Posted on 09/30/2004 3:45:39 AM PDT by TaxRelief
LUMBERTON - Robeson County District Attorney Johnson Britt can't believe a jury found Tina Locklear not guilty of beating her 2-year-old daughter to death. The jury did convict Locklear of abusing the child, which caused more confusion for Britt.
"I don't understand the verdict the jury brought because the child abuse was the cause of the death," Britt said. "It is one of the most, if not the most, stunning cases in which I've been involved. I have no explanation for what happened."
The jury on Friday convicted Locklear, 28, of felony child abuse inflicting serious injury, while finding her not guilty of first-degree murder. Locklear was sentenced Monday morning to serve six to eight years in prison, pay a $25,000 fine and $511 in court costs. She will receive about three years credit for time served.
Locklear, of 212 N. Jones St., Pembroke, was charged with beating Brianna McNeill to death on Sept. 9, 2001. Locklear could have faced the death penalty if she had been convicted of murder.
"I've been in shock since Friday; you never can predict what a jury may do," Britt said. "A logical conclusion, if you find her guilty of child abuse, would be to find her guilty of felony murder."
Brianna's grandfather, Al McNeill, questioned the jury's decision and said he believed the judicial system had let Brianna down. He said Locklear "got away with murder ...."
"If we can't count on our judicial system, what protections are our children going to have today?" McNeill said. "Is it so far out of reality to expect justice for the life of a little child?"
"It's a very touchy subject with me," he said. "I felt that there was evidence to support the charge and for whatever reason the jury decided against that."
Brianna's aunt, Judy Krendick, of Scottsdale, Ariz., said she was insulted by the verdict.
"It feels like her life never happened; she had an entire lifetime of abuse by her mother," Krendick said. "Brianna got dropped through the cracks and the reality of it is that she should never have been allowed to be with her mother. It's just mind boggling that she is going to be out walking the streets. This is just so insulting to Brianna's life. I just pray this will get people thinking and something good can come out of this."
Locklear's defense attorney Geoff Hosford said the jury did its job.
"They certainly didn't rush into anything," he said. "They reviewed evidence, and they listened pretty carefully to the judge's instructions. The jury did their job."
Boyfriend accused
Closing arguments were heard Wednesday, with defense lawyers Sue Berry and Hosford telling the jury that David Lowery, Locklear's boyfriend in 2001, killed Brianna.
Berry said that Lowery beat Brianna to death because he was angry, and that he did it over a 10-minute period when Locklear and her older daughter, Chelsey, went to Burger King.
Britt argued that Locklear beat her daughter to death as part of an elaborate plan to regain custody of her two children from their father, Brian McNeill. Britt said Locklear had the strength to kill her child, and that a medical expert said Locklear used an object to sexually assault the child.
Hosford argued that Locklear didn't need to beat her daughter to regain custody because she already had joint custody and often visited both children. He said that medical testimony supported a sexual assault from a man, and that man was Lowery.
The jury, given options of first-degree murder, second-degree murder and not guilty, deliberated for about two days before reaching its verdict late Friday.
Lowery, 24, was also charged with the killing. Britt told the jury that Lowery had entered a plea of accessory after the fact to murder. Britt said Lowery will be sentenced in October, and will get more prison time than Locklear. Lowery will likely serve about 10 to 13 years in prison, and will also receive almost three years credit for time served.
Hosford questioned why Lowery was not taken to trial.
"One person decided David Lowery's fate and 12 people decided Tina Locklear's fate," Hosford said. "When you look at the two people charged in the case, we've never understood why the state took it out of the jury's hands to decide David Lowery's fate."
Locklear ...." six to eight years " "Lowery will be sentenced in October, and will get more prison time than Locklear"
So, no one murdered her?
Let's all remember that our justice system is not perfect. It makes mistakes.
When it does so in such an egresious manner there is a desire to take the law into our own hands.
But sine we live in a society of laws created by men, imprefection is something we must learn to live with and accept.
To do otherwise is to destroy the sanctity of the law and the fabric which keeps us civilized.
Of course feel free to write what you would like to do, just don't do it.
"But sine we live in a society of laws created by men, imprefection is something we must learn to live with and accept."
Or we can take the law into our own hands... and accept the verdict of society on our behavior. That's not perfect either, but it does serve to help fix the imperfections you mentioned.
The people of Robeson County, North Carolina seem to eat their young with impunity.
It was too late for this particular 2-year-old when the prosecutors and DA arrived. (Pause for discussion of Child Welfare Service ...)
The harm of this verdict will be felt by other children whose parents (stepparents, parents' live-in whatevers) will get the message that juries will let them get away with abusing and killing the children, too.
Robeson County is my neighboring county. You simply would not believe the stuff that goes on in and comes out of that county.
Agreement, Right, Liberty?
What does the "agreement" part mean? (see my tagline)
"Prosecuters and DA fail innocent 2 yr old..."
Certainly did.
Heck, we'd have taken her in if she needed new parents. They didn't have to murder her. We have a heart for little ones.
Excellent thought.
Of course one must wonder whether there
1.really would be a market and
2. whether the family would be liable if it turned out that the high paid prosecuter convinced a jury to convict an innocent man.
Then they would need a high-paid defence attorney.
There is something that appears slightly necessary that the person who speaks for the state (as the second phase of law enforcement) be paid by the state.
But, I would like to continue this conversation. I am not certain on this.
Others?
The translation (which is subject to debate) is as follows:
Einigkeit = Unity
Recht = Liberty
Freiheit = Freedom
There is no exact German word for Liberty in German. I assume you too your translation from the "Freiheit's Statue" - Statue of Liberty. But "Freiheit" really is the Germanic root of "Freedom" in English. "Recht" is the root of "Right(s)", but in my and other opinions is, in this circumstance more appropriately translated into "Liberty".
The "Einigkeit" part is really about the unity of the German people. It is not about the banality of agreement that your tagline properly berates.
Tomorrow, special guest John f'n Kerry will teach us French.
Good tagline ... polysyllabic!
Interesting suggestion ... privatizing criminal law, so to speak. Instead of "The People vs. Mr. Criminal," we had have "Mr. Victim (or victim's heirs) vs. Mr. Criminal."
I don't know whether the results would be better or worse. Although the current system of elected or appointed public prosecutors is open to abuse, corruption, or incompetence, that would also be true of privately-chosen prosecutors. I suppose the fact that the victim of a crime (or his proxy) would make the decisions, rather than a public employee's doing so, would represent an expansion of options that Thomas Sowell would approve!
Blah, blah, blah...the sanctity of law...blah,blah,blah.
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.