It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

Kansas girl, 5, may face murder charges in drowning

page: 4
8
<< 1  2  3    5 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Jun, 10 2011 @ 09:22 PM
link   
I say bs on this story.

At 5 years old I was well aware of what this would do. In the story the girl said she got irritated with the baby crying.... i mean come on, she knew what she was doing. Lock her up and keep watch, this one aint right!




posted on Jun, 10 2011 @ 09:27 PM
link   
The baby sitter should be charged with negligent homicide, plain and simple. The law needs to keep their hands of the little girl. She probably still has not real clue as to what she did. She probably keeps wondering why Mommy and Daddy were so upset about it. I feel for the families of both children involved.



posted on Jun, 10 2011 @ 10:23 PM
link   

Originally posted by caladonea

Some people are born evil.....I think she knew what she was doing.......Ted Bundy when he was 3 used to put knives around sleeping peoples heads.


This is EXACTLY what I was thinking. Its in some people's blood... regardless of age.

Dragging a toddler to the bathtub with the SPECIFIC PURPOSE and PLAN to DROWN IT shows what kind of MONSTER she is destined to be.

I mean SERIOUSLY, do you know of any little kids that would do something like this?

A future monster here...



posted on Jun, 10 2011 @ 10:53 PM
link   

Originally posted by loam

Originally posted by marg6043
The only one here to be charge with "involuntary murder is the adult that was in the house at the time that the child was left along in the bathtub with the toddler.


Exactly.

Exactly?? You sure about that?
Inaccurate might be a better choice of words.


From what I have read, and from several different sources-
  • There was no adult in the house, at the time.
  • They were not left in the tub. The 5 yr. old put the toddler in the tub.



  • posted on Jun, 10 2011 @ 10:57 PM
    link   
    reply to post by nunya13
     


    again the babysitter was mentaly challenged ie you cant charge her as shes not an adult(mentaly or physicly) either why not blame the parents you know the ones that left them alone with there young children and a mentaly challenged babysitter the only ones in the case fully competent and adult were the gasp adults so if any one goes down for this it will be parents or relatives



    posted on Jun, 10 2011 @ 11:05 PM
    link   
    There is no civilized country where a 5 year old could be held for murder. Counseling and intervention yes, murder charges NO. What 5 year old could hold a full sized mature baby/toddler and even think to keep them under water? Im serious. I have 5 boys, and they were big and strong, but there isn't a chance, at 5 they could have held a screaming baby. They could only hold their brothers assisted with the child in their lap. This is not what happned.

    This case is hiding something. The baby sitter may have done it and pinned it on the girl, and/or the police state did this, trying to make crimes of children have legal consequence for they run a hell zone.
    edit on 10-6-2011 by Unity_99 because: (no reason given)

    edit on 10-6-2011 by Unity_99 because: (no reason given)



    posted on Jun, 10 2011 @ 11:12 PM
    link   

    Originally posted by VonDoomen
    I say bs on this story.

    At 5 years old I was well aware of what this would do. In the story the girl said she got irritated with the baby crying.... i mean come on, she knew what she was doing. Lock her up and keep watch, this one aint right!


    Not only did she not do it, impossible, and its a set up. But if she was 8 and did this, she's just a kid. They don't control irratition and you just showed absolute ignorance of children. I'm going to tell you this right now, we're removing this hellzone, its passing away, it might get worse first , but its over. And its hell now, even when they don't charge children. Hells over on earth. I would choose love and peace, compassion and kindness for our frequency will match our next step.



    posted on Jun, 10 2011 @ 11:20 PM
    link   

    Originally posted by Unity_99
    What 5 year old could hold a full sized mature baby/toddler and even think to keep them under water? Im serious.


    Originally posted by Unity_99
    Not only did she not do it, impossible,


    That makes absolutely no sense at all. How could it be impossible for a 5 yr. old to to hold an 18 month old child underwater? Not only is it not even close to impossible, but it wouldn't even be difficult. It would actually be quite easy.



    posted on Jun, 10 2011 @ 11:24 PM
    link   
    Jeez, this just isn't a good situation all around.

    It reminds me of something that happened when I was in first grade. I remember sitting around with friends during... whatever "free time" was called back then, and one of my friends was making fun of another. We were all giggling, but I remember the one kid who was being made fun of got irritated, so he put his hand over his friends mouth in order to get him to be quiet. It wasn't until the kid passed out that the other friend realized that he had done something wrong. And considering first graders are usually 5 or 6 years old... this story just seems to parallel what I remember. (Both kids ended up being fine, but the whole class had to get a lesson on why not to put your hand over someones mouth).

    Obviously this little five year old girl wasn't very intelligent and her parents should have taught her some semblance of right and wrong. I know it sounds like a harsh judgment, but I remember knowing better than to cut off someone else's airflow at that age (but then again, by that time in life I had also witnessed a graphic death, so I might have been ahead of the curve when it comes to an awareness of mortality).

    I guess my conclusion is that this is just a tragedy. Nothing more or less. The family is definitely going to have a lot of pain to get through, but the courts shouldn't add more pain to their lives by treating this incident as some kind of intentional crime.
    In all of this, I feel the worst for the 5 year old girl. She might not understand the gravity of what she's done at the moment... but later in her life she'll be haunted by the memory consistently. And that is a pretty heavy sentence in itself.



    posted on Jun, 11 2011 @ 12:26 PM
    link   
    Even Mothers who kill their kids often get off with a slap on the wrist, the kid will not face charges and I doubt the parents will either.
    edit on 11-6-2011 by SevenBeans because: (no reason given)



    posted on Jun, 11 2011 @ 01:49 PM
    link   
    reply to post by BrokenCircles
     


    What? As a mother of 5, with common sense, anyone who thinks a 5 year old held a struggling screaming baby and had the strength to do this, is very greenhorn/inexperienced with children. My sons would have needed to be supported, sitting down to even have a placid happy babe in their arms. My first born was 10 lbs 5 ounces, and 4 were big babies. He's now 6 foot 2, and they were never small weak children. This is a little girl. Someone else did the murder and is using her.

    Everything I wrote makes perfect sense.
    edit on 11-6-2011 by Unity_99 because: (no reason given)



    posted on Jun, 11 2011 @ 02:13 PM
    link   

    Originally posted by Unity_99
    What? As a mother of 5, with common sense, anyone who thinks a 5 year old held a struggling screaming baby and had the strength to do this, is very greenhorn/inexperienced with children.


    That is complete and utter rubbish, I have kids too (in fact I have a 5 year old and an almost 2 year old).

    The 5 year old is very capable of holding the 2 year old down.

    Your kids must have been terribly scrawny at 5 and/or freaks of nature at 2 to think this way.



    posted on Jun, 11 2011 @ 03:12 PM
    link   

    Originally posted by Unity_99
    reply to post by BrokenCircles
     


    What? As a mother of 5, with common sense, anyone who thinks a 5 year old held a struggling screaming baby and had the strength to do this, is very greenhorn/inexperienced with children. My sons would have needed to be supported, sitting down to even have a placid happy babe in their arms. My first born was 10 lbs 5 ounces, and 4 were big babies. He's now 6 foot 2, and they were never small weak children.

    Common sense leads me to the conclusion that the size of your own children, is completely irrelevant, and has no bearing on this case whatsoever. Maybe your common sense is different from mine, but my [color=EDE275]common sense tells me that if I am going to attempt to speak in absolute certainties, then I can make [color=EDE275]no assumptions.



    Originally posted by Unity_99
    This is a little girl. Someone else did the murder and is using her.

    Everything I wrote makes perfect sense.

    I have read several articles about this particular case. There are a few details that you seem to be using to determine this conclusion, that as far as I know, are only assumptions. I am not saying that they are not facts. I am saying that if they are, I have not come across these details. If these [color=EDE275]assumed details are facts, then please provide links.

  • [color=EDE275]The 5 yr. old was little
  • [color=EDE275]The 18 month old was a full sized mature baby/toddler
  • [color=EDE275]The 18 month old was struggling and screaming

    There are many factors which are unknown. Maybe the kid was tired. Maybe there wasn't much of a struggle at all. Maybe the toddler was smaller than average. Maybe the 5 yr. old was bigger than average. I could go on and on with the possibilities, but there is no need.

    This could have easily been accomplished without much effort at all.

    Here is the main difference:
    I am not saying that this definitely was accomplished with a small amount of effort. I am saying that it could have been. It is possible. Regardless of the many unknown factors, you have somehow reached this conclusion of it being impossible.

    It is [color=EDE275]impossible to reach an absolute definitive conclusion based on minimal details.



  • posted on Jun, 11 2011 @ 03:25 PM
    link   
    reply to post by BrokenCircles
     


    it's also quite irrelevant in my opinion....
    five year olds do some pretty stupid things, many of which cause injury to themselves!!! my youngest still has the nice scar from where he was pushed full force into the wall by his older brother, and his older brother had no idea why he did it then, and still doesn't. I imagine maybe jealousy had a little to do with it. most parents know to watch the older kids when the younger ones first appear onto the scene. realizing that a little sibling rivalry might pop up. and well, kids are kids!!! at that age, they don't realize what the consequences of their actions are. this is why we tend not to leave them alone without supervision...or should I say adequate supervision. In my opinion, there are alot of 16 year old kids that shouldn't be left with kids this young. there are just too many things that could pop up that they just don't know how to deal with, and well.....they shouldn't be held accountable if something pops up and their inexperience or immaturity causes them to do the wrong thing!!! and this 16 year old was mentally handicapped....
    so well, if there is any blame to go around...although I bet that everyone involved in this are rather horrified at the outcome, well...it should be the ADULTS that were entrusted with the toddler's care. they imperiled all three of these children!!!



    posted on Jun, 11 2011 @ 04:20 PM
    link   
    reply to post by dawnstar
     
    The one detail, that I personally feel is the most disturbing about this whole thing, is that he had been there for a few weeks, but his dad was coming to get him and take him home. Maybe dad didn't have a vehicle, since he was being picked up from the bus station, so he was probably not planning to take the toddler back home right then, but it seems that he was taking him back soon, probably the next day.


     
    Just came across a more recent article from Huffington Post, that gives a few more details.


    around 11:30 p.m., after the boy was [color=CFECEC]found floating in the water. Paramedics rushed the toddler to the hospital where he was pronounced dead on arrival, police said.


    At the time of his death, Jermane was in the company of his 16-year-old babysitter and four other children, the oldest of whom was 12.
    This is written slightly differently, so not sure, but in some of the articles that I read yesterday, it stated there was a total of 5 children. Toddler, 5 yr. old, 16 yr. old, and 2 others for which no age was given. This article does not actually say that the 16 yr. old babysitter was also a relative who lived in this house. Whichever is wrong, that is where the confusion is. Regardless, there being a 12 yr. old also in the house, creates more thoughts.


    According to the Jackson County Medical Examiner's Office, they are in possession of the preliminary autopsy results right now, but because the case is an "open investigation," they are not commenting on what those findings are.



    The Family Court division is actively involved in the case, according to Mary Jacobi, a spokeswoman for the Jackson County Court.

    "A petition was presented and has been acted upon to consider the 5-year-old child in need of care. It is a formal court preceding that gives the court the ability to provide services to the child," Jacobi told The Huffington Post.

    Jacobi added: "The child is not imprisoned. The child is in a better place and receiving whatever services were deemed [necessary] by those interacting with the child."



    "The suspect has to be able to form the intent and appreciate the criminality," Bremner told The Huffington Post. "In adults, they call it competence. In juvenile cases, they call it capacity.

    "Can a five-year-old form the intent? Do they know what death is? Do they know if you put a baby in water it will die? The prosecution will look at it and evaluate it but they most likely won't put a 5-year-old on trial for murder."



    However, there is a possibility that police and prosecutors could focus their attention on other people connected to the case.

    "[color=CFECEC]Negligent homicide would be tough based on the facts we know, but there is potential for neglect charges against the parents," Bremner said. "The parents weren't there. We don't know the level of incapacitation of the babysitter, but prosecutors will just have to show that it was reasonably foreseeable that something tragic could happen."


    Huffington Post



    posted on Jun, 11 2011 @ 04:37 PM
    link   
    This is what happens when you assume that your responsibility of being a parent magically disappears when you bring those magic things into your world. Babysitters, schools, whatever. It's a wonder this sort of thing doesn't happen more often with the culture that we have today. Ultimately it is the parent's responsibility. Not only did they hire someone who would fall asleep but someone who managed to sleep through the screams of an infant. Screams which by nature's design are effective at waking others up better than an alarm clock. I'd bet it wasn't crucial for them to both be out of the house, and they went out by their own will.

    No I don't have kids. That's why I'm not rushing to the parents side and transferring all blame to the babysitter. The parents are ultimately responsible. They should be blamed just as hard as the babysitter. This day and age, people just want to have the benefits of things which take responsibility, without taking responsibility. Give me a high position, high importance job but let me get off work all the time. Let me have a kid but I still want to go out every weekend. And they all work together to make this a reality. I call it the grownups club. They go about creating responsibilities for themselves, then work together by consensus to make it OK to shirk those responsibilities.

    So yeah, in that town by now, all blame has probably been shifted away from the parents through consensus. After all life is hard and they paid a babysitter (magic word, magic thing that takes care of everything and protects your child from all harm). Maybe the parents should be considered for negligence? How is it not considered a risk to place the safety of toddlers in the hands of a minor?



    posted on Jun, 11 2011 @ 08:06 PM
    link   

    Originally posted by Novise
    This is what happens when you [color=E18B6B]assume

    Not only did they [color=E18B6B]hire someone who would fall asleep
    [color=E3E4FA]What leads you to the conclusion that she was hired?


    they [color=E18B6B]paid a babysitter (magic word, magic thing that takes care of everything and protects your child from all harm).
    hmmm. You sure 'bout that?


    managed to sleep through the screams of an infant. Screams which by nature's design are effective at waking others up better than an alarm clock.
    If I held your head underwater, how long do you think you could scream without air?
    How far away do you think your gargled voice could be heard?
    Looks like a big house to me.


    I'd bet it wasn't crucial for them to both be out of the house, and they went out by their own will.
    Just as I'd bet it wasn't crucial for you to make an attempt at learning any actual details, before reaching your own conclusions. Who is this ~'both'~'they'~'their'~ that you speak of?


    They should be blamed just as hard as the babysitter.
    ...just as hard as a mentally disabled 16 yr. old, who may or may not have been put into a situation that she was not prepared for, and possibly having no option to accept or decline.



    Maybe the parents should be considered for negligence? How is it not considered a risk to place the safety of toddlers in the hands of a minor?
    [color=FFF8C6]↑Quoted↑↑Text↑↑Directly↑↑Above↑↑Your↑↑Post↑



    posted on Jun, 11 2011 @ 10:30 PM
    link   

    Originally posted by SevenBeans
    Even Mothers who kill their kids often get off with a slap on the wrist, the kid will not face charges and I doubt the parents will either.
    edit on 11-6-2011 by SevenBeans because: (no reason given)


    That's absolutely not true about mothers, at least not here in New Zealand!
    Vicky



    posted on Jun, 12 2011 @ 12:05 AM
    link   
    I'm going to chime in on this from an informed point of view, not necessarily on the case itself, but the stages of cognitive development in children ages 0-7. Seeing as three years of child psych was required in the class structure in my education degree (and concepts from which I still apply in my classroom), I feel that I am more qualified than some to speak about the rationality of the child in question (from a strictly developmental point of view).

    I don't know how many of you are familiar with Piaget's Theory of Cognitive Development, but he basically talks about the cognitive development process from birth till death.

    There are four stages in his overall theory, but I'm only going to talk about the first two:

    Stage One: Sensorimotor Stage

    This stage is typically from birth till about 18-24 months. This is the stage in which the child develops from reflexive actions (sucking, grabbing, etc), to the understanding of simple symbols such as a box of cookies, or a bottle of milk. This is the time where the child explores her environment, begins to understand that the bottle of milk means food, and that the box of cookies means yummy treats, etc.

    Stage Two: Preoperational Stage

    In this stage, from roughly ages 2-7, the child develops from the simple language of symbols to actual words and "real" language. This stage is characterized by increased cognizance, but a lack of logical reasoning capabilities behind that cognizance. Put it this way: the child is still very egocentric. What a child does, only occurs to that child (in her mind). More or less, a child in the middle of this stage (around age 4 or 5) can still not see an event or thought from another person's point of view.

    One of the sub stages to stage two is the Intuitive Thought Substage. During this sub stage, a child becomes more aware of her surroundings, and starts asking many, many questions. This stage typically starts around age 5, but can start as late as age 6 or even 7, the theorized end of the Preoperational Stage. Children that are in this substage still lack the logical reasoning capabilities to fully understand the consequences of their actions.

    A few examples:

    1) Johnny sees Timmy eating cookies. Johnny wants to try a cookie because they look so good. Johnny takes a cookie from Timmy, and Timmy starts crying. Mr. Truthseeker1984 approaches Johnny and asks why Johnny took Timmy's cookie. Johnny responds: "Because I wanted the cookie." Mr. Truthseeker1984 responds: "Did you ask Timmy if you could have a cookie?" Johnny responds: "No." Mr. Truthseeker asks: "Then why did you take Timmy's cookies?" Johnny responds: "Because I wanted one."

    2) Jill is running down the sidewalk at a breakneck pace to see the new kittens that her friend Mary brought home. Jill trips on an uneven part of the sidewalk, falls down, and scrapes her knee. When Mary's mother approaches Jill, she asks if Jill is okay. Jill says, "The sidewalk was mad and made me fall down."

    Believe it or not, this is what happens. Children at this age are VERY egocentric, and do not understand that a sidewalk cannot be mad, or that the cookies that another child is eating is not hers. Or that a screaming baby might not wake up after being dunked in water.

    ~~~~

    Piaget stated that during these two initial stages of development, a child uses PLAY and IMITATION throughout their early development. Much of it has to do with trial and error. Some children learn quickly, while others do not.

    Now, much like we scratch an itch when it itches, a child will scratch an "itch" when it suits them. Refer to the cookie and sidewalk examples. It is my belief, from a purely developmental point of view, that this child was absolutely annoyed with the screaming baby. It is also my belief that the child only wanted to serve herself by making the baby silent. Did the child pick the best action in this circumstance? Nope. Did the child know what she was doing when she did it? To an extent, yes. But purely from a self-serving point of view. No malice involved. She used the word "angry." Refer to the sidewalk example. This child is not the next Jeffery Dahmer.

    Without trying to make assumptions about the child's home life, it is indeed possible that she saw something in passing on the television where a baby or even an adult was "silenced" by sticking his/her head under water (remember, a child of this age is just coming out of the symbol stage). Imitation is a huge part of this stage of development. Perhaps she wanted to see what would happen, or perhaps she just wanted to scratch her own itch. In either case, I do not believe the child is at fault, and any child psychologist worth their salt will immediately see that.

    This was nothing more than a tragic accident, and those of you calling for blood for either the parents or the babysitter (and the one poster who says that a five year old child should go on trial for murder), should really re-evaluate the situation by removing the emotion from the equation. Obviously the major news outlets are going to focus on the fact that this state is even considering putting a five year old child on trial for murder (which is sparking emotions of all different kinds), and won't focus on the underlying details, which we have very few of, and probably won't have much more of.

    My heart goes out to the family that this has affected, and I only hope that the judge that is looking at this case won't make a mockery of the US Judicial System by putting a five year old child on trial for murder.

    I hope this post helped.





    Peace be with you.

    -truthseeker




    More on Piaget's Theories:

    Concise version
    Wiki Article, very well done and cited, with more in-depth examples.



    posted on Jun, 12 2011 @ 05:05 AM
    link   
    reply to post by BrokenCircles
     


    It was screaming before it was put into the tub. Not after. It was not a sob, it was loud enough to bother the five year old. And there are clues in the story that it's not a situation of teen pregnancy. In a teen pregnancy, duh the teen has to take care of the kid, but there is no reason to use a teenage babysitter when other options are available and someone more experienced reliable would be better, or at least someone reliable bottom line - age is not always an issue but it often is. You can pretty much figure out that the parents are not (still) teenagers at least because there is a five year old an an infant, very low odds, and they are likely mid 30s, middle aged. It comes across as 2 adults, not seperated, in the family and well to do because again there are 2 children and I say well to do because you said it's a big house. Are you sure I'm wrong? Sorry I didn't bother to be politically correct, and there is a line between jumping to a conclusion and making justified assumptions. A babysitter that leaves water in the tub and goes to sleep, is not experienced. These things happen when too many things are neglected in a situation, not when people are taking due diligence and being careful.

    And yeah, I guess we all COULD have been mentally challenged. Or the babysitter COULD have been deaf, etc. I guess this absolves us of all responsibility when we did not help when we could, because any of us could have been born without limbs, born without sight, born without hearing. Hmm...
    edit on 12-6-2011 by Novise because: (no reason given)



    new topics

    top topics



     
    8
    << 1  2  3    5 >>

    log in

    join