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

Skip to comments.

Strict faith is no defense(Breast-feeding driver loses bid to have husband..)
Akron Beacon-Journal ^ | 8/7/03 | Ed Meyer

Posted on 08/07/2003 7:09:49 AM PDT by Dane

click here to read article


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-2021-4041-6061-63 next last
Sheesh, another circus like trial. Ms. Donkers, if you had to breast feed your kid couldn't you have just pulled off at an exit and fed your kid while you weren't driving.
1 posted on 08/07/2003 7:09:49 AM PDT by Dane
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | View Replies]

Comment #2 Removed by Moderator

To: Dane
"Sheesh, another circus like trial. Ms. Donkers, if you had to breast feed your kid couldn't you have just pulled off at an exit and fed your kid while you weren't driving".

That would have been way too simple and she and her nut case husband would never get to have their "15 minutes of fame" Too bad we don't have a law about being criminally stupid to apply to this woman. On the other hand if we did, almost half the congress would be indicted.
3 posted on 08/07/2003 7:23:36 AM PDT by Graybeard58
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Dane; wideawake
There have been previous threads on this just after it happened and hit the news waves. The husband was/is a freeper..cannot recall the name.

This woman made an incredibly ridiculous choice to nurse her child while driving. And then to ignore law enforcement...absolutely moronic.

4 posted on 08/07/2003 7:24:01 AM PDT by mrs tiggywinkle
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Dane
OMG, here is a woman who should not be allowed anywhere near a car.
breat feeding and driving, next your going to tell me the kid was eight.....

nice find Dane.....wow did I just say that.
5 posted on 08/07/2003 7:24:25 AM PDT by vin-one (I wish i had something clever to put in this tag)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Dane
They summoned a portion of jurors 1 through 86 for that case Monday afternoon. (Portage county assigns a juror number to you and you have to call in daily during your two weeks to see if they'll need you for the next day.)

I'm in the mid 100's.
6 posted on 08/07/2003 7:25:19 AM PDT by Bikers4Bush
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Dane
The worst part is that this stupid woman has already reproduced.
7 posted on 08/07/2003 7:25:28 AM PDT by Blood of Tyrants (Even if the government took all your earnings, you wouldn’t be, in its eyes, a slave.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Dane
Some people just go looking for trouble, and when it finds them, they complain that their religion is being violated. Yeah, right...Just another one of the many who think they are exempt from whatever laws they don't feel like obeying.
8 posted on 08/07/2003 7:27:35 AM PDT by nobdysfool (Every time I learn something new, it pushes something old out of my brain...Homer Simpson)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Dane
Holy cow. I had hard enough time trying to read or walk or anything else for that matter while breast feeding. This woman is out of her mind.

Religious freedom should never be argued to overrule common sense.

It probably cost her husband more in gas money to go get the kid than her original ticket would have cost. And shoot, lets face it, she probably could have gotten away with just a warning.

9 posted on 08/07/2003 7:28:58 AM PDT by EuroFrog (My hero is in Iraq!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Dane
The judge allowed public defender John P. Laczko to stay at the defense table, although Donkers refused his help. Laczko said little, though, and mostly shook his head at what he heard.

While thinking to himself, "I have to find another line of work."
Or alternatively, "I can't believe my law firm volunteered me for this."

10 posted on 08/07/2003 7:30:09 AM PDT by 1rudeboy
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Dane
I saw these two on O'Reilly's show a few weeks ago. They are a pair of arrogant jerks who richly deserve whatever comes their way. I feel very sorry for the poor kid, having to grow up with these two as parents.
11 posted on 08/07/2003 7:31:17 AM PDT by blau993 (Labs for love; .357 for Security.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: EuroFrog
It's baack! I was wondering if anyone was going to post on this trial. The original thread reporting this incident was a FR classic.
12 posted on 08/07/2003 7:32:44 AM PDT by cjshapi
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 9 | View Replies]

To: Dane
I'm surprised at you guys.

My prediction was that she committed a crime on purpose (which could be my tin foil beanie being too tight), and that she is bringing God's law back into the court room.

I could be wrong, but under the right circumstances it could cut the activism in the judicial by 100%. Think about it - the Supremes would have to acknowledge the basis for our judicial system is the law of God.
13 posted on 08/07/2003 7:33:34 AM PDT by mabelkitty
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: wideawake
You have no idea.... I saw the husband and wife on Bill O'Reilly, and they were from Bizarro world. The wife at first wouldn't speak for herself. The husband couldn't answer a single question Bill posed without acting like Bill Clinton, parsing the meaning, getting ultra-defensive. Then the wife spoke. I think I actually suffered mental injury from listening to the legal and religeous contortions she spewed!

Before this one is over, they will sue every man and woman in the US! They're wacky!

14 posted on 08/07/2003 7:35:35 AM PDT by shadowman99
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: Dane
her husband

He's a freeper. And a nutcase. I've forgotten his screen name.

15 posted on 08/07/2003 7:38:41 AM PDT by buccaneer81 (Plus de fromage, s'il vous plait...)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Dane
So the officer would've just issued a child restraint violation. These two are dying for a circus. They merely crave the attention.
16 posted on 08/07/2003 7:39:40 AM PDT by PBRSTREETGANG
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: mabelkitty
she is bringing God's law back into the court room.

And we have a winner, folks.

Miss Mabel, how does this couple's behavior reflect God's Law? I seem to remember something on the order of "render under Caesar"...

The husband is on an ego trip. If anything, he is giving self-purported religious folks a bad name.

17 posted on 08/07/2003 7:41:40 AM PDT by maxwell (Well I'm sure I'd feel much worse if I weren't under such heavy sedation...)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 13 | View Replies]

To: PBRSTREETGANG
That's not actually true. She would still have been charged with almost everything she has been charged with once he found out she didn't have a license.
18 posted on 08/07/2003 7:42:16 AM PDT by Bikers4Bush
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 16 | View Replies]

To: mabelkitty
THE SUN

Law, say the gardeners, is the sun,
Law is the one
All gardeners obey
To-morrow, yesterday, to-day.

Law is the wisdom of the old,
The impotent grandfathers shrilly scold;
The grandchildren put out a treble tongue,
Law is the senses of the young.

Law, says the priest with a priestly look,
Expounding to an unpriestly people,
Law is the words in my priestly book,
Law is my pulpit and my steeple.

Law, says the judge as he looks down his nose,
Speaking clearly and most severely,
Law is as I've told you before,
Law is as you know I suppose,
Law is but let me explain it once more,
Law is The Law.

Yet law-abiding scholars write;
Law is neither wrong nor right,
Law is only crimes
Punished by places and by times,
Law is the clothes men wear
Anytime, anywhere,
Law is Good-morning and Good-night.

Others say, Law is our Fate;
Others say, Law is our State;
Others say, others say
Law is no more,
Law has gone away.

And always the loud angry crowd,
Very angry and very loud,
Law is We,
And always the soft idiot softly Me.

If we, dear, know we know no more
Than they about the Law,
If I no more than you
Know what we should and should not do
Except that all agree
Gladly or miserably
That the Law is
And that all know this
If therefore thinking it absurd
To identify Law with some other word,
Unlike so many men
I cannot say Law is again,

No more than they can we suppress
The universal wish to guess
Or slip out of our own position
Into an unconcerned condition.
Although I can at least confine
Your vanity and mine
To stating timidly
A timid similarity,
We shall boast anyway:
Like love I say.

Like love we don't know where or why,
Like love we can't compel or fly,
Like love we often weep,
Like love we seldom keep.

--W.H. Auden

19 posted on 08/07/2003 7:43:10 AM PDT by 1rudeboy
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 13 | View Replies]

To: mabelkitty
The basis for our judicial system is the Constitution.
20 posted on 08/07/2003 7:44:34 AM PDT by You Dirty Rats
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 13 | View Replies]


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-2021-4041-6061-63 next 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