Woman Who Killed Her Baby Has Conviction Overturned, Court Says Six-Day-Old Baby Isn’t a Person

Life News ^ | 10/30/2015 | Micaiah Bilger

[WTFOVR]

A New York court recently ruled that a Long Island woman who killed her baby in a car accident cannot be convicted because her baby was not a person yet.

The Times Union reports Jennifer Jorgensen previously was found guilty of second-degree manslaughter for causing the death of her baby daughter in a car crash. She also was indicted for driving under the influence of drugs and alcohol and endangering the welfare of a child, according to the report.

Jorgensen was in her third trimester when the car accident occurred in May 2008. Her daughter was delivered by C-section after the head-on collision and died six days later, according to the report.

In October, the New York Court of Appeals reversed Jorgensen’s conviction, ruling that she was not guilty because she fatally injured her daughter before she was born.

The court ruling compared Jorgensen’s actions to self-induced abortion and called it an offense that is “no greater than a misdemeanor.”

[al baby]

All the way

[Glad2bnuts]

I happen to agree that the woman should not be convicted of a crime against her unborn child. The reasoning is insane, why not just have the common sense to not charge her for the loss of her child.

[Fightin Whitey]

Sick ain't it.

D Rider makes the essential point at Post #14.

Control the definition of a human being, or a worthwhile human being, and you are a long way down the road toward commencing The Final Solution.

[Ann Archy]

WTF are you talking about??? You are Agreeing with the Judge?

[Delta 21]

Yep. Thats exactly how God would see this situation.

WTFOVR&OUT

[Amendment10]

I cannot believe that with all of the relatively recent talk about PC, pro-anchor baby interpretations of the citizenship aspect of the 14th Amendment that even activist judges would unthinkingly ”amend” that amendment from the bench to ”clarify” that all ”persons” born in the United States are not necessarily persons.

14th Amendment, Section 1: All persons born or naturalized in the United States, and subject to the jurisdiction thereof, are citizens of the United States and of the State wherein they reside [emphasis added]. No State shall make or enforce any law which shall abridge the privileges or immunities of citizens of the United States [emphases added; nor shall any State deprive any person of life, liberty, or property, without due process of law; nor deny to any person within its jurisdiction the equal protection of the laws.

[semaj]

WTF? Where does it end?

[conservativejoy]

Very well said. There is only one way back and that is to call out to God, Repent, and ask for His Mercy and Wisdom.

[Chgogal]

There is precedence:

http://www.lifenews.com/2015/01/20/man-found-guilty-of-killing-his-pregnant-girlfriend-and-her-13-week-old-unborn-baby/

http://www.theblaze.com/stories/2012/09/21/woman-convicted-of-murder-after-slicing-out-an-unborn-baby-from-a-pregnant-womans-womb/

http://minnesota.cbslocal.com/2013/12/17/apple-valley-man-convicted-of-murdering-wife-unborn-child/

http://www.nydailynews.com/news/national/tenn-man-charged-2011-murder-woman-unborn-child-article-1.1792607

http://abcnews.go.com/US/murder-pregnant-woman-fetus-bring-death-penalty/story?id=21412398

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Unborn_Victims_of_Violence_Act

[Norm Lenhart]

A law is whatever a liberal says it is because non liberals cannot be bothered to elect anyone intent on stopping them.

Non liberals do however expend all sorts of time and energy making excuses for their choice to allow liberals to continue their murderous ways.

[Another Post-American]

Likewise, if they want to play that game... they’ve made a mockery of the whole concept of law, so they cannot rightly claim its protection.

[TigersEye]

That is exactly right. It’s the solution of tyrants.

[Dante3]

The article didn’t mention the names of the judges who made this outrageous ruling - they should be removed. There are too judges who set themselves up as dictators.

[Amendment10]

Mea culpa regarding post 26. I should have read the OP further concerning what was evidently an unborn baby. Now that I’ve calmed down a little, I think that the first sentence in the OP is misleading.

[holyscroller]

“If a six day old is not a person then perhaps neither is a forty year old lawyer....or judge.”

[TigersEye]

When the rule of law is ignored, broken and mocked from the White House and all agencies under its authority and Congress refuses to address it then it would be absurd to expect respect for the law from anyone else.

[KarlInOhio]

New York has two conflicting statutes about the protection of unborn children from violence, according to National Right to Life. One statute calls the killing of an unborn child after 24 weeks for reasons other than abortion "homicide." However, a separate statutory provision defines the victim of a homicide as a "human being who has been born and is alive."

Which law was passed first and which second? Generally the later law overrides earlier one unless the old one has higher status (like Constitution vs. statute).

And although I find the judge's logic disgusting about a six-day old baby not being a person, the action took place when the woman was pregnant and the child died six days after an emergency C-section. If the law says that injury to the unborn isn't a crime and the judge said that the lower judges didn't follow the law, then I (with much disgust) have to agree with the judge. It's his job to rule on the law - not make it up even in the way I would like.

[TigersEye]

Their names wouldn’t be hard to find.

[sasquatch]

HOW OLD IS THE JUDGE?

[Fightin Whitey]

Sorry meant to ping you at Post #23.

You made a brilliant point.