Man Convicted for Tricking Girlfriend to Take Abortion Pills[W:393,1077]

[Scrabaholic]

Re: Man Convicted for Tricking Girlfriend to Take Abortion Pills

.
The entire set-up of the case completely rejects the idea that the woman herself was violated significantly and deserved justice. It places her as nothing but a vehicle for debating the man's will vs. the embryo's right or lack of to occupy a woman's body, and that's all. The set-up of the case showed that the prosecution cared so little for this woman's rights and agency and integrity that they would rather use her as a political tool and risk the guy just getting out scott free, because they cared not even the tiniest bit about getting justice for her.

Interesting points. I had never thought of it that way.

 

[Sherman123]

Re: Man Convicted for Tricking Girlfriend to Take Abortion Pills

I highly doubt the murder charge would have held if the case had gone to trial but he pleaded guilty to avoid a trial.

Again I'm on very unfamiliar ground here so I'll take your word for it. But again that seems to be a neither here nor there distinction. Regardless of the possible outcome he was charged with a murder equivalent felony and did receive an extremely long prison sentence. To me that seems manifestly unfair and morally uneven.

 

[Sherman123]

Re: Man Convicted for Tricking Girlfriend to Take Abortion Pills

Sherman, I have to agree with the above comments. The only legal instrument to deal with this type case is the Unborn Victims Act, which is exactly what was used to try and convict the guy. But this law is vague and not tested in a lot of cases.

The development stage of the pregnancy just short of 7-week-long pregnancy.

The emotional suffering of the woman is hard to measure. She claimed that the pregnancy for HER was a blessing.

Obviously the guy has violated her rights, but given the length of her pregnancy...there's no way of knowing if she would have naturally carried that embryo to full term as about 25% of pregnancies are terminated by a woman's body.

It was still possible for her body to reject the embryo.

And like yourself...the guy being charged and convicted with a murder is extreme, in my opinion. I disagree with it.

The reason I disagree with is that "IF THE WOMAN BELIEVED she couldn't conceive EVER" (result of medical diagnosis), and HE WAS AWARE OF THAT...then obviously I "might"..just might consider a more serious charge. Nothing of this nature has been disclosed.

An interesting way to think about it, I had only been looking at the overt ethical implications that I saw from the 'double standard'.

 

[sangha]

Re: Man Convicted for Tricking Girlfriend to Take Abortion Pills

I'll plead unfamiliarity with the legislation in question but in several articles I read the charges are quoted as such "Welden was indicted under the rarely used federal Unborn Victims of Violence Act, a murder charge that carries a life sentence." It seems to be viewed as a murder charge, or if not explicitly something extremely proximate to one. Certainly with a similar penalty.

You can believe what a journalist writes in a newspaper, or you can read the law

18 USC § 1841 - Protection of unborn children | Title 18 - Crimes and Criminal Procedure | U.S. Code | LII / Legal Information Institute

The only similarity between this and murder is the punishment. Both bribery and murder are punished with jail time. That doesn't mean that "bribery = murder"

The fact remains that this man was not charged with murder.

 

[sangha]

Re: Man Convicted for Tricking Girlfriend to Take Abortion Pills

Again I'm on very unfamiliar ground here so I'll take your word for it. But again that seems to be a neither here nor there distinction. Regardless of the possible outcome he was charged with a murder equivalent felony and did receive an extremely long prison sentence. To me that seems manifestly unfair and morally uneven.

There is no such thing as a "murder equivalent felony". Either you are charged with murder (in one of several "degrees") or you are not

 

[Sherman123]

Re: Man Convicted for Tricking Girlfriend to Take Abortion Pills

You can believe what a journalist writes in a newspaper, or you can read the law

18 USC § 1841 - Protection of unborn children | Title 18 - Crimes and Criminal Procedure | U.S. Code | LII / Legal Information Institute

The only similarity between this and murder is the punishment. Both bribery and murder are punished with jail time. That doesn't mean that "bribery = murder"

The fact remains that this man was not charged with murder.

I think in this instance it is more of a semantic distinction. The act was the destruction/death/whatever you want to call it of her unborn child. The punishment and terminology used are equivalent with a murder. The ethical question still stands which is what I created the thread to discuss.

 

[calamity]

Re: Man Convicted for Tricking Girlfriend to Take Abortion Pills

IMO he belongs in prison. In defense of abortion, people have said to me that killing a zef is just like killing cancer cells, or cutting of an infected limb. People have also compared the zef to a parasite sucking the life out it's host. With thinking like that you could almost say this guy did his girlfriend a favor. I get that he took her choice away. I'm just making the point if you view a zef as having little to no value then how can you justify throwing this guy in prison?

Simple. It wasn't his choice to make.

 

[Sherman123]

Re: Man Convicted for Tricking Girlfriend to Take Abortion Pills

You can believe what a journalist writes in a newspaper, or you can read the law

18 USC § 1841 - Protection of unborn children | Title 18 - Crimes and Criminal Procedure | U.S. Code | LII / Legal Information Institute

The only similarity between this and murder is the punishment. Both bribery and murder are punished with jail time. That doesn't mean that "bribery = murder"

The fact remains that this man was not charged with murder.

Wait what the hell. This is a murder charge:

If the person engaging in the conduct thereby intentionally kills or attempts to kill the unborn child, that person shall instead of being punished under subparagraph (A), be punished as provided under sections 1111, 1112, and 1113 of this title for intentionally killing or attempting to kill a human being.

1111, 1112, and 1113 are murder, manslaughter, and attempted manslaughter respectively. Your link also states in the first paragraph that:

(A) Except as otherwise provided in this paragraph, the punishment for that separate offense is the same as the punishment provided under Federal law for that conduct had that injury or death occurred to the unborn child’s mother.

 

[Sherman123]

Re: Man Convicted for Tricking Girlfriend to Take Abortion Pills

Simple. It wasn't his choice to make.

Completely true. But that isn't usually equated with a murder charge. Choice isn't what makes one thing a murder and another thing a surgical procedure or a drug regimen.

 

[sangha]

Re: Man Convicted for Tricking Girlfriend to Take Abortion Pills

I think in this instance it is more of a semantic distinction. The act was the destruction/death/whatever you want to call it of her unborn child. The punishment and terminology used are equivalent with a murder. The ethical question still stands which is what I created the thread to discuss.

Yes, it is a semantic distinction I am making in order to counter a semantic distortion

The punishment for violations of UVVA *are* equivalent to the punishment for murder. However, the punishments for many other crimes (ex terroristic threats) are also equivalent. That doesn't make those other crimes "murder"

And the language in the UVVA make it clear that it is *not* the equivalent of murder. The terminology is explicitly different (see sec 2d)

 

[minnie616]

Re: Man Convicted for Tricking Girlfriend to Take Abortion Pills

Again I'm on very unfamiliar ground here so I'll take your word for it. But again that seems to be a neither here nor there distinction. Regardless of the possible outcome he was charged with a murder equivalent felony and did receive an extremely long prison sentence. To me that seems manifestly unfair and morally uneven.

According to the article you posted the judge has not decided on the sentence yet.
They indicated it could be at least 13 years. Do you have an update? Has a sentence been announced?

 

[Sherman123]

Re: Man Convicted for Tricking Girlfriend to Take Abortion Pills

According to the article you posted the judge has not decided on the sentence yet.
They indicated it could be at least 13 years. Do you have an update? Has a sentence been announced?

I may have misread if that is the case. I though it had said that his plea agreement was in exchange for a 13 year prison sentence. Do Judges usually reduce or alter those agreements?

 

[sangha]

Re: Man Convicted for Tricking Girlfriend to Take Abortion Pills

Wait what the hell. This is a murder charge:

If the person engaging in the conduct thereby intentionally kills or attempts to kill the unborn child, that person shall instead of being punished under subparagraph (A), be punished as provided under sections 1111, 1112, and 1113 of this title for intentionally killing or attempting to kill a human being.

1111, 1112, and 1113 are murder, manslaughter, and attempted manslaughter respectively. Your link also states in the first paragraph that:

(A) Except as otherwise provided in this paragraph, the punishment for that separate offense is the same as the punishment provided under Federal law for that conduct had that injury or death occurred to the unborn child’s mother.

Note how the bolded part does not say "the crime is the same as"; It says the punishment is the same as

Can't you understand what you read? Nothing in the UVVA calls it "murder". It merely specifies that the punishment (not the crime itself) be the same as the punishment for murder.

Murder is defined as the intentional killing of a person. There is nothing about killing a person in UVVA because the unborn are not "persons"

(A) Except as otherwise provided in this paragraph, the punishment for that separate offense is the same as the punishment provided under Federal law for that conduct had that injury or death occurred to the unborn child’s mother.

Please note that the bolded does NOT say "the crime is the same as"; It says the punishment "is the same as"

 

[Sherman123]

Re: Man Convicted for Tricking Girlfriend to Take Abortion Pills

Note how the bolded part does not say "the crime is the same as"; It says the punishment is the same as

Can't you understand what you read? Nothing in the UVVA calls it "murder". It merely specifies that the punishment (not the crime itself) be the same as the punishment for murder.

Murder is defined as the intentional killing of a person. There is nothing about killing a person in UVVA because the unborn are not "persons"

This is obviously a murder equivalent charge which is why it is reported as such and most people perceive it as such. The semantic distinction you are forcing onto the issue is a deflection from the ethical question. If you want to keep haggling over that feel free but I feel comfortable in my (and others) interpretation of the issue.

 

[Ben K.]

Man Convicted for Tricking Girlfriend to Take Abortion Pills

I agree with you. But let's look at how minor the charges for what he did to the woman are.

He not only dosed her with a very strong pharmaceutical causing her to lose a wanted pregnancy, but he did so improperly, putting her at high risk of complication. Why is there no grievous bodily harm charge? Simple assault? That's it? Really? The same charge he would have gotten if he'd just threatened to smack her?

And therein lies the thing that is truly twisted about this case.

There is a REASON they pushed for a murder conviction, despite the fact that killing a ZEF oneself carries no charge. It was an attempt to politicize this case, and if he was found guilty, it would cause his conviction to conflict with the current classification of a ZEF as defined by Row, which sets the stage for a court challenge.

Basically, the prosecution was just using this woman as a tool to get some licks in on the abortion debate.

And they cared so little about her that they couldn't even be bothered to attach a serious charge to the harm that he did to her. Just some little nothing-charge that doesn't carry any significant time. Charging him for what he did to her was almost an afterthought. They were too busy thinking about the embryo.

Which means they were pushing for one of two results from this case: creating yet another anti-choice state, or just letting the guy go with nothing more than a slap on the wrist.

That is what is really disturbing about this case.

The entire set-up of the case completely rejects the idea that the woman herself was violated significantly and deserved justice. It places her as nothing but a vehicle for debating the man's will vs. the embryo's right or lack of to occupy a woman's body, and that's all. The set-up of the case showed that the prosecution cared so little for this woman's rights and agency and integrity that they would rather use her as a political tool and risk the guy just getting out scott free, because they cared not even the tiniest bit about getting justice for her.

Or it's entirely possible that she pushed for this against her attorneys advice because she believed her baby had been killed.

 

[sangha]

Re: Man Convicted for Tricking Girlfriend to Take Abortion Pills

I may have misread if that is the case. I though it had said that his plea agreement was in exchange for a 13 year prison sentence. Do Judges usually reduce or alter those agreements?

No, he plead in order to avoid a different charge (the article doesn't specify what that charge was) that carried a life sentence.

Note: The UVVA specifically prohibits a sentence of execution if found guilty, which is just one way in which UVVA differs from a murder charge

 

[sangha]

Re: Man Convicted for Tricking Girlfriend to Take Abortion Pills

This is obviously a murder equivalent charge which is why it is reported as such and most people perceive it as such. The semantic distinction you are forcing onto the issue is a deflection from the ethical question. If you want to keep haggling over that feel free but I feel comfortable in my (and others) interpretation of the issue.

There is no such thing as "a murder equivalent charge". That is a term that you made up because the facts don't support your argument.

 

[minnie616]

Re: Man Convicted for Tricking Girlfriend to Take Abortion Pills

I may have misread if that is the case. I though it had said that his plea agreement was in exchange for a 13 year prison sentence. Do Judges usually reduce or alter those agreements?

Sometimes judges can use their discretion. He is supposed be sentenced on December 5th of this year.

 

[SmokeAndMirrors]

Re: Man Convicted for Tricking Girlfriend to Take Abortion Pills

Or it's entirely possible that she pushed for this against her attorneys advice because she believed her baby had been killed.

A good lawyer would have told her such a position is hard to defend, and that it would be likely he'd walk away with practically no punishment at all.

And if she had wanted to do that anyway, then it's even sadder, because she can't see the value in herself, and she also can't see the value in women in general.

 

[ksu_aviator]

Man Convicted for Tricking Girlfriend to Take Abortion Pills

Killing something with the mentation of a worm does not warrant 13 years in prison and if it truly does then killing a cow or chicken should warrant 20+ years

Valuing an animals life over a human's? Smh. How can we have a rational debate with skewed priorities like that?

 

[Ben K.]

Man Convicted for Tricking Girlfriend to Take Abortion Pills

A good lawyer would have told her such a position is hard to defend, and that it would be likely he'd walk away with practically no punishment at all.

And if she had wanted to do that anyway, then it's even sadder, because she can't see the value in herself, and she also can't see the value in women in general.

But they won...

And it's not sad. Many pregnant women view their pregnancy as their baby. If someone poisoned them they would generally be more upset about the loss of their baby than any crime directly committed against them. That is not sad at all, it's quite natural for people to feel that way about their offspring whether you like it or not.

 

[SmokeAndMirrors]

Re: Man Convicted for Tricking Girlfriend to Take Abortion Pills

Valuing an animals life over a human's? Smh. How can we have a rational debate with skewed priorities like that?

Skewed compared to what?

On what basis do you assert that humans are inherently worth more than any other creature on earth?

And on what basis do you include an embryo within that logic?

Answer both of those without the use fallacies and I'll start taking you seriously in calling GEI's statement "skewed."

 

[OscarB63]

Re: Man Convicted for Tricking Girlfriend to Take Abortion Pills

I don't get it.

If a woman doesn't want a child and the man does, she can get an abortion and it is legal and people will praise her "right to choose"

But if a man doesn't want a child and the woman does, he is basically ****ed and if he makes any attempt to prevent the pregnancy from going to term...he's a murderer.

 

[SmokeAndMirrors]

Re: Man Convicted for Tricking Girlfriend to Take Abortion Pills

But they won...

And it's not sad. Many pregnant women view their pregnancy as their baby. If someone poisoned them they would generally be more upset about the loss of their baby than any crime directly committed against them. That is not sad at all, it's quite natural for people to feel that way about their offspring whether you like it or not.

No, they settled. There's a difference. And he didn't get the sentencing that winning would have entailed, either.

I am not saying it's sad that she viewed it as a baby. I am saying it's sad that whoever came up with these charges doesn't believe the violation to the woman deserves any punishment. The only thing that matters is the embryo, and she's irrelevant.

That's what is sad.

You can't divorce these two things when you're talking about an embryo. One is inside the other.

And the entire basis of the murder charge is nothing but throwing a Row challenge into the wind.

 

[sangha]

Re: Man Convicted for Tricking Girlfriend to Take Abortion Pills

I don't get it.

If a woman doesn't want a child and the man does, she can get an abortion and it is legal and people will praise her "right to choose"

But if a man doesn't want a child and the woman does, he is basically ****ed and if he makes any attempt to prevent the pregnancy from going to term...he's a murderer.

Sounds like you "get it" 100% (aside from the murderer bit at the end)