Thoughts on Brenda Slaby?

[Lew]

I'd be curious to hear what others have to say, I'm still torn on this one.

I've read several bloggers, they've pretty much gone the race route. Although our old friend Nate Livingston viewed it from class perspective, and if anything, that's the concern I would have.

I'm not going to discount race or say it's a non-factor, because it is. Many in white America believe there is no racism, many in black America believe there is nothing but racism, but obviously the truth lies somewhere in between.

But I really believe, and I base this on my own experiences, that the key variable is class, not race. I'm not convinced the decision not to prosecute would change if every other factor were the same except Brenda was black.

Conversely, if Brenda were white trash, she'd probably be in trouble.

Maybe I'm wrong on this, but that's my gut feeling. I do feel she should have been charged; I'm not saying she should have been convicted (that would be up to the trier of fact).

And I don't doubt for a moment that she's suffered immensely already. I don't doubt that she'll have to live with this every day for the rest of her life. I don't mean to pile-on as I think the media has in this case.

But the issue was- was there enough evidence for the State to make a case against her? And if the answer was yes, then charges should have been filed.

And maybe Don White is legally correct and did the right thing. But remember, in the realm of ethics, it's not whether there is actual impropriety; it's whether there is the appearance of it.

[cincygreg]

One thing I have to say Lew...

Forgetting your umbrella or your purse or wallet or license or even your homework in the car is excusable, but not a child.

How do you leave your kid in a car for that long in any weather?!!?!?

If you are a parent, your #1 responsibility is your kids. Protecting them, taking care of them...
How do you forget or neglect them??!?!?!?!??!
Makes no sense at all.

[LanDroid]

I've gone back and forth on this one too. At first I figured she is already serving her own life sentence of personal guilt, so what would punishment accomplish? Then info came out that she left kids in the car routinely (but briefly) and had even been warned about it before! At that point I was all for prosecution. Now I'm kinda back to what would punishment accomplish - perhaps make society feel better, keep her away from her other kid?

<font color="#a62a2a" size="1">[ September 13, 2007 06:38 AM: Message edited by: LanDroid ]</font>

[cincygreg]

The guilt and feelings of losing her own child will weigh on her forever, and that is quite a weight to carry I'm sure but...
Is that enough!?!?
And if not, how much more?
Tough situation, but many parents are probably questioning how safe it is to leave their kids with her "watching them".

[Lew]

And the problem is, attrition does (and should) play a role in sentencing, but it does not (and should not) have any role whatsoever in whether a crime has actually been committed. The man who wrecked into the Carrollton school bus.....I'm sure he didn't intend to cause that incident, and I'm sure he has to live with it every day. And in that case, many of the families actually forgave him, and he's been out of jail for several years now.

Like I said, I think I'm more bothered that the case wasn't offered to the grand jury in the first place. If they don't return an indictment, so be it. If they do, but a jury subsequently acquits her, that's also fine. Again, I'm not out for her blood here.

And Lan does touch on an important issue- there are varying degrees of culpability. No one's arguing she intended for this to happen. But if she's been on notice before, and continues to repeat her negligent behavior, it can rise to a level of recklessness and that can be grounds for criminal culpability. Again, these are issues a jury would have to address, but when Donny Boy decided not to bring charges, it became moot.

[reason]

She should be prosecuted.

Ms. Slaby may not have had an overt intent to hurt her child, but she had willful intent to create the conditions for such an awful outcome.

I guarantee that it wasn't the first time that day Ms. Slaby left her child unattended in the car. Where do you think her toddler was when she was purchasing 8 dozen doughnuts?

Ms. Slaby had been previously warned, but she obviously did not care. Someone in her position knew of the consequences of her actions, but she continued with the same behavior.

The 8 hours the child spent baking in the car must also be taken into consideration. Think about this. Not only did Ms. Slaby forget to take the child to the babysitter, she forgot the child for 8 hours during the workday.

There is something so incredibly wrong with this, especially since Ms. Slaby has hundreds of children in her care.

If Ms. Slaby gets off the hook, she will have given a great example of how to legally kill a child.

My two nephews attended Glen Este Middle School.

<font color="#a62a2a" size="1">[ September 13, 2007 01:26 PM: Message edited by: The Big Sexy ]</font>

[Lew]

Can't disagree with you, Reason. I'd be perfectly content to let the jury hear the evidence, hear her testimony (this is the type of case where the defendant would have absolutely no choice but to take the stand) and have them weigh it out. Based solely what I've read in the Enquirer, I can see the potential for a jury to find that her conduct did rise to a level of recklessness.

In fairness to White, these are tough cases to prosecute. If the jury buys into the grieving mother, the prosecutor has to be careful not to alienate the jury during cross-examination. But if you think about it, the "hasn't she suffered enough" tact is really irrelevant; the jury's job is solely to determine the facts, and how much she has or has not suffered has absolutely no bearing on what actually happened in the parking lot that day. And it's certainly no excuse for him not bringing the charge to the grand jury in the first place.

And your last point is key. At the end of the day, one human being was killed by another human being. A crime may very well have been committed. It at least gives the possible perception, as you say, that it's legally permissible to kill a child so long as you can demonstrate the traumatic effects it will have for the rest of one's life.

[Lew]

And if I can make one other observation about "intent"- in both criminal and civil law, it is easier to find culpability with what someone did do rather than what they didn't.

Most crimes involve affirmative acts. You stole from Wal-Mart. You filled-up and drove off without paying. You punched someone in a bar.

The Slaby case is an example of what she did not do. If her conduct was criminal, it was by omission not action. She neglected to take care of the child, possibly to a level of criminal reckelessness.

Now theoretically, that shouldn't make any difference whatsoever. On paper, anyway, negligence (and recklessness, and for that matter even intentional acts) can be demonstrated by what a person did or did not do. But for whatever reasons, juries struggle more with inaction than they do action. Again, still no excuse for not bringing the charge.

The classic lawbook hypothetical in this area is the driver going down the street and a child runs out in front him. Suppose the driver was going 5 MPH over the speed limit. Speeding is per se negligent in terms of civil fault, but is that criminal recklessness? Probably not.

Suppose the driver is going 40 MPH over the speed limit. Criminally reckless? Almost certainly.

So where would you draw the line? You'd let the jury decide. All kinds of variables to examine.

What if the driver was going the speed limit, but was intoxicated? What if he's on his cell phone? What if he'd had accidents prior?

A prosecutor cannot (well, should not) make such arbitrary decisions when there are so many unanswered questions.

[reason]

When you add up the course of events as presented in the news, it appears Ms. Slaby treated her child as a distraction, not as a human being totally dependent on her mother.

Consider:

1. The toddler was left in the car before and Ms. Slaby was warned about such behavior. Her actions caused a school to post a warning in its newsletter about engaging in such behavior.

2. Ms. Slaby picked up 8 dozen doughnuts, most likely leaving the child in the car during what was more than a short endeavor. Speculation on my part, but I'd bet money on it. If she didn't leave the child in the car during the doughnut purchase, it would beg the question of why the child wasn't taken to the babysitter or why Ms. Slaby didn't remember the child when she arrived at school.

3. Ms. Slaby was at school for 8 hours and only remembered her child after someone alarmed her to the child's presence in the car.

Too many things don't add up. If 8 hours wasn't bad enough, Ms. Slaby forgot her child for even longer than that. She drove from Symmes Twp to Glen Este for pete's sake, and it probably took a good 15 minutes to buy and haul all those doughnuts while the toddler baked in the car.

Is this woman really that overwhelmed or that careless? Doesn't this story stretch believability? I'm not a parent, and even now I simply can't believe a child was forgotten in that manner.

Remember, the child suffered more than the mother. Ms. Slaby should be forced to answer the hard questions and face whatever penalty comes her way.

<font color="#a62a2a" size="1">[ September 13, 2007 04:38 PM: Message edited by: The Big Sexy ]</font>

[reason]

According to an interview published in the paper, Ms. Slaby said she felt like she had to be SuperMom and SuperAdministrator.

That particular morning, Ms. Slaby had the luxury of *extra time*. She was *too early* for the baby sitter, so she set off to buy dozens of doughnuts.

I can only speak from my own experience, but when I'm overwhelmed and got too much on my plate, I'm rarely early, nor do I have the wherewithal to spend extra minutes picking up dozens of doughnuts on my way to work.

It just doesn't make sense.

Last winter, I was my office's Saturday morning doughnut guy. On the way in, I'd stop at Bonomoni's and pick up a box or two for fellow workmates to enjoy.

Now my mindset when doing this was that "I have extra time, so I'm going to do this. It's a nice perk that everyone would enjoy."

In other words, I knew I didn't have to do this, but it was something I figured would be nice.

On mornings where I was busy, tired, or simply had too much to do, I didn't buy any goddamned doughnuts. Not part of the plan.

Is it just me, or does anyone else see any major disconnect with Slaby taking time out for this perk and her claim of being overwhelmed?

I'm a ditz myself, and I simply cannot fathom her excuse as being valid.