Woman guilty re PA's fetal homicide law

"Terroristic threats"? That's an odd phrase. What would those be, do you suppose?

What an amazing story.

Naively I fail to see the difference between a homicide law, and a "fetal" homicide law, except, of course if it were aimed at the "carrying" mother, to inhibit her possible attempts to do dammage to her unborn infant.
It seems to me (unimportantly) that the wrong law is being used since the details of the case, if reported effectively, represent a willfull attempt to kill an individual in order to punish another (variation on the standard triangle).

What is that "fetus homicide" law in detail?

BoGoWo - The difference between the regular homicide law and a "fetal homicide" law is because of the controversy over the "personhood" status of the fetus. Attempts were made to expand the regular homicide laws to cover a fetus as well but abortion rights groups complained that doing so would be a recognition of the fetus as a "person" and opened the whole abortion can of worms again.

The fetal homicide laws make the unnatural termination of a fetus a crime without granting "person" status to the fetus. They also exclude the pregnant woman and any medical provider she may see from any possibile prosecution if she chooses to terminate her pregnancy.

Well, personal preferences aside, there was reasonable doubt. If that story is ALL the case was, then there was DEFINITE reasonable doubt. If they found out that it was a possible infection that killed the fetus, then why on gods green earth did the jury vote for a guilty verdict? Now, I'm only 15, so bare with me if I sound ignorant...but the Prosecuting attorney MUST provide any and all evidence to prove that the defendant did what they are accused of BEYOND ALL REASONABLE DOUBT.

According to the current standing law, there was reasonable doubt, and this case should be taken for an immediate appeal.

You'll note that the story mentions one defense medical expert stating that the fetus died from an infection. Apparently the jury found the County Medical Examiner's finding more convincing. Look at any criminal case and you'll find conflicting medical opinions. One of the functions of the jury is to decide which opinion fits with all of the facts at hand.

News stories also seldom give all the details. The trial took several days and the jury deliberated for a full day. The story barely fills a paragraph.

You can't know that there was "DEFINITE" reasonable doubt unless you were sitting in the courtroomand heard all of the testimony.

I can easily see why this case is in appeal if there were no indications of physical harm to the pregnant woman attacked. In this country, if you want good legal defence, you have to pay for it. Given this type of incident, I seriously doubt either party has the cash to get anything but a court appointed attorney, who really doesn't care about cases like this.

The personally paid attorneys are a bit different. They make their reputation on this sort of thing, innocent or guilty, by getting their paid client off completely or a very light sentence for a criminal act. This entire incident screams of the less than refined on all parts, the wife, husband, and pregnant girlfriend.

It is nothing more than a circus act. If you went to law school and had a student loan that was a complete financial overload, who would you spend your time with, the people that helped you pay for your education and work towards it or a freebie case of a court appointed representation? That's an easy answer. Justice has very little to do with our justice system in some ways. Thankfully, as corrupt as it may be, we all get a more reasonable shot than in most other countries.

Personally, I think this sentence is too harsh without evidence of brutality. Can a miscarriage be ruled out in this case? Probably not. Many women suffer accidents, like car wrecks or falling down a flight of steps causing physical injury that is obvious, but do not spontaneously abort, as in this case.

The law often does not cover common sense, like putting yourself at danger and claiming victim. I have to put the victim on the stand in this case. She knowingly had a sexual relationship with a married man without adequate protection against pregnancy. Today, we have methods of prevention that are above 99%, if used correctly, which isn't all that difficult. Abortion is also a legal alternative which many women may choose given they have to raise a child alone and may not have resources for this to provide a home or father for their child. There are choices this victim did not make, responsible sexual behavior.

We have the victim pregnant with another woman's husband's child. What is the normal reaction for infidelity? Pain and rage. Add a child that isn't yours fathered by your husband and what do you think the criminal is feeling? Does she have any children or a family with this man? It is difficult enough to forgive infidelity and keep your family intact. It is impossible with the constant reminder and child support coming out of your husband's check for his betrayal.

Women get that constant reminder of infidelity every paycheck that does not support their family, but goes to a woman her husband had an affair with, which is completely unnaceptable to most women. The only choice is divorce and a broken home for the criminal. I bet she does want someone to pay for her pain, her husband and his girlfriend.

I don't see one guilty party here. I see three contributions to this act of violence. The victim, unless she was born yesterday, every woman knows the pain and anger that goes with betrayal. Every woman that has an affair with a married man knows that the wife will act irrationally with pain first, then fury, especially when he impregnates this woman. The husband is completely responsible for his actions as well as the victim with their affair, unknown to the criminal.

It is still unsaid if the criminal has children, which equates to a family, which is now destroyed by this pregnancy. The criminal probably feels her life, as well as her family, is forever destroyed because a pregnancy cannot be forgiven in the mind. The husband is obviously not a straight up guy or this pregnancy would never have occurred in the first place. He should have talked to his wife about separation or problems within their relationship, not lied repeatedly to his wife having an affair and getting another woman pregnant.

I honestly think the law omitted human emotions and the irrationality of the criminals behavior that went with it. She is also a victim of a destroyed marriage or even family living as a single parent without a father for her children. Imagine her pain when she attacked this woman. I'm sure it was pretty bad.

I am not endorsing this type of behavior. I think everyone should be a bit more civilized than this. I do think another trial is in order. I think this sentence is completely out of whack considering the circumstances, which are normal human emotions. She was right feeling the way she did, but wrong in acting it out. We all have choices, but I do feel this woman was severely provoked in this sort of attack.

The law expects that you are able to control your emotions. There is no provision in law that gives you the right to harm or endanger another just because you can't control yourself.

Getting pissed because someone cuts you off on the freeway is a "normal" human emotion too. Would you argue that people should be able to shoot anyone that cuts them off? It's just a normal emotional reaction after all..

I would agree with you, but I don't think humanity is quite that evolved yet.

I actually gave this one a little bit of though, instead of my usual knee jerk reaction. I have to stand by my origional statements. Should anyone be allowed to physically attack another, no matter what the reason? Absolutely not, but that is an ideal to strive for, not a reality of humanity.

I don't think there is a topic in the world where emotions run higher than in marriage or relationships with another. I believe some people knowingly take on high risk behaviors and claim victim when things didn't work out their way. This subject is way to broad to even go into, like smokers suing the tobacco industry when they chose to light one up, or was it capitolistic addiction enabled by the industry? Who knows! The law does not represent right from wrong and never did. Use your own evaluation.

What person knowingly enters into a sexual relationship with a married individual living with their spouse without taking the risk of serious problems resulting from this choice? Every adult or even teen knows you are seriously stepping on toes that will definitely cause rage if the truth is known.

Ask any police officer just how many domestic disputes that get out of hand in which they have to put a stop to, either by arrest or separating the individuals giving them time to cool off. It's probably the majority of their calls. With matters of the heart, logic is often out the window. We don't know why we are in love with an individual. We just know that powerful emotion of love and how it can alter our normal logical actions. There is absolutely nothing logical about the feeling of being in love.

Many times, matters of betrayal of the heart, end up with murder. The prisons are full with crimes of passion and a need to avenge betrayal as a sense of justice, not criminal behavior. The law does not protect our hearts and never did. At times, powerful emotion overrules logic and people do act upon it. If you wish to engage in high risk behavior, take your share of the blame. The, so called, victim did not.

Again, I do not condone the actions of the wife in this case. I, personally, will take it up at home and not make a public embarassment to myself. Others do not think as I do, spare further embarassment. The law has nothing to do with this, the agreement between myself and husband has everything to do with matters such as this. What was the agreement when you marry? Most of us feel infidelity is not part of it. I can understand her feelings. Anyone who has been through a divorce can tell you it often takes several years to come to terms with this type of issue, let alone a pregnancy that will be a forever reminder of betrayal.

I have to ask what is acceptable. Is demolition of your family when married acceptable to you when you did not betray the agreement made? Would you find it acceptable to love and financially support the child of your spouses infidelity? Would you willingly take this child and love it as your own without resentment? No way. That is asking too much of anyone, male or female. What is the norm for a wife pregnant by another man or another woman pregnant by another woman's husband? Serious psychological pain, destruction of family, and loss of faith in humanity to trust another. That a serious reality to anyone under these serious circumstances.

I have to question whether or not a spontaneous abortion was an incident of conincidence or one of serious injury. I do not know if there were weapons, such as a ball bat, involved in this case. I have experienced pregnancy. It does make the belly a bit larger, but if defending yourself from physical attack, you are not exactly completely disabled.

This type of thinking goes back to the days where pregnant women lost their jobs hiding from employers in order to continue their getting a paycheck, which was earned irregarlless of pregnancy in many professions. My doctors told me to continue working because I would be more phisically fit and healthy, and that was in 1986. What year is it? Oh, 2004. Today, women can work at physically challenging occupations that cause exertion and do giving birth to very healthy children. Women demanded this right of employment and justly so, even with physically demanding work.

How pregnant was this woman? Most spontaneous abortions are in the first trimester, three months because of a defect or abnormality of some sort of the mother's ability to carry a child or the probable defect of the child to be was not compatible. Where is the evidence of physical injury? The post showed nothing.

Personally speaking, I would fight for the rights of the wife that was betrayed. The had more than enough povocation to commit an act of passion for her family and love for her husband. Her life, as she thought it was, is now destroyed forever. No woman can accept the birth of a child by another woman that her husband fathered. This is a sickening thought for any woman.

Get rid of the dead beat and move on? That's not so easy. When you believe in marriage and love for your partner, it is psychologically as well as life altering to deal with pain in this magnitude. This is not a sex biased issue at all. Men and women alike feel intense pain when betrayed by their partner in which they love. How would a man feel if his wife was impregnated by another man? The same emotions that a woman feels when her husband impregnates another woman.

People choose their own risk. This is the right thing to do;

1) Discuss problems with your partner or spouse.
2) Make a reasonable effort if in a committed relationship to problem solve so that both parties are accepting of the outcome.
3) If, after discussing and problem solving do not help the relationship with effort on both parties, trial separation is in order.
4) If, during the time of separation, you wish to see other individuals, this information should be made clear to the other spouse.
5) After making it known to the other spouse or partner your honest thoughts of wishing to see other people is made clear, no one has to agree. You do have to respect the rights of the individual and their choices, once separation has occurred.
6) Once you have made your point clear to your spouse or partner after separation, they do not have to agree. They are obligated to honesty, not details.

You may think that I am coming across this topic with idealistic ignorance. I am not. I honestly believe my husband and myself have completely run out of topics of argument. We were separated for five years. We are together again. The truth got us everywhere. deceit only added to existing problems in our marriage. All this time later, we learned this lesson the hard way, both of us.

Today, the marriage isn't great. At least it is honest. I know where he stands and he knows where I do, which differ dramatically in areas. We can either accept or reject each other. That is the only real choice. You have to face the fact, at some point, that you either are compatible or not. This is the most difficult thing in the world to deal with and I have dealt with many challenges in life. Sometimes you have to accept the unacceptable, but this often takes years and years of error and wisdom to figure out.

On that note, I strongly feel this woman deserves a new trial. Her punishment was not fit with the crime she committed. I stand by the statement of court appointed defense as being inadequate, if the facts of this trial were correct stating that no other signs of brutality caused spontaneous abortion. You can't rule out nature at all. A woman's body protects the unborn through much more than a fist fight, like serious auto accidents and such, where healthy children were produced.

Give me more facts. I do not feel the punishment was just for the crime she committed at all. I don't see adequate legal representation, if the basics were spelled out in the topic. This is not justice at all, at least, in my opinion.

You already have the facts and your own comments work directly agaisnt your argument:





As you state very clearly right here - people end up arrested and./or in prison for "crimes of passion" all the time.




Her court appointed atty. MIGHT be a concern if she had one. She didn't. You're also ignoring half of the facts that were presented. At least one medical expert stated the abortion WAS caused by the beating and one testified that it wasn't. Which expert to believe is entirely up to the jury sitting there at the time.



And pregnant women have lost their babies when air bags deploy in cars in acidents too. Go back and read the original story. The woman was dragged to the ground and kicked repeatedly. It was a bit more than just a fist fight.



You ask for facts and then claim she didn't have adequate representation??? Where did you get that fact from? It isn't in the story anywhere. Are you familar with her lawyer?

From the original story: "She told police that during the attack, Wilcott yelled, "I told you I was going to get you for sleeping with Kareem." Wilcott also yelled during the attack that she hoped the fetus died, according to prosecutors. "

She TOLD her she was going to get her? That indicates that there was a period of time between a prior confrontation and this one. That removes it from a "crime of passion" and moves it into planned and premeditated 1st Degree murder. She had time to think about her actions. It's not like she had just found out right there when the attack happened.

I believe I had a lot more to say on this issue besides the quoted parts. What part of this affair of a married man that produced a fetus, which could have been another life, do you find ethical? It isn't.

Where does responsibility for your own behavior and putting yourself in a dangerous situation begin and the law end? As a woman, I would never go home with a stranger in a bar. Legally, I can, with absolutely no risk of fault on my judgement at all. If this man rapes, beats, or murders me, the law is stating it is his fault and I have absolutely no responsibility for taking precautions for my own choices my personal safety. I am to assume that everyone is law abiding and absolutely cannot endanger me, no matter how high risk my behavior may be. I'm not to blame at all. I'm a victim. Yeah, a victim of my own poor choices.

All that I am asking is to have compassion for the wife, who is now behind bars over a fist fight. It is very questionable, with differing medical opinion, just why this spontaneous abortion occured. Was the fetal tissue genetically tested for defect? Was this woman healthy, reproductively speaking or healthwise, to carry a child to term?

The law never did equate right from wrong and changes all the time. Is the wife a murder? I don't think so. What was her state of mind at the time of this act? Unstable, most likely. Who wouldn't be under those circumstances? Is she guilty of assult? Yes, she is. Someone enlighten me to the facts please! Did she use any weapon or just her own body as one?

Humans have never learned that voilence does not equate just from unjust. How many died in wars because of differing religious beliefs and are heros, not murders? What was VietNam about anyway? A completely differing belief in govermnet style that so many died for, not just Americans. How many killed for a belief or cause without being convicted murders in times of war? When does murder stop in the name of a cause, legal under terms of war? There are times when you have to strike in order to defend yourself or what is ethically right, governmentally speaking, but this is not an individual right. I'm not anti-war, if it a ethical cause, not religious or differing opinion. It is the human way and it never did stop, murder that is.

Is war and mass death and destruction ever right? Absolutely not. Yet we still participate in this in the name of a cause. How about the cause of ethics by an individual? A woman's husband made a legal and religious (possibily) oath to be faithful to his wife, then gets another woman pregnant.

Ethics tell us it is wrong to have an affair when married, much less bring another life into this disaster. This affair was nothing more than lies and deciet. The husband did not keep his word to his wife. The 'other woman', with very effective birth control of today got pregnant by another woman's husband.

Ethically speaking, how on earth can anyone defend these two liars? A woman would have to be insane to give her blessing to the birth of her husband's child by another woman. What's she supposed to do, throw her a baby shower and buy her gifts? Get real!

Who said I found it ethical? I'd agree that it isn't. It also isn't ethical to cause physical harm to another person. Why are you excusing that?



It ends at the point where the law is violated. Seems pretty simple.




You making a poor choice doesn't create permission for someone else to make a poor choice - especially if that poor choice violates that standards society has set as law.



A "fist fight" that resulted in the termination of another human beings child.



Take you own advise here. Reality is that this woman assulted another human being and caused a spontaneous abortion. She failed to control herself and violated the law, was tried by a jury of her peers and was found guilty.

Yes, she was lied to and her husband is a jerk. The other woman is a tramp too. All well and good. So now you have a liar, a tramp and a murderer ALL OF WHOM acted unethically. Which one of those cuased physical harm to another human being? Which one of those people violated the law? Which one of these 3 people intentionally violated the rights of another human being? Why do you continue posting tirades trying to excuse her behavior? At what point do you encourage others to start taking things into their own hands when their feelings get hurt? Should everyone who makes a poor choice be assulted?

Yes, she's just a poor little woman that can't control her own actions and can't think in a responsible manner; an outcast from society... *boohoo* Next you'll be claiming she was raised in abusive family and that her parents never showed her any love or affection. Yup, she's just a poor litle misunderstood murderer.

You don't have to agree with me and I don't have to agree with you. The world is not ideal, so let's not pretend it is by taking on high risk behavior that may very well result in criminal acts towards you.

By your post, I should be ok with going home with a strange guy at a bar (which all adults know means having sex or privacy would be a non-issue) and taking the risk associated with it and crying victim or I can do it my way and avoid the problem all together. Right? In your opinion, what is the best choice to make in this scenario, go home with a guy and take the risk of being a victim or using your head and avoiding problems such as this all together? What's your pick?

Please, don't twist my words to mean something they don't. Who ever gives permission for rape, beating, or murder? You do have to use common sense not to put yourself into situations where you may cause any of these behaviors, like having an affair with a married individual stupidly thinking that once the partner finds out that they will not be enraged and act out in ways that may not be within the norm of their usual behavoir.

How would a average man feel if his wife told him that she was pregnant, but the bad news it's not yours, it's his? Enraged. How would an average woman feel with some slut flaunting her pregnancy by her husband? The same feeling, enraged.

Do you not see the powerful emotion of this type of subject matter? Please, leave out idealism. This is far from a perfect world. Can you give me a valid argument for both sides of this issue? No, the woman should not be physically attacked, but she did knowingly risk it given the circumstances. You are pushing people way too far over the edge with something of this magnitude.

Can you understand how the wife may feel and why? Can you understand her pain, feeling of deomoliton of her marriage and/or family? Can you understand that divorce often takes years to come to terms with under the best of circumstances, which still suck?

Understanding and compassion for more than just the law are all I am asking for. This is too harsh.

I'm not going to debate, just want to add my two cents. I don't see how you could classify this as third degree murder, but I can definitely see a criminal consequence beyond just assault. I will always defend abortion and believe that life begins at birth, but if your actions cause the end of someones pregnacy that was not accidental than you should be accountable under the law. I don't care what the circumstances are. Even if the victim is a mistress. All parties have to be accountable for their actions no matter who deserved it. If you get in a fight and you put someone in the hospital you're still accountable even if that person deserved it.

I don't know what they should classify it as but definitely not murder or homicide. Maybe involuntary man slaughter...

I can agree with that, involuntary manslaughter. The damage was beyond assault. I cannot agree with murder. How about you, Fishin? Do you feel this is a reasonable compromise for this situation?

I should have gone to law school and got a job defending criminals charging them a fortune. Fishin, you would be a great procuter. I bet we would both be making a lot more money than we are now. lol!!