what brought me into the discussion. If this, then that. If the negligence resulted in the child being harmed, then we enforce the child negligence law. If nothing happened, no charges are filed.

What else do you need to know? What do you think the media left out, or what do you think was inflated? What do you think might be the mitigating circumstances that are omitted? The woman put the toddler to bed and then went to a friend's house. What piece of information do you think is missing?

Three reasons for the criminal justice system, as taught to me while pursuing a criminal justice degree:
1) Retribution for harming another or society.
2) "Rehabilitation." That is to say, alter negative behavior.
3) Deter others from doing the same.

I can see at least two reasons to charge her. If found guilty, the judge will determine the best way to deter the woman from doing this again.


----------



## Slippy (Nov 14, 2013)

This is a Bullshit Question Poll! (i.e. the Marisa Tomei character in My Cousin Vinnie :vs_laugh

The 1 and Only Correct Answer is that a New Department within the Federal Government needs to be created. Yes, old Slippy is usually in favor of smaller government and eliminating Departments but stick with me knuckleheads...

The new Department will be called The Federal Department of Sterilization of Idiots and should be headed by yours truly. 

Prior to any child becoming of breeding age, the child's vital information that has been stored since birth will be presented to Slippy, after a brief yet thorough investigation, Slippy will then make a determination that said child be Sterilized so that forementioned child is never able to procreate. 

In 20-45 years most of this once great republic's problems will be solved. 

You're Welcome!

Slippy! :vs_wave:


----------



## Denton (Sep 18, 2012)

Slippy said:


> This is a Bullshit Question Poll! (i.e. the Marisa Tomei character in My Cousin Vinnie :vs_laugh
> 
> The 1 and Only Correct Answer is that a New Department within the Federal Government needs to be created. Yes, old Slippy is usually in favor of smaller government and eliminating Departments but stick with me knuckleheads...
> 
> ...


Dr. Karl Brandt; is that you?


----------



## Slippy (Nov 14, 2013)

Denton said:


> Dr. Karl Brandt; is that you?


Think about it, I'll be in charge of granting licenses to have children! VOILA!

You need a license to Fish, Hunt, Trap, Carry a Pistol, Get Married, Drive a Vehicle, Open a Business, Fly on a Commercial Plane, Build a House (Permit), etc etc.

Why not give out licenses to have children? And the new rule will be if you do not qualify for a license to breed, you get your pee pee whacked or your tubes tied!

Within 45 years we will no longer have a Welfare Problem, An Overpopulated Prison Problem, Black Out of Wedlock Births will plummet, Crime will drop, the list goes on and on.

I see no downside to this at all.lain:


----------



## Annie (Dec 5, 2015)

I have a good friend who was one of these kids. We'll call her Lucy. Lucy's father worked nights and her mother was having an affair. Mom would go out at night after putting the kids to bed. Lucy said she'd get up and search the house top to bottom looking for her. She said her 2 year old sister was found out on the street a couple of times. Lucy disowned her mom, whom she now calls the witch. Lucy calls her step mom her mother. 

My point in telling this is that there was no loved lost between Lucy and the witch. Lucy would've been emotionally better and physically safer if someone had intervened and pressed charges. 

BTW, there's a happy ending, because today Lucy is one of the most awesome moms I know!


----------



## Coastie dad (Jan 2, 2016)

Just trying to motivate healthy conversation, @Denton. So far, a pretty open discussion. Like I said, I already have my opinion, just trying to stimulate.


----------



## MisterMills357 (Apr 15, 2015)

Slippy said:


> This is a Bullshit Question Poll! (i.e. the Marisa Tomei character in My Cousin Vinnie :vs_laugh
> 
> The 1 and Only Correct Answer is that a New Department within the Federal Government needs to be created. Yes, old Slippy is usually in favor of smaller government and eliminating Departments but stick with me knuckleheads...
> 
> ...


I love that movie, and that is a classic scene from it. Yer Welcome Right Back!


----------



## Denton (Sep 18, 2012)

Coastie dad said:


> Just trying to motivate healthy conversation, @Denton. So far, a pretty open discussion. Like I said, I already have my opinion, just trying to stimulate.


Aren't I doing my part?


----------



## Coastie dad (Jan 2, 2016)

Of course!


----------



## SDF880 (Mar 28, 2013)

Who leaves their child alone like that? She should have had the friend come to her house!


----------



## Smitty901 (Nov 16, 2012)

SDF880 said:


> Who leaves their child alone like that? She should have had the friend come to her house!


 Again this type stuff is on the news every time you turn around in Milwaukee. And none of the are ever held accountable.


----------



## 6811 (Jan 2, 2013)

SDF880 said:


> Who leaves their child alone like that? She should have had the friend come to her house!


Have her friend come to her house instead? But that makes too much sense...


----------



## Old SF Guy (Dec 15, 2013)

Denton said:


> Remember, this is what brought me into the discussion. If this, then that. If the negligence resulted in the child being harmed, then we enforce the child negligence law. If nothing happened, no charges are filed.
> 
> What else do you need to know? What do you think the media left out, or what do you think was inflated? What do you think might be the mitigating circumstances that are omitted? The woman put the toddler to bed and then went to a friend's house. What piece of information do you think is missing?
> 
> ...


DENTON FOR ME IT ITS THE FIRST PARAGRAPH HERE THAT BOTHERS ME/.....If the negligence resulted in the child being harmed the enforce the law, but if nothing happenned no charges...This is where i suppliment the DUI charge....if No harm was committed then no charges right? or do we say instead....greater harm can come from these types of actions so we choose to enforce the laws...and yur sentence will be affected by what degree of hrm was included in the offense.


----------



## StratMaster (Dec 26, 2017)

Old SF Guy said:


> DENTON FOR ME IT ITS THE FIRST PARAGRAPH HERE THAT BOTHERS ME/.....If the negligence resulted in the child being harmed the enforce the law, but if nothing happenned no charges...This is where i suppliment the DUI charge....if No harm was committed then no charges right? or do we say instead....greater harm can come from these types of actions so we choose to enforce the laws...and yur sentence will be affected by what degree of hrm was included in the offense.


Yes, there MUST be a penalty for extremely endangering the populace or an individual even if the worst has not yet occurred... otherwise, the worst is guaranteed to occur.


----------



## Smitty901 (Nov 16, 2012)

Old SF Guy said:


> DENTON FOR ME IT ITS THE FIRST PARAGRAPH HERE THAT BOTHERS ME/.....If the negligence resulted in the child being harmed the enforce the law, but if nothing happenned no charges...This is where i suppliment the DUI charge....if No harm was committed then no charges right? or do we say instead....greater harm can come from these types of actions so we choose to enforce the laws...and yur sentence will be affected by what degree of hrm was included in the offense.


 If you drink and drive you will do it again , you will in time hurt or kill someone. As for this women leaving that child , do you think it is really the first time? is it the last. No it is not in either case. If she is not dealt with she will treat it as a joke and others seeing her get away with it will do the same.


----------



## Denton (Sep 18, 2012)

Old SF Guy said:


> DENTON FOR ME IT ITS THE FIRST PARAGRAPH HERE THAT BOTHERS ME/.....If the negligence resulted in the child being harmed the enforce the law, but if nothing happenned no charges...This is where i suppliment the DUI charge....if No harm was committed then no charges right? or do we say instead....greater harm can come from these types of actions so we choose to enforce the laws...and yur sentence will be affected by what degree of hrm was included in the offense.


The judge will take everything into account when he makes his decision. That's what he is for.

Do we know if the child was harmed? I don't mean by someone else. I mean, how will this impact her ability to feel secure or will she grow up to have trust issues, not even remembering what happened to cause them? Remember, this wasn't a little escape artist looking to explore the world. This was a little toddler who awakened to an empty house.

There's another thing that makes me curious. If this woman thinks so little about her daughter and her responsibilities to that little girl, are there other areas in motherhood where she is just as negligent? This incident might have brought to light a serious problem for a little girl. Again, though, let the child welfare folks and the judge sort it all out.


----------



## Smitty901 (Nov 16, 2012)

Denton said:


> The judge will take everything into account when he makes his decision. That's what he is for.
> 
> Do we know if the child was harmed? I don't mean by someone else. I mean, how will this impact her ability to feel secure or will she grow up to have trust issues, not even remembering what happened to cause them? Remember, this wasn't a little escape artist looking to explore the world. This was a little toddler who awakened to an empty house.
> 
> There's another thing that makes me curious. If this woman thinks so little about her daughter and her responsibilities to that little girl, are there other areas in motherhood where she is just as negligent? This incident might have brought to light a serious problem for a little girl. Again, though, let the child welfare folks and the judge sort it all out.


 No judge will quickly read a report from case worker. One that may have seen her once or just read about the case. Case work will recommend nothing be done , list a lot of social buzz words and BS. Judge will go with the case worker case closed. 
When that child turns up abused or dead down the road CYA time for court and social workers. Local news full of these cases.


----------



## RedLion (Sep 23, 2015)

I would say no if she has no prior history of the same or similar. No abuse or other reported problems, then no.


----------



## Denton (Sep 18, 2012)

Smitty901 said:


> No judge will quickly read a report from case worker. One they may have seen her once or just read about the case. Case work will recommend nothing be done , list a lot of social buzz words and BS. Judge will go with the case work cased closed.
> When that child turns up abused or dead down the road CYA time for court and social workers. Local news full of these cases.


What a little ray of sunshine you are!


----------



## Smitty901 (Nov 16, 2012)

Denton said:


> What a little ray of sunshine you are!


 Just the truth, every time you turn around Milwaukee news another of these case comes up. Many times same people over and over. The Children deserve better. Not long ago they had one case worker had not made one in home visit in a couple years.
She did not get fired by the way.


----------

