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.

 

Drugs during pregnancy and have a stillborn baby? Go to prison for life.

page: 1
1

log in

join
share:

posted on Jul, 1 2011 @ 03:37 AM
link   
www.guardian.co.uk...


Rennie Gibbs is accused of murder, but the crime she is alleged to have committed does not sound like an ordinary killing. Yet she faces life in prison in Mississippi over the death of her unborn child.



Gibbs became pregnant aged 15, but lost the baby in December 2006 in a stillbirth when she was 36 weeks into the pregnancy. When prosecutors discovered that she had a coc aine habit – though there is no evidence that drug abuse had anything to do with the baby's death – they charged her with the "depraved-heart murder" of her child, which carries a mandatory life sentence.


Okay, I believe doing drugs during pregnancy is terribly wrong, but....life in prison....even when there is NO evidence her habit had anything to do with the babys death? (Not to mention she was only 15 years old) Then this other question comes up.


"If it's not a crime for a mother to intentionally end her pregnancy, how can it be a crime for her to do it unintentionally, whether by taking drugs or smoking or whatever it is," Robert McDuff, a civil rights lawyer asked the state supreme court.


I dont know what to think about this. A woman can intentionally stop her pregnancy without going to jail, but when the pregnancy was unintentionally stopped, shes suddenly a murderer?

I really do not know what to think about this! I really dont.

Edit - What if the mother is on perscribed medication and the baby dies because of those drugs? Is she still going to prison for life? What about if the baby has a low birth weight because of poor nutrition? Is she still a murderer then?
edit on 1-7-2011 by buni11687 because: (no reason given)




posted on Jul, 1 2011 @ 03:43 AM
link   
reply to post by buni11687
 


The Case should clearly be dismissed.

When you think about it if you can intentionally end the child's life and she unintentionally (Or purposely did it through the drug use) did it then it doesn't seem sound to throw her in jail for life for something that other mothers do on a daily basis.

I read somewhere in my country(Canada) that for every 2 births there is 1 abortion that sorta makes me feel sick knowing they are aborting so many children. It just seems weird....



posted on Jul, 1 2011 @ 04:06 AM
link   
Heres the only video Ive been able to find about this story.




posted on Jul, 1 2011 @ 04:14 AM
link   
If addiction is an illness then the defense will be arguing that the offender was under the influence of the illness.

But then it is Mississippi.

Very thorny issue, it could be argued that it was an intentional or non-intentional abortion. Just an unusual method of abortion, it will hinge on the abortion law in Mississippi, a state not normally known for tolerance.



posted on Jul, 1 2011 @ 04:21 AM
link   
She deserves to be punished, taking drugs during pregnancy is unacceptable and it is a crime of serious child abuse at the least, in this case even possible homicide, tough proving the link between the two may not be easy.

I do think life in prison is excessive in this case, tough, because she is a minor, and because I am not sure the link between death of a baby and drug use is proven.



posted on Jul, 1 2011 @ 04:34 AM
link   
reply to post by Maslo
 


The problem is as you stated she is a minor.

Therefore she cannot be held accountable to contracts she enters in to because a minor does not have the mental capacity to know what they are entering in to, because they are not deemed responsible.

So to argue that a 16 y.o. can be tried for intentional murder must be tested against the legal paradigm of mental capacity. But I doubt this will happen.



posted on Jul, 1 2011 @ 04:36 AM
link   
First of all, it's obviously ridiculous to press charges if there is no evidence that her drug-taking was directly responsible for her baby's death.

If the medical examiner concluded that her coc aine abuse was a contributory factor in the death of her baby, then I think that she should just be charged with manslaughter ( or whatever the equivalent law is in the US ), rather than murder.

The argument that a woman can legally terminate her pregnancy is not a valid argument in this woman's defence. Firstly, because most states - including Mississippi - put restrictions on abortions after around the 24-28 weeks mark. The baby's death occurred at 36 weeks; at this stage during the pregnancy, a woman does not have the legal right to abort her fetus in Mississippi without the state's approval.

Secondly, self-induced abortion is illegal in most states in the US. Abortion is only legal if it is carried out by a qualified and registered physician.



posted on Jul, 1 2011 @ 04:56 AM
link   

Six months later Kimbrough was arrested at home and charged with "chemical endangerment" of her unborn child on the grounds that she had taken drugs during the pregnancy


Whether drug use was responsible for the death of a baby or not, she is still guilty of a serious crime of chemical endangerment. You do NOT take drugs during pregnancy.



posted on Jul, 1 2011 @ 05:05 AM
link   

Originally posted by Maslo

Six months later Kimbrough was arrested at home and charged with "chemical endangerment" of her unborn child on the grounds that she had taken drugs during the pregnancy


Whether drug use was responsible for the death of a baby or not, she is still guilty of a serious crime of chemical endangerment. You do NOT take drugs during pregnancy.


I agree with what you are saying, but where I am coming from is that it could be argued that her mental capacity could be impaired because she was under the influence of an addictive illness plus because she is a minor she does not have the mental capacity to understand the consequences of her actions.

At least that is the law in my country of Australia and US law derives from the same British route as Aussie law does. So I don't know the ideosynchrases of US federal or state laws.



posted on Jul, 1 2011 @ 05:15 AM
link   
reply to post by Krusty the Klown
 


15 year olds usualy do have criminal responsibility, just the sentences are lower. Also, in the US teens are often tried as adults even tough they are not adults yet (weird, but thats how it is..).




because she was under the influence of an addictive illness


I dont think this is sufficient. She knew what she was doing, and being addicted does not give anyone right to commit crimes. And if she wanted to take drugs instead if being pregnant, she should have aborted the baby while she could, in accordance with the law.
edit on 1/7/11 by Maslo because: (no reason given)

edit on 1/7/11 by Maslo because: (no reason given)



posted on Jul, 1 2011 @ 05:22 AM
link   
But the sentence is outrageous. Since she is both a minor, and there was probably no intent to kill the child, the murder charges (unintended killing at worst it should be) and life sentence is clearly innapropiate (that is more due to mandatory sentences law, which is ridiculous).







 
1

log in

join