Mother to surrender in videotaped beating of girl
Posted on 09/21/2002 4:36:25 AM PDT by MeekOneGOP
Mother to surrender in videotaped beating of girl
09/21/2002
MISHAWAKA, Ind. - A woman seen on a department store security tape punching her 4-year-old daughter plans to surrender Saturday, her attorney said Friday night.
Police have been searching for Madelyne Gorman Toogood since Sept. 13, when a camera in a department store parking lot videotaped her punching and shaking her 4-year-old daughter.
The attorney, Stephen Rosen, said Ms. Toogood is on her way to Chicago and will surrender. She is charged with felony battery to a child.
Indiana police took the search nationwide Wednesday when they released the tape. "We want to get the girl the medical attention she needs," Police Chief Anthony A. Hazen said. "We want to get her to an emergency room and let them examine her."
Ms. Toogood is also wanted in Texas on at least two warrants. Fort Worth police said one warrant involves a shoplifting charge in March. Authorities in White Settlement, a Fort Worth suburb, issued an arrest warrant on an unspecified Class C misdemeanor.
Ms. Gorman's sister, 31-year-old Margaret Daley, who authorities say was present at the time of the incident, was arrested and charged with failure to report child abuse.
Police received more than 1,000 calls about the video, which was first aired Wednesday night.
Staff writer Laurie Fox contributed to this report.
My wife informs me that I do come across that way. So do you. Much more consistently than I do.
The woman caught in adultery is actually a very poor analogy, perhaps worse than your original 'Barabbas' analogy. The woman in that story...
It is evident that you cannot read. The woman is not what the analogy was about. I explained that. I will now explain it to my cat...he will understand better than you what I mean. You can go back and reread my posts and/or continue in your ignorance.
The story has nothing to say about withholding personal judgment of evil-...
That is the point of the story.
Rather, it is a stern warning against the arbitrary execution of judgment by private means.
No, Christ was exhorting people to look inwardly for evil instead of outwardly. Where did you buy your interpretation? E-bay?
People (usually libertarians attempting to justify personal perversions) read that gross lie into it, but the truth is we are commanded to discern evil and assiduously avoid it--not wink at it in some misguided belief we are being "more tolerant than thou."
You can make all the assumptions you want to about my life and my motivations. It doesn't prove a point about anything other than your lack of ethics. I will most certainly condemn evil in the most wrathful way when I see it. My point from the beginning is that evil was not evident in the video of the womans actions. Just a possibility of it. If you are certain based on that then heave your stone.
The evil I see is people yelling 'crucify her, crucify her' without knowledge of a crime. The evil I see is people calling for judgement to satisfy their hearts without satisfying their minds. I'm sure I expect too much. You fulfilled my prophecy that you would expose yourself as a statist once again. If you think our country is run by the rule of law and the constitution is that law then you are a sheeple or a statist. We know you're not that dumb so...
It is a behavior trait commonly found among many so-called Christian libertarians.
You know nothing about me do you?
As for me, I will stand up for the right of the child to be free from vicious abuse even at the hands of her own mother.
Nothing I have said opposes that or even addresses that aspect of the story. When Christianity has been sufficiently demonized that you won't dare have your little prayer circles in the park with your family don't whine about it. You are calling it forth. An allegation is worth a conviction. Right?
Spare me your comments about conspiracies and tin-foil. If everything were so darn right about our government you wouldn't be on FR.
A few hours ago they were saying that she was going to turn herself in at any moment. Unless she did and I missed it, which is possible, I suspect that the mother had no intention of turning herself in but was just buying time with the story. She has had now all yesterday evening and all day today to travel without having the media asking people to be on the lookout for her.
You should read the real Bible not the Marvel Comics version. In the real Bible she was caught. No controversy. The accepted punishment in that time was death by stoning by a crowd. No controversy. The story says she was being stoned. No controversy. If you accept this video as rock solid (pun intended) evidence and think you are Christ, if you think what others have suggested is appropriate ie. having 2nd graders stoner her, then heave away.
Cut the 'libertarian' crap. What you are supporting is anarchy. But earlier you were supporting more government intervention (as you usually do) so what do you really believe? Or is that dependant on the moment?
'Judge not lest ye be judged', remember?"
Exactly what I have been hammering on. Did you actually get a glimmer there?
Hang on to it.
What's the matter with you? Are you so blinded by your ideology that you can't find it in your heart to feel anger toward a person who would commit such a crime against such a defenseless BABY?
I have seen this latter part of the tape, too, and you're right; it isn't always shown. Sometimes it's cut off.
Your argument is as ridiculous as that leftist who wrote that stupid article whining because people are still talking about 9/11. She said that anyone who still gives 9/11 a second thought is a hypocrite because there are people on the other side of the world who died in an earthquake and we didn't give them equal time in our grieving.
It is the most damning part of the tape that I've seen. The mom backs away as if she's finished, then she goes back in and proceeds to punch the living daylights of that little baby.
She has turned herself in, but she didn't have the baby -- either that or the child had already been whisked off to the hospital.
A group of men appear to be about to commit violence on a defenseless woman. A woman appears to be actually committing violence on a defenseless child. In each case is it proper to judge the motives of the persons who only appear to about to commit violence on a defensless soul? Or do you "judge not lest ye be judged"? The confusion vanished when you remember to draw a distinction between judgment and execution of judgment--both of which are simply called "judgment" in the shorthand of the New Testament.
Viewed from that perspective, Jesus Christ definitely judged the motives of the men who appeared to be about to commit violence. He judged them evil. Based on this judgment He intervened and stopped a cold-blooded murder.
You should bear in mind that in Israel under Roman occupation the Jews were forbidden by Roman authority to execute capital punishment for violation of their religious laws. That is why they delivered Jesus to Pilate instead of taking it upon themselves to kill him. When the men took up stones to strike down the woman for adultery, they were acting as vigilantes executing judgment outside the bounds of lawful authority. Jesus Christ never said the state was forbidden to execute judgment. He did not protest his own state execution.
That doesn't mean Roman authority was fundamentally good. It does mean Jesus Christ was not a rabble rouser trying to incite the overthrow of state authority. Not to put too fine a point on it, but Jesus was not a libertarian. That was what Barabbas was all about.
Also bear in mind that Jesus did not condemn the men for judging the woman to be guilty of adultery. He accepted that they were correct in their judgment. Rather, he berated them for seeking to execute private judgment on their own authority and challenged them to look inward and to examine their own hearts before they violently assaulted someone else for sinning.
Here, this mother appears to have unmercifully and unjustly beat an innocent, defensless child. People are outraged and venting their feelings. Despite this outrage, the mother has not been stoned, and has not been deprived of a single day of liberty, or suffered the fine of a single dime. There has been plenty of judgment in the form of epxressed public outrage, which is to be expected. But their has been no execution of judgment that would harm the mother in the least.
I agree with the posters who have said they would intervene. I just don't understand those who would look away and ignore the cries of a child.
Your argument is as ridiculous as that leftist who wrote that stupid article whining because people are still talking about 9/11.
Well, it's not exactly an 'argument', is an invitation to face reality. Seriously, in your view, what's more troubling? The situation in Sudan or the situation at that IL Walmart Parking lot?
Let me guess your answer: it's NOT the Sudan. Right?
SlickWillard seems to be the FreeRepublic expert at doing this and I was hoping he would have some suggestions for this one.
Answers:
Since you asked, and ONLY because you asked, YES, I AM a very proud parent. Sorry, the pics are some 2 yrs. old. The kids look even better today.
Second - I was never concerned with spanking 'techniques'. As I stated earlier, I am not a licensed parent.
Third - my eyesight is none of your business.
Fourth - it would take A LOT to make the way other parents raise or discipline their children ANY of MY business.
Fifth - since you seem to be getting very personal, just get yourself lost - preferably back to watching your favorite Fox News show. I'm sure they are showing re-runs of America's most important news story since 9/11 - "the beating in Illinois".
Nice to see all the knuckle-draggers have crawled out from under their rocks to defend this woman's right to privacy at the expense of the little girl.
But to take this to its "logical" conclusion, in one of these threads, a poster actually said that the government had no right to remove a child from her parents even if her life was in imminent danger. He said the role of the government was to prosecute the parents for murder if the child died.
"I used to be disgusted, but now I'm just amused."
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.