Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

Abortion charge against woman won't hold up, attorney says
Virginian Pilot ^ | 3/4/06 | Linda McNatt

Posted on 03/04/2006 7:27:33 AM PST by wagglebee

SUFFOLK — The defense attorney for a woman accused of shooting herself in the stomach and killing her unborn child says an abortion charge won’t hold up in court.

Suffolk’s lead prosecutor says his office is still investigating the crime.

Tammy Skinner, 22, is charged with inducing an abortion and filing a false police report. Prosecutors have already said they plan to drop a firearms charge because it doesn’t apply.

Virginia Beach lawyer Kevin Martingayle, who met with Skinner on Friday, said he doesn’t think the abortion charge applies either.

“All of the provisions of the law are aimed at third parties, not at pregnant mothers,” Martingayle said. “We do not read laws broadly to express outrage. We don’t assume anything is illegal.”

Commonwealth’s Attorney Phil Ferguson said he won’t make a final decision until all the evidence is in.

“I have said from Day One, there are a lot of technical, legal issues that need to be looked at,” Ferguson said Friday. “We are investigating all of those things. This is a stretch. Whatever we feel is appropriate, we’ll move ahead with.”

Skinner’s next court appearance is Friday.

If prosecutors go forward with the abortion charge, it will be the first time in this area and probably the first time in the state.

Police arrested and charged Skinner the day after she got out of the hospital, where she underwent a Caesarean section to deliver the baby and surgery for the bullet wound.

Skinner, who has two other children, called police at 4 a.m. Feb. 23. She told them she had been shot in the stomach but said she couldn’t remember where she was shot or who shot her.

The baby girl, who was expected to be born that day, died.

Prosecutors have previously said that the state’s fetal homicide law, adopted in 2004, does not apply because of the way it’s worded. It refers to taking the life of the “fetus of another.”

The abortion law that Ferguson is using doesn’t apply either, Martingayle said. Eventually, he said, the incident could change some state laws, but they can’t be applied retroactively.

“This is an unusual situation,” Ferguson said. “It involves a statute that has other ramifications to it. We may be making the law.”

Marie Walls, senior assistant commonwealth’s attorney, said prosecutors are striving to make certain that charges will stand up all the way to the U.S. Supreme Court.

The baby’s funeral will be at 1 p.m. today at New Mount Joy Food for Living Ministries.

In her obituary, she’s referred to as “Little Angel.”

“I understand that people feel moral outrage over this,” Martingayle said. “And there is likely to be some criminal punishment. But perhaps she’s been punished enough.”


TOPICS: Crime/Corruption; Culture/Society; News/Current Events; US: Virginia
KEYWORDS: abortion; cultureofdeath; fetalrights; infanticide; prolife
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-2021-37 last
To: cgk; wagglebee

Well I don't even NEED coffee.

And something about this story stinks real bad; if she was going to abort her baby, why did she shoot herself to do it?


21 posted on 03/04/2006 8:12:42 AM PST by Ultra Sonic 007 (Hitler and Stalin have nothing on Abortion)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 14 | View Replies]

To: Ultra Sonic 007; wagglebee

re: coffee - It's a comfort thing. :)

And, I suspect she may have killed the baby to exact revenge on its father - they were apparently having problems.


22 posted on 03/04/2006 8:14:52 AM PST by cgk (I don't see myself as a conservative. I see myself as a religious, right-wing, wacko extremist.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 21 | View Replies]

To: wagglebee; Ultra Sonic 007
Shooting of fetus creates legal hurdles

Excerpt: She told WAVY-TV on Wednesday that trying to take care of two small girls, ages 1 and 4, and having an abusive boyfriend drove her to abort her unborn, third child.

23 posted on 03/04/2006 8:18:29 AM PST by cgk (I don't see myself as a conservative. I see myself as a religious, right-wing, wacko extremist.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: wagglebee; 2ndMostConservativeBrdMember; afraidfortherepublic; Alas; al_c; american colleen; ...
Shouldn't the Unborn Victims of Violence Act be used against this woman?  Or is this law just another piece of public-relations "fluff" with no teeth in it? 
 
President Bush Signs Unborn Victims of Violence Act of 2004

24 posted on 03/04/2006 8:19:09 AM PST by Coleus (Roe v. Wade and Endangered Species Act both passed in 1973, Murder Babies/save trees, birds, algae)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Coleus
It doesn't cover this, amazingly.

Key Points on UVVA

  The law covers the "child in utero," defined as "a member of the species homo sapiens, at any stage of development, who is carried in the womb."  The law explicitly provides that it does not apply to any abortion to which a woman has consented, to any act of the mother herself (legal or illegal), or to any form of medical treatment.  The National Right to Life Committee strongly supported enactment of the law because it achieved other pro-life purposes that are worthwhile in their own right:  The protection of unborn children from acts of violence other than abortion, the recognition that unborn children may be victims of such violent criminal acts, and the just punishment of those who harm unborn children while engaged in federally prohibited acts of violence. 

25 posted on 03/04/2006 8:24:52 AM PST by cgk (I don't see myself as a conservative. I see myself as a religious, right-wing, wacko extremist.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 24 | View Replies]

To: wagglebee

This is unbelievable...she murdered that baby in cold blood on the day it due to be born! I told my wife that I thought she'd done it the day we first saw it on the news.


26 posted on 03/04/2006 8:41:55 AM PST by pgkdan
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: wagglebee

Wow, I thought this was sick when I read the first article. Now she may get off... How horrible.


27 posted on 03/04/2006 8:47:40 AM PST by Kaylee Frye
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: cgk
so what the law says is that if a man commits an act of violence to the mother--he is charged with murder. If a mother commits an act of violence to herself, then everything is OK because she is self-aborting and has that "choice", even though there is a baby being murdered by her hands. And that it's OK to use a firearm to shoot yourself and your baby in utero.
28 posted on 03/04/2006 8:48:27 AM PST by Coleus (Roe v. Wade and Endangered Species Act both passed in 1973, Murder Babies/save trees, birds, algae)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 25 | View Replies]

To: wagglebee

But perhaps she’s been punished enough.”

I don't think so. I fear for her other children and I still wonder whose gun it was and was it legal? So another child is dead and another monster will walk free. Something is dreadfully wrong here.


29 posted on 03/04/2006 9:07:47 AM PST by pandoraou812 (dilligaf)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Coleus

The charge is practicing medicine without a license.

Mrs VS


30 posted on 03/04/2006 9:26:02 AM PST by VeritatisSplendor
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 28 | View Replies]

To: Vn_survivor_67-68
Teen Gets Probation for 'Baseball Bat Abortion'

Getting whacked in the stomach with a bat is serious pain(I know) but to do it SEVERAL times seems NUTS to me.

Of course I wasn'yt trying to rid myself of an unborn child at the time(another insane act)
Either their both criminally libel or both criminally insane
31 posted on 03/04/2006 9:40:30 AM PST by RedMonqey (People who don't who stand for something, will fall for anything.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 11 | View Replies]

To: wagglebee

Okay, if we can not throw this murderer in prison, let's have her committed to an insane asylum for live for being a danger to both herself and others.


32 posted on 03/04/2006 9:45:46 AM PST by Paul C. Jesup
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Coleus
so what the law says is that if a man commits an act of violence to the mother--he is charged with murder. If a mother commits an act of violence to herself, then everything is OK

Not only that, but a man has no right whatsoever to protect his unborn child from murder by mother, omg. What is wrong with this thinking??

33 posted on 03/04/2006 1:27:48 PM PST by Desert_Girl (A scar is what happens when the world is made flesh)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 28 | View Replies]

To: Desert_Girl
when it comes to fathers' rights and abortion, there aren't any. (Not to mention the little child has no rights too.)And it's a biological fact that it's the father's DNA that protects his baby from the baby's mother's immune system from attacking the new blast and it's also the father's DNA the provides the placenta, chorion, etc. The father is the protector from the moment of conception.
34 posted on 03/04/2006 1:51:09 PM PST by Coleus (Roe v. Wade and Endangered Species Act both passed in 1973, Murder Babies/save trees, birds, algae)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 33 | View Replies]

To: cgk

Thanks for the ping!


35 posted on 03/04/2006 10:43:12 PM PST by Alamo-Girl
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: wagglebee
You're right but you have to admit it's difficult to imagine the law had contemplated this circumstance. Sometimes people do something to outrageous, it hasn't been conceived of in criminal law no matter how immoral and reprehensible. At the very least CPS better get her other children away from her because she's clearly *nuts*.

I wish the prosecutors the very best of luck and legal skill cleaning up this mess.

36 posted on 03/05/2006 9:12:24 PM PST by newzjunkey (All I need is a safe home and peace of mind. Why am I still in CA?)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Vn_survivor_67-68
I think I missed that story. I'm shocked by some of the truly heinous actions undertaken to avoid personal responsibility.

With anonymous safe surrender of newborns available in so many states, there's no reason for "inconvenient pregnancy" abortions. None. Using a baseball bat? Shooting yourself? Insanity!

37 posted on 03/05/2006 9:16:01 PM PST by newzjunkey (All I need is a safe home and peace of mind. Why am I still in CA?)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 11 | View Replies]


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-2021-37 last

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.

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson