@Robert Gentel,
Robert Gentel wrote:
ehBeth wrote:It could well be that I'm not using the correct language for an American case.
It's just as incorrect in Canada. In common law (which includes Canada) murder requires the
intent to kill.
Yep....murder requires, as I understand it, mens rea, the guilty mind......intent to kill.
This kind of case is excruciating, and it distresses the hell out of me, too, that this poor child was killed by nonsensical belief.
But I, also, don't understand the urge to vengeance here.
I think the vengeance part has been dealt with by the death of a kid who was foolishly, but no doubt deeply, loved.
I assume part of the nature of the sentence is an attempt by the judge not to punish the remaining children by depriving them of their parents as well as their sister.
I see no reason to remove the other kids if the parents are otherwise good parents, and if the kids want to remain with them after what they saw, AND, most importantly, have learned from this awful experience to seek appropriate medical help. I assume they will be closely monitored, too.
I understand the desire to deter other parents from such foolish behaviour, and I "get" the wish for a harsher sentence from that point of view...but I think a number of you guys are being over the top.