A 2 year old child is taken to the house of a babysitter at 7:00 AM, by the boyfriend of the mother. The child was noted to be somewhat 'sleepy' but in no acute distress. During the day the child was listless and much less active than normal for her. At 4:30 PM, the 14 year old daughter of the babysitter arrives home, and goes to a backroom to check on the child--finding her unresponsive. This is her first contact of the day with the baby. 911 is called and child is transported to hospital, and pronounced DOA. Autopsy examination reveals a hemoperitoneum and laceration of the anterior portion of the right lobe of the liver. The lungs are heavy, edematous and congested. Microscopic examination of the liver reveals a well-established inflammatory reaction and hemorrhage. The 14 year old is convicted of felony-homicide and sent to prison. Do the facts suggest the jury was correct? What factors are for and against the verdict?
A 2 year old child is taken to the house of a babysitter at 7:00 AM, by the boyfriend of the mother. The child was noted to be somewhat 'sleepy' but in no acute distress. During the day the child was listless and much less active than normal for her.
At 4:30 PM, the 14 year old daughter of the babysitter arrives home, and goes to a backroom to check on the child--finding her unresponsive. This is her first contact of the day with the baby. 911 is called and child is transported to hospital, and pronounced DOA.
Autopsy examination reveals a hemoperitoneum and laceration of the anterior portion of the right lobe of the liver. The lungs are heavy, edematous and congested. Microscopic examination of the liver reveals a well-established inflammatory reaction and hemorrhage. The 14 year old is convicted of felony-homicide and sent to prison.
Do the facts suggest the jury was correct? What factors are for and against the verdict?
Trending now
This is a popular solution!
Step by step
Solved in 2 steps
