Org Mobile Site
A woman kills 8 infants and gets a fifteen-year sentence. By my calculations this works out to 1.875 years per dead baby. Doesn't seem like justice, does it? Here's the article. She should have either gotten life in prison or life in a mental institution. Splitting the difference with infanticide doesn't work out.
Speaking as a lemur who spends most of his nights comforting, feeding and caring for a baby, I find this whole affair super-duper revolting and disturbing. Thought I'd share.
You're welcome!
Speaking as a lemur who spends most of his nights comforting, feeding and caring for a baby, I find this whole affair super-duper revolting and disturbing. Thought I'd share.
You're welcome!
Originally Posted by Lemur:
I find this whole affair super-duper revolting and disturbing.
What is especially odd is the fact that the role of her ex-husband seems to have been somewhat neglected (he claims to have never noticed that she was pregant)I find this whole affair super-duper revolting and disturbing.
Originally Posted by :
Hilschenz had originally been charged with murder but the court reduced this to manslaughter before her trial began because it did not feel there was enough proof that she had tried to conceal her crimes.
I didn't think trying to conceal your crimes was a pre-requisite for being charged with murder? Perhaps in Germany.Hilschenz had originally been charged with murder but the court reduced this to manslaughter before her trial began because it did not feel there was enough proof that she had tried to conceal her crimes.
Originally Posted by :
Prosecutor Anette Bargenda said she planned to study the verdict in detail to see whether the court was right to decide against a murder conviction, the Associated Press news agency reported.
Sounds like the prosecutor might appeal for a higher sentence. I hope so.Prosecutor Anette Bargenda said she planned to study the verdict in detail to see whether the court was right to decide against a murder conviction, the Associated Press news agency reported.
How did Ser Cerglane's post end up before mine and BKS'? It wasn't there before, and according to the backroom index Ser was the last to post 
Somehow, because they are infants, their lives mean less to the world.
Note the following: In the backyard of my parents' house are the dead bodies of eight women ranging between the ages of 17 and 23. I can't remember if I killed them and buried them or not.
(obviously not true and just trying to make a point. Don't get any ideas from this you sillys. )
Why is it that the evil is less if they are children killed by the mother? She should be burnt alive in a public square for all to see.
Note the following: In the backyard of my parents' house are the dead bodies of eight women ranging between the ages of 17 and 23. I can't remember if I killed them and buried them or not.
(obviously not true and just trying to make a point. Don't get any ideas from this you sillys.
)Why is it that the evil is less if they are children killed by the mother? She should be burnt alive in a public square for all to see.
Talk about a lack of foresight. She should have had their brains sucked out just before they popped out, called it "choice", and could have become a patron saint of abortionists and liberals world wide. Man, people really should think ahead.
Originally Posted by Divinus Arma:
Note the following: In the backyard of my parents' house are the dead bodies of eight women ranging between the ages of 17 and 23. I can't remember if I killed them and buried them or not.
We have the principle in Germany that if no one can prove that you killed that eight women then you go free. Figure that.Note the following: In the backyard of my parents' house are the dead bodies of eight women ranging between the ages of 17 and 23. I can't remember if I killed them and buried them or not.
The court was of the opinion that killing by neglect isn't the same as murder.
Originally Posted by Devastatin Dave:
Talk about a lack of foresight. She should have had their brains sucked out just before they popped out, called it "choice", and could have become a patron saint of abortionists and liberals world wide. Man, people really should think ahead.
Sorry, it's not legal in Germany. They allow abortion in the first trimester only. And first you have to see a counselor who will try to make you change your mind about it.Talk about a lack of foresight. She should have had their brains sucked out just before they popped out, called it "choice", and could have become a patron saint of abortionists and liberals world wide. Man, people really should think ahead.
You people are being to hard on the judge. If the court comes to the conclusion that the act can't possibly be labeled as "murder" following the letter of the law, all the judge can do is give her the maximum sentence for manslaughter. Wich is exactly what was done.
Originally Posted by Spetulhu:
Sorry, it's not legal in Germany. They allow abortion in the first trimester only. And first you have to see a counselor who will try to make you change your mind about it.
Really? That's absolutely barbaric!!! A woman has the right to chose to have her "mass of cells" chopped and diced and served with greens right up to the point where the "mass of cell" ass is slapped by the doc. The Germans need to get out the stone age. (this is sarcasm, its good that Germany has a responsible abortion policy.)Sorry, it's not legal in Germany. They allow abortion in the first trimester only. And first you have to see a counselor who will try to make you change your mind about it.
Originally Posted by Kralizec:
How did Ser Cerglane's post end up before mine and BKS'? It wasn't there before, and according to the backroom index Ser was the last to post
Possibly related to the thread-starter bug?How did Ser Cerglane's post end up before mine and BKS'? It wasn't there before, and according to the backroom index Ser was the last to post
Anyway, this would hardly have been murder, since there's that other kind of killing we call infanticide, which does carry a reduced sentence.
However... I'm gonna write a song about this.
Originally Posted by A.Saturnus:
We have the principle in Germany that if no one can prove that you killed that eight women then you go free. Figure that.
Also called in dubio pro reo.We have the principle in Germany that if no one can prove that you killed that eight women then you go free. Figure that.
Besides the court decided as if all the babies were born alive even though police could prove that only in one case. Another court may decide that the other 8 babies were not killed by her because noone can prove they were born alive and then...
...
voila
...
she is only charged for killing one baby...
I´m in favor of the "in dubio pro reo"-principle but I think she should be charged for hiding dead babies alone, whether they were born dead or not I don´t care, but if my grandma died a natural death, I also wouldn´t bury her in the garden...
And on top of that, drinking until you have a blackout or even close to that before a baby is born should get a harsh punishment because you´re seriously putting the unborn baby into danger...
In the end I´d say even though it seems obvious, we can´t prove she killed the babies(sad as it is), but for the other stuff in 8 cases each I´d put her in prison for a very long time(alcohol abuse resulted in a dead baby).
Anyway, the laws should be refined but I´ll stop thinking about it here because I fear it won´t help much anyway.
You could argue that since she drank a lot when knowing she's about to have a baby (assuming she wasn't drunk 24/7), she accepted the possibility that the child would die after or prior the birth, making it murder.
I'd say causing the negligent deaths-at the very least-of eight, as in one, two, three, four, five, six, seven, eight, of her own children over a period of ten years would seem to me not to be just 'negligence'.
And 15 years is the maximum sentence?
Crazed Rabbit
And 15 years is the maximum sentence?
Crazed Rabbit
Originally Posted by Kralizec:
You could argue that since she drank a lot when knowing she's about to have a baby (assuming she wasn't drunk 24/7), she accepted the possibility that the child would die after or prior the birth, making it murder.
Yeah, that was my point.You could argue that since she drank a lot when knowing she's about to have a baby (assuming she wasn't drunk 24/7), she accepted the possibility that the child would die after or prior the birth, making it murder.
The sad part all she had to do was walk into a church put the baby down and walk out. Or if a church was too far out of range put the child on a doorstep knock and run away. Either way they could have been adopted and became someone else's joy.
She should have Got a Death pentaly.. if not that,at least Life in Prison,period.. Such a Shame Someone has to Kill Babies,really is..
Originally Posted by Crazed Rabbit:
I'd say causing the negligent deaths-at the very least-of eight, as in one, two, three, four, five, six, seven, eight, of her own children over a period of ten years would seem to me not to be just 'negligence'.
Actually it would be just negligence. Plus there is always the fact that some people just shoouldn't have kids.I'd say causing the negligent deaths-at the very least-of eight, as in one, two, three, four, five, six, seven, eight, of her own children over a period of ten years would seem to me not to be just 'negligence'.
Originally Posted by Crazed Rabbit:
And 15 years is the maximum sentence?
Crazed Rabbit
You know something else, here I could kill a man and only spend about 5 years in jail. More than enough time to get a jail house degree for free. Granted I'd be on probation for like 15-20 years but hey who's counting. And 15 years is the maximum sentence?
Crazed Rabbit
Lmao,this World is becoming Wacky..my God,She should have not had Kids anyhow..
Originally Posted by BHCWarman88:
Lmao,this World is becoming Wacky..my God,She should have not had Kids anyhow..
Driving a vehicle -- license required.Lmao,this World is becoming Wacky..my God,She should have not had Kids anyhow..
Flying a plane -- license required, along with tutored instruction.
Plumber -- license required, some continuing education required.
Selling Insurance -- license required, career-long continuing education required.
Doctoring -- license required, significant education, continuing education, periodic recertification required.
Bringing into physical existence another human life -- no restrictions.
Originally Posted by BHCWarman88:
Lmao,this World is becoming Wacky..my God,She should have not had Kids anyhow..
Lmao,this World is becoming Wacky..my God,She should have not had Kids anyhow..
The world barely changes, it's what you see of it that does. I read somewhere that the Romans threw unwanted babies away like garbage, infanticide has certainly been a popular method of birth control in a lot of cultures, or for a lot of people in cultures where it isn't accepted.
Originally Posted by Oaty:
The sad part all she had to do was walk into a church put the baby down and walk out. Or if a church was too far out of range put the child on a doorstep knock and run away. Either way they could have been adopted and became someone else's joy.
Yes..The sad part all she had to do was walk into a church put the baby down and walk out. Or if a church was too far out of range put the child on a doorstep knock and run away. Either way they could have been adopted and became someone else's joy.
Originally Posted by doc_bean:
The world barely changes, it's what you see of it that does. I read somewhere that the Romans threw unwanted babies away like garbage, infanticide has certainly been a popular method of birth control in a lot of cultures, or for a lot of people in cultures where it isn't accepted.
Also, the nomad arabs (Before Islam) used to bury their daughters alive, just to get rid of the shame-chance (Because if one's daughter is raped, he'd be ashamed for ever, and as you know, there were many tribes, who'd raid each other and rape each other's women.. Chaotic).The world barely changes, it's what you see of it that does. I read somewhere that the Romans threw unwanted babies away like garbage, infanticide has certainly been a popular method of birth control in a lot of cultures, or for a lot of people in cultures where it isn't accepted.
But really, I don't think she intended to kill them.. A woman can barely pull of killing one of her babies, what about 8?!
Depends. The defining difference between manslaughter and murder is intent, wich is usually hard to prove and especially in this case. The woman doesn't seem to be bothered about 8 dead babies, though.
Originally Posted by :
Hilschenz's lawyer said his client would appeal against the verdict .
"We don't know how long the children lived, my client can't remember burying or hiding the children, which brings up the question of whether someone else did it,"
This sort of muppet gets lawyers a bad name. Hmm, one day I have a kid, the next day I don't, the kids bodies all turn up in my flower pots, Hilschenz's lawyer said his client would appeal against the verdict .
"We don't know how long the children lived, my client can't remember burying or hiding the children, which brings up the question of whether someone else did it,"
maybe someone else did it.Eight freaking times.
If he's saying it was the husband, fair enough, but make the case. This "someone else" cobblers adds insult to injury.
Originally Posted by doc_bean:
The world barely changes, it's what you see of it that does. I read somewhere that the Romans threw unwanted babies away like garbage, infanticide has certainly been a popular method of birth control in a lot of cultures, or for a lot of people in cultures where it isn't accepted.
Or they'd sell them. I mean why just kill them when you can make a profit.The world barely changes, it's what you see of it that does. I read somewhere that the Romans threw unwanted babies away like garbage, infanticide has certainly been a popular method of birth control in a lot of cultures, or for a lot of people in cultures where it isn't accepted.
Man this topic just keeps making me think of dead baby jokes.
Originally Posted by lars573:
Or they'd sell them. I mean why just kill them when you can make a profit.
Man this topic just keeps making me think of dead baby jokes.
I hope you can keep your sick humour for yourself...Or they'd sell them. I mean why just kill them when you can make a profit.
Man this topic just keeps making me think of dead baby jokes.
keep your sick humor for yourself,no one wants to hear it..
Wow, I'm glad I didn't post that joke I was going to then...
Originally Posted by :
She said she already had three children, and her husband did not want any more babies.
WHAT! That is a terrible rational. She could have been sterilized immediately after the third child, or he could have been at any time. Or any one of dozens of birth control methods. She said she already had three children, and her husband did not want any more babies.
Originally Posted by :
Her husband, relatives and neighbours all said they had been unaware of her pregnancies.
Sounds rather fishy. I find it very hard to believe that the HUSBAND didn't notice she was pregnant. Her husband, relatives and neighbours all said they had been unaware of her pregnancies.
Originally Posted by :
Wow, I'm glad I didn't post that joke I was going to then...
PM it to me, please.Wow, I'm glad I didn't post that joke I was going to then...
Telegraph story
Hmm. If she felt pressured into doing such a thing by her husband, he should definetely be looked into. Maybe he beat her?
Single Sign On provided by vBSSO