Considering the insane liberal view of human life, that would be a logical conclusion. Of course he couldn't have legally murdered the baby himself. He would have had to hire a "professional" to do it.
Posted on 07/05/2019 4:31:17 PM PDT by ETL
I don’t see anything.
There are many possible scenarios for a baby to have suffered blunt force trauma to the head. It could have been hit with something, dropped on the floor, thrown into a wall, etc, etc.
If those had happened the father would be claiming it was an accident.
It’s a gif I made from a YouTube clip of the uncle punching the baby’s father. Maybe your settings are set such that your computer isn’t allowing it.
He did try to claim it was an accident. Read the excerpt from DailyMail.com in my post 38.
Bows rejected a plea deal from the prosecutor last week, standing by his original claim that he did not kill his three-month old son. Boes told investigators, baby Parker fell off the couch and hit his head.
However, medical reports show the father’s story did not add up. An autopsy revealed the three-month old died from blunt force trauma to the head with evidence of hemorrhages to his brain and both of his eyes as well as bruising to his groin.
From Channel 44 News
If the father had just thought to kill his 3-month son three months earlier all would be well. /sarcasm
Wow! That sick bastard. I wonder what he actually did to cause the fatal injuries. One would think this all came out in court. I looked for several minutes earlier and couldn’t find any additional details. Too busy right now to try again.
It’s bad. The poor child was probably crying and he lost his temper. That’s usually what causes these things. The picture above shows a happy, beautiful child, it breaks my heart.
Considering the insane liberal view of human life, that would be a logical conclusion. Of course he couldn't have legally murdered the baby himself. He would have had to hire a "professional" to do it.
I’m with you.
That’s gotta be the most confusing headline of the week. I wondered how and why a father would punch his three month old son in the face while in court.
I'm curious, what do you guys see below, a vase or two people?
...you don’t have to answer. I wasn’t being serious. :)
But it is interesting how you could misread the headline like that.
Pass that picture around at the prison he’s going to.
Killing an innocent baby should get an appropriate punishment.
.......................................
Are there babies who are NOT innocent? Perp should be hanged, and in a truly civilized country he would be.
That’s exactly the way I read it. Until I clicked on the article I read it three times and it still came up as if a father had punched his 3 year old son in the face in a court room. This must be the result of a generation that was never taught correct English Grammar and sentence structure.
My English teacher would say that he three-month old was punched in the face. Subject-predicate agreement.
My English teacher would say that [t]he three-month old was punched in the face. Subject-predicate agreement.
It doesn't make sense to say "killing 3-month-old son punched in the face" if they meant "killing 3-month-old son (he, the father, had) punched in the face"
They clearly meant "Indiana father (convicted of killing 3-month-old son) punched in the face in court"
Indiana father, convicted of killing 3-month-old son, punched in the face in court. This would be correct.
Yes, that would have been a better way of phrasing it.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.