Witches Kill Baby (40 puncture wounds & snapped neck)

Christian Underground ^ | Jan. 20, 2005

[Lindykim]

The Christian Underground http://www.christian-underground.com READ IT - LEARN FROM IT - PRAY OVER IT - SHARE IT --- Witches Kill Baby January 21, 2005

Little girl had 40 puncture wounds and a snapped neck Pagan tattoos may match baby girl's wounds Photos of couple's religious markings studied in probe of toddler's death

Prosecutors have obtained photographs of a Springfield Township couple's neopagan tattoos in an effort to match the markings to puncture wounds on the woman's slain year-old daughter. Daniel Duffield and Vanessa McGlumphy are charged in connection with the neck-snapping death of McGlumphy's 13-month-old daughter Jacqueline Mae Cooper.

Aside from the fatal neck injury, the toddler's body was also riddled with more than 40 puncture wounds, 12 broken ribs and a lacerated liver. Prosecutors last week received permission from Summit County Common Pleas Judge Marvin Shapiro to photograph the couple to determine whether their religious tattoos match puncture wounds that appear on the toddler's feet.

According to court records, the child had puncture wounds on her foot in the shape of a Wicca or Celtic symbol.

In addition, prosecutors say that Duffield and McGlumphy told investigators that they wanted to raise the girl in their Wiccan faith, an earth-based religion sometimes called ``The Craft´´ or the ``The Craft of the Wise.´´

Duffield told investigators that he placed the Wiccan pentacle symbol on the girl's feet, prosecutors say. Photos of the couple's markings were taken last week at the Summit County Jail, where the two are being held. Duffield's tattoos include a skull and dagger, an anarchy symbol, a demon and a Celtic cross, prosecutors say. McGlumphy's include a goat head, Medusa and a she-devil.

Prosecutors say a needle containing the child's DNA was found near her crib around the time of her death. The child's puncture wounds, prosecutors contend, are evidence of abuse at the hands of Duffield and proof that McGlumphy ignored the girl's injuries. ``For (McGlumphy), Wicca is nothing but an appreciation and love of nature,´´ said defense lawyer Tom Adgate, who represents the woman. Adgate said his client ``didn´t notice -- and she didn´t condone´´ -- the symbol puncture wounds. ``And she doesn´t know when it was done.´´

Duffield's lawyers could not be reached for comment. Duffield, 32, is charged with murder, involuntary manslaughter, child endangering and felonious assault involving puncturing the girl's feet and face. McGlumphy, 25, is charged with involuntary manslaughter and child endangering. Each has pleaded not guilty.

Both are scheduled for trial Monday, but Duffield has asked for a delay to allow his lawyers more time to prepare for trial. Shapiro is expected to rule on the request in a hearing.

The toddler died Oct. 6 from either a dislocation at the top of the spine -- from blunt impact to the head -- or a ``hyperextension/hyperflexion´´ of the neck, according to autopsy reports.

On Tuesday, a juvenile court judge granted temporary custody of the girl's twin sister to McGlumphy's father. The arrangement was agreed to by the child's biological father.

http://www.myrtlebeachonline.com/m ld/myrtlebeachonl:ne/10569204.htm http://www.covenantnews.com/newswire/archives/009376.html moderator@christian-underground.com http://www.christian-underground.com/archive/read.php?sid=398 Posted to the CU: 2005-01-21 08:39:08 CST ======================================== We will Pray WHEN we want School - WHERE we want Work - The Street - The Mall - Persecute Us At Your Own Peril! The Christian Underground http://www.christian-underground.com ========================================

[Liberator]

"Depends upon whom you get to decide what is and is not a 'religion'. They you'll REALLY see stupidity."

Already there, bro.

You and I could call ANYTHING a "religion." Even an entity called the 'Church of anti-Churches.'

The definition of "religion" has been subverted and hijacked -- as has common sense.

"As an alternative, why not simply allow people to worship as they choose, or not, so long as they do no harm to the rights of another person? They can establish churches and whatnot as they will, subject as always to fraud laws and tax laws as appropriate."

Again, we're covering the same ground. Problem: Who is the arbiter of the conditions "harm" and "fraud"? Both concepts are relative, aren't they?

That's the problem with relativism and it's mantra of "tolerance" -- there is NO definitive "truth."

Without absolute values, anarchy and chaos can only prevail. AND hide behind the protective guise of "religion."

[Long Cut]

BTW, what does this perpetual discussion of "morals" have to do with whether or not it is advisable for the government to regulate religion, ban some of them, elevate others etc. in full violation of the Constitution?

Christianity is the majority religion in America today. Why can't you leave it at that? Why this urge to attack the minority ones, even to the point of demanding that they "respect" Christianity above all others, or even advocating the banning of some of them?

This seems to be a strictly Constitutional question. I see not where "morals" come in, save as a means of circular argument.

[Long Cut]

"Who is the arbiter of the conditions "harm" and "fraud"? Both concepts are relative, aren't they?"

Nope. If you use force or fraud to deprive another citizen of their rights to life, liberty, or property that constitutes harm. Such activity is properly prosecuted.

The simple existance of, say, the Eternal Church Of The Worship Of Naked Molerat does no harm to anyone. It is only when some individuals do harm that it becomes a problem, but even then that is solved by their imprisonment.

Besides, attacking every other religion save your own merely creates the impression that yours is threatened by them.

[Junior]

Ahem, in both Greece and Rome women could own property; abortion and infanticide are practiced nowadays in supposedly Christian nations; and Christians once used the Bible to justify enslaving their fellow men.

[Liberator]

"If you use force or fraud to deprive another citizen of their rights to life, liberty, or property that constitutes harm. Such activity is properly prosecuted."

Who's advocating such policy?

But how about addressing attempts to defraud America and it's citizens by referring to any self-declaration of a "religion" as a front to plot and plan against said citizens?

And again -- WHO shall be the arbiter of what constitutes such a thing as "harm"? Especially when such arbiters are increasingly commanded to abide in "moral relativity" because it is more "tolerant"?

Let me simply ask you to imagine a purely theoretical scenario:

Would you believe the United States of America -- should Satanists and Muslims become dominant in numbers -- would still retain the same ideological course in "liberty" and "freedom for all" as we have since our Founding Fathers?

[Long Cut]

If individuals (and remember, only an individual can commit a crime, not an organization) are engaged in a conspiracy to defraud, or otherwise commit a crime, they can and are prosecuted. If their organization is so far gone that RICO applies, it can be broken up. I'm not sure what you're getting at, here.

FRAUD by nature must include the intent to deprive someone of life, liberty and property through lies and misstatements. Who is "attempting to defraud America and it's citizens by referring to any self-declaration of a "religion" as a front to plot and plan against said citizens?"

Clarify, please.

[Oztrich Boy]

If Andrea Yates had been a Secular Humanist, she might have been a danger to her children.

[expatguy]

What comitteee would you appoint to decide what is and is not a religion? What criteria should they use?

That is a good question, and I honestly don't have the answer, but you simply cannot be calling every single belief and ideology you run across a "religion".

[Bosco]

That's the problem with debating religion, period. Invective is pretty much the pinacle of the debate. Few minds are ever changed. The older and wiser I become, the more I realize that if conversion is possible it has to come from love, not debate.

Sometimes it's a loving thing to point out to a person that they aren't consistent with what they believe, or that that there are holes in their world view that they may not have considered. Jesus engaged in debates with religious leaders of His day and He essentially said "It isn't about religion, it's about a relationship between you and God, not how many religious duties you have performed."

That being said, what's a soft atheist?

[Modernman]

Government has a perfect right to do what it thinks is right, subject to the agreement of the voters and legislators.,

I wonder if you'd be singing the same tune if you lived in a town that became majority Muslim and instituted Sharia law?

We should be very hesitant to outlaw most religions

This statement is kind of meaningless since there is no constitutional way to ban a religion in this country.

Probably Satanism has entered here, and I think the government has a perfect right to outlaw Satanism.

Please point out where in the Constitution governmment is given the power to ban religions.

[Modernman]

You forgot to mention some pertinent facts, Junior. Like how females were considered to be sub-human creatures; abortion, infanticide, and child abandonment were commonly practiced; and slave population numbers most usually outnumbered the citizens. Not so hot after all, eh?

Up until recently, every Christian country in the world treated women as second class citizens. Abortion, infanticide and child abandonment occurred in every Christian society in history. As for percentage of the population consisting of slaves, that number was never more than about 20% in Rome, which is a much smaller percentage than in the old Christian, god-fearing South.

[Modernman]

And I wonder how many 'Wiccan' chaplins are there in the U.S. Armed Forces?

I don't know. If an American soldier is dying on the battlefield, shouldn't he be ministered to by the clergy of his choice?

[Modernman]

Your reasoning is flawed. It implies the possibility that our gov't can function as a morals neutral entity. If so, then tell me what guides the reasoning of this morally 'neutral' entity?

The proper role of government in a free society is the protection of the rights of the citizenry.

[nicmarlo]

Absolutely sickening.

Here's another article...sorry if someone already posted.

Oct. 27, 2004

Couple indicted in death of toddler

* * *

The Summit County medical examiner determined that the child died of a broken neck. She also had a severed liver, old and new fractures in her arms and legs, and had been stuck with a needle in her feet and the side of her head about 40 times.

Jacqueline was taken by a township emergency crew on Oct. 6 from her home to Children's, where she was pronounced dead in the emergency room at 1:10 p.m. A surviving twin sister, Layloni Cooper, was taken into the emergency custody of the Summit County Children Services Board.

Akron Municipal Court records show McGlumphy was convicted of domestic violence and aggravated menacing in 2002, while Duffield has had numerous encounters with the law, including a conviction for child endangering in Portage County. He was paroled in March on a 2003 burglary conviction out of Summit County.

http://www.thestate.com/mld/beaconjournal/10025387.htm

[Cicero]

Please point out where in the Constitution governmment is given the power to ban religions.

I suppose it depends what you mean by religion. If, for example, a group of Baal worshippers started sacrificing their first-born children, then the government would have a right to step in and stop them.

If a group of us got together and said that our religion believes in child incest or feeding babies gin instead of milk, that too could be stopped.

Keep in mind, that my remarks were in the context of a group of people who snapped a child's neck as part of a religious ritual. Most people would say that the perps should be tried for murder. And if this action was actually part of their normal religious activities, and not an aberration, then the religion itself should be rooted out and banned just as you would root out any other group of conspirators to commit murder.

In fact, unlike some posters to this thread, I don't believe Wicca is necessarily evil. I believe it is foolish and misguided, and may open the doors to real evil. This particular group of people who call themselves Wiccans evidently have real problems.

[Modernman]

If a group of us got together and said that our religion believes in child incest or feeding babies gin instead of milk, that too could be stopped.

The belief couldn't be stopped, only the act of incest or feeding babies gin.

And if this action was actually part of their normal religious activities, and not an aberration, then the religion itself should be rooted out and banned just as you would root out any other group of conspirators to commit murder.

No, it couldn't. The government does not have the power to ban religions. The only thing the government can do is arrest and prosecute people for violating laws against murder, child abuse etc. The government absolutely has no power to ban any religion.

[Liberator]

"If an American soldier is dying on the battlefield, shouldn't he be ministered to by the clergy of his choice??

Not even a good red herring.

[Happygal]

Any tatoo's, piercings etc on a childs body should be treated as ENDANGERMENT.

And I include mothers who pierce the ears of infant children in that. WHAT the hell is THAT all about?

Let your children pierce themselves, when they are older if they want to...NOT when they are infants.

[texasflower]

Personally I find the allegiance of Islamic military personnel in the U.S. Armed Services highly suspect.

Why? Out of the thousands of Muslim soldiers we have, we have heard of problems with what three?

I can think of one who was arrested for THEFT at his home base, the one with the grenade into the tent and Cpl. Hassoun.

So why do you "suspect" them all?

[texasflower]

Christians believe that Jesus will soon return to claim the Christians and take them "up into the air" with Him.

I am fully ready to go. That is why some of us will post things like that. (Come soon Lord Jesus, etc)