This makes sense to me. When a pregnant woman is assaulted and the fetus dies, typically the assailant gets charged with manslaughter. This woman started a fight. The shooting was ruled to be in self-defense and the charges against the shooter were dropped. Therefore the woman who was shot was ultimately responsible for the events that lead to the loss of life.
The pregnancy was 5 months along, the assumption is she wanted to keep the baby and that makes a big difference when a criminal act causes her to lose it.
Before framing this as an abortion rights issue, ask yourself: If she had been shot, not in self-defense, and lost the baby… wouldn’t you want the shooter charged for it?
It’s because the cops f*cked up and didn’t follow proper Alabama police procedure The black person with the gun should have been shot dead and the pregnant woman charged with the “death of a unborn child”.
They’ll probably put the officer on paid leave while they investigate why this didn’t happen.
except that a young woman has been shot. Who’s paying her medical bills? Who’s covering her utilities and other bills while she’s laid up? Who’s taking care of any other children she might have? What will happen to her job, since she won’t be able to work for a while?
The fact that NO article I’ve read so far even mentions the fact that the gunshot victim has been physically and financially harmed (to say nothing of losing her pregnancy, which we might as well assume was a wanted one) makes it clear that this has nothing to do with self defense. I’m just surprised the judicial system there didn’t go after both women, since they’re both black.
Ah, but in Alabama that will not be the case when (and if) their version of the personhood law goes into effect. IIRC, it mandates law enforcement investigation of miscarriages to “ensure that the mother took no actions that might have contributed to the death of the fetus.” That “no actions” part could, and probably will, be broadly interpreted when it suits the prosecutors’ whims.
Being shot means you were probably the one who didn’t have a gun. Which in many cases means that you’re not likely to be using deadly force. I don’t know what the standard is in Alabama (happy for someone else to look it up, I just don’t have time) but usually only when in fear for your life can you use deadly force.
I think what we have here is a confluence of really bad laws; self-defense laws and fetal rights laws that have overlapped to make this whole case possible. I think you’re making good arguments but this is a very complicated case without all the facts. I do think it’s safe to say, however, that charging a woman who has lost a child in this way is probably not justice.
If she assaulted someone, she should be charged with assault, but she wasn’t. If the shooter can be excused for actually killing the baby in self defense, the mother can’t be responsible for it- she didn’t pull the trigger.
Nope. Absolutely not. You’ve completely mistaken my point.
The fight wasn’t the basis of the charge. It was the shooting. And she was shot. She is the victim of the shooting regardless of who started the fight. She didn’t force the woman to shoot her or the fetus. If she wasn’t pregnant and the woman shot her, she wouldn’t have been charged with causing herself to get shot.
Well, she is the victim of the shooting in the sense that she was the one shot, clearly. But I don’t know that she didn’t force the shooting. If I go in to a bar, pick a fight and as I am beating the hell out of some poor schmuck with, let’s say a pool cue, maybe sitting on his prone body as I do, and he pulls out a gun and shoots me. Who is to blame? Me, even though there is no fetus anywhere around. Despite being shot, this guy was defending him self in a situation of last resort. I THINK in all states, I am the one there that would get arrested (assuming the gun was legally owned etc). So yeah, she very well could have been charged with causing herself to get shot. Now I don’t know if that is the sort of situation it really was. And I the murder charge does seems bogus; probably should be assault or something like that.
How do you know the shooting was done “in a situation of last resort”? That would require a recording of the incident, or evidence presented at trial. Neither occurred.
I don’t know, which I said several times. Just positing that maybe the shootee was not clearly the victim here. (AGAIN, I don’t think that murder is the appropriate charge) There WAS apparently a trial of the shooter and it was found to be self-defense.
Alabama has a “stand your ground” law, which is essentially just this sentiment, codified into law.
People think things were bad before Roe vs. Wade? That’s nothing compared to the awfulness of anti-abortion laws coupled with fetal personhood laws, a horror beyond current American comprehension.
Not just murder investigations after every miscarriage, either - it will be charges against any woman doing anything that might harm a fetus at the time, even if there’s no evidence harm has occurred.
Except in the “pro-life” culture, unlike cultures that actually venerate expectant women, the responsibility to protect the “vessel” is entirely, solely, the mother’s.
This is a direct consequence of the totally insane “stand your ground” laws. They’re seen as making it impossible to prosecute someone for shooting (and killing) someone in an argument (regardless of who" started it," whether the other person was unarmed, if the shooter had a history of violence, etc.). But since a fetus got shot, someone had to pay, and there was only one person left, so…
Yes, because that would also have been a crime AGAINST HER, goddamnit.
Nope. Charges were dismissed because it’s a “stand your ground” law state, and thus it’s almost impossible to prosecute someone in the shooter’s position, no matter how unreasonable the shooter’s actions actually were. “Stand your ground” laws are fucking awful and reason and decency go out the window.
