6-day-old Baby NOT a Person, Says NY Appeals Court

A pregnant Jennifer Jorgensen crashed her car in 2008 while on drugs and/or alcohol causing her near-full-term baby to be delivered by emergency C-section.  Jorgensen was initially sentenced to 3 to 9 years in prison for second-degree manslaughter because her baby girl died six days afterward. However, the highest court in the state of New York overturned that conviction, because the case hinged on the question of intent of the state law "to hold pregnant women criminally responsible for engaging in reckless conduct against themselves and their unborn fetuses, such that they should be subject to criminal liability for prenatal conduct that results in postnatal death? Under the current statutory scheme, the answer to this question is no."

For background, click headlines below to read previous articles:

Physicians Force New York Times to Admit 22-week Fetus is a Baby!

Study Shows Babies Can Hear the Abortionist Coming

Abortionists Stymied by New Oklahoma & Kansas Laws

-- From "Conviction of pregnant driver overturned in N.Y." by Michael Virtanen, Associated Press 10/22/15

Prosecutors argued that Jennifer Jorgensen was speeding, intoxicated, and unbelted when she crossed into traffic in 2008 and hit another vehicle head-on, killing Mary and Robert Kelly. Jorgensen, of Long Island, was eight months’ pregnant at the time.

She was acquitted of manslaughter in the deaths of the Kellys but convicted of recklessly causing her daughter’s death.

But the Court of Appeals, in a 5-1 ruling, said the state Legislature didn’t intend to hold a pregnant woman responsible for such harmful conduct to herself or her fetus unless it’s intentional.

To read the entire article above, CLICK HERE.

From "Court Overturns LI Woman’s Conviction In 2008 Death Of Baby" by CBS New York & Associated Press 10/22/15

Any imposition of criminal liability for actions of pregnant women where a child later dies from injuries suffered while in the womb needs to be clearly defined by lawmakers, Judge Eugene Pigott Jr. wrote. “It should also not be left to the whim of the prosecutor.”

“Conceivably, one could find it ‘reckless’ for a pregnant woman to disregard her obstetrician’s specific orders concerning bed rest; take prescription and/or illicit drugs; shovel a walkway; engage in a contact sport; carry groceries; or disregard dietary restrictions,” Pigott wrote. “Such conduct, if it resulted in premature birth and subsequent death of the child, could result in criminal liability for the mother.”

At present, that’s not in New York’s criminal law, Pigott wrote.

In a dissent, Judge Eugene Fahy wrote that he could not join in a ruling that analyzes New York statutes to determine that the 6-day-old child was not a person because she was unborn when her mother crashed. “The pertinent parts of the Penal Law speak to victims as they are, not as they were at the time the acts giving rise to the crime were committed.”

To read the entire article above, CLICK HERE.

From "Court reverses mother's conviction in infant death" by Casey Seiler, Albany Times Union 10/22/15

In June 2009, Jorgensen was indicted for aggravated vehicular homicide, driving under the influence of drugs and alcohol and — charges related to the death of the infant — manslaughter in the second degree and endangering the welfare of a child.

Her first trial ended with a hung jury. In a 2010 retrial, Jorgensen was convicted on only one charge: second-degree manslaughter for causing the death of her daughter. A 3- to 9-year sentence was stayed pending her appeal. An appellate court subsequently upheld her conviction.

The court said that Suffolk County prosecutors "concede that, had defendant not consented to the cesarean section with the result that the child be born alive, she would not have been prosecuted for manslaughter in the second degree." Ruling against Jorgensen, then, "would create a perverse incentive for a pregnant woman to refuse a cesarean section out of fear that if her baby is born alive she would face criminal charges for her alleged reckless conduct, jeopardizing the health of the woman and the unborn fetus."

To read the entire article above, CLICK HERE.

From "Mom's Conviction Tossed for Baby's Death in Crash" by Nick Divito, Courthouse News Service 10/23/15

State legislators have put down laws to criminalize self-abortions, but has left the question "ambiguous" as to whether it's a crime to be reckless while pregnant.

"We conclude that the legislature did not intend to impose greater punishment on pregnant women for their alleged reckless conduct toward a fetus than for their intentional conduct," [Judge] Pigott wrote.

And since the baby did not die while in the womb, Jorgenson "could not have been prosecuted under the manslaughter statute because the fetus would not have fallen under the definition of a 'person'" under the law, the said.

Judge Eugene M. Fahey Fahey dissented, stating: "I conclude that the baby was a person in the eyes of the penal law, that the mother can be held accountable ... for the baby's death, and that the appellate division's order should be affirmed."

To read the entire article above, CLICK HERE.

Also read Planned Parenthood President Asks, Who Cares When Life Begins?

Epidemic of Drinking Problems on College Campuses

Proposed solution: One hundred college and university presidents nationwide recommend LOWERING the drinking age.

-- From "Colleges: Drinking age 'not working'" by Stephen Kiehl, Baltimore Sun Reporter 8/19/08

Top university officials in Maryland - including the chancellor of the state university system and the president of the Johns Hopkins University - say the current drinking age of 21 "is not working" and has led to dangerous binges in which students have harmed themselves and others.

"Kids are going to drink whether it's legal or illegal," said Johns Hopkins President William R. Brody, who supports lowering the drinking age to 18. "We'd at least be able to have a more open dialogue with students about drinking as opposed to this sham where people don't want to talk about it because it's a violation of the law."

Each state has the authority to set its own drinking age, but in 1984 Congress passed the National Minimum Drinking Age Act, which says that states with a drinking age lower than 21 will lose 10 percent of their federal highway money. After that law passed, all 50 states raised their drinking age to 21.

"We have this law that in effect prevents any state from exploring new ways of addressing the issue," said William E. Kirwan, chancellor of the Maryland state university system. "We have a crisis on our hands. We need some new ideas and new thinking."

Advocates of the 21-year-old drinking age say it has saved thousands of lives. They say lowering the age will pass the drinking problem down the line to high school students and that national surveys have found the public supports keeping the age at 21.

[Maybe we should take the advice of an experienced teenager on this issue:]
Katie Buckheit, 19 and also a junior, said if people were exposed to drinking at a younger age, they would be more mature about it. "Maybe I'm being idealistic, but in Europe you can drink once you can see the bar," she said. "I think we should maybe take a lesson from what other countries are doing."

To read the entire article, CLICK HERE.