@dagmaraka,
I disagree and I wish we could get a lawyer to post about this. Many of cases Ive worked on (forensics) have been based upon '"A reasonable person should have known". That was the standard of proof.
If all the medical facts show that diabetes can be managed as a chronic illness
If the general public is aware of that fact
If the popular press published stories or articles about managing diabetes as a chronic condition
If medical advice says that also
THEN the reasonable person should have known and acting contrary to that information is considered depraved indifference and is available for a murder 3 (maybe 2) charge.
My point then was that probably the prosecutor chose the level of charge to assure a conviction.
In reality it becomes semantics, you and E just hold too much in the value of the word "murder". WHen you look at some legal results, the word is used in many situations other than premiditeated or involuntary (act of passion).
See, I feel that, with depraved indifference, this killing of the young girl is even more reprehensible than (to me) a murder of passion where , say the mother went totally postal ,Cause the kid was using wire hangers. And beat her and the kid died. Thats murder, why not depraved indifference??
Im prwching as a futurist The Charges should be brought as soon as we stop this insane "free pass" attitude towards many of these irresponsible religions..