From Life Site News.
Excerpt:
The Supreme Court of Canada declined last Thursday to hear an appeal in the case of a mother who smothered two of her children. The decision means that a Canadian mother can continue to plead to the lesser charge of “infanticide” rather than “murder” when she ends the life of her newborn child.
The mother in the case, referred to as “L.B,” was 15 years old when in 1998 she smothered her 6-week-old son Alexander. She smothered another one of her children, 10-week-old son Cameron, in 2002.
[…]In a statement to the police, L.B. testified that 6-week-old Alexander’s crying made her “angry.” When he would not stop crying, she placed him in his crib, covered him entirely with blankets and a plastic cover, left the room, and began listening to music. She admitted that she was “very confused” but insisted that she “wanted to help Alexander feel better.”
L.B. also testified to police that on the day she killed her 10-week-old son Cameron, she was “very upset” and feared that she would do her child harm. Police heard how L.B. “wanted Cameron to die,” since she believed it was “the right thing to do.” As Cameron slowly suffocated, she told her son that he was “going to a better place.”
Here’s the prosecutor:
Jennifer Woollcombe, acting for the Crown, appealed Justice Herold’s 2008 decision, arguing that L.B’s “infanticide defence” was based on antiquated laws that were created to give juries an alternative to the death penalty for mentally unstable mothers who killed their children. The Crown argued that the “infanticide defence” constitutes an “unacceptable devaluation of the worth of a newborn child.”
“The trial judge found that these murders were planned and deliberate. There is no principled reason for acquitting her of murder. She made a choice to kill while her husband was at home, called an ex-boyfriend rather than 911 after killing him, maintained a facade that the babies died of SIDS, and accepted and sought out sympathy and attention.”
“The respondent intentionally killed two babies,” said the Crown brief during the mother’s trial, as reported in the Globe and Mail.
Recall the horrifying story about the recent slap-on-the-wrist handed down to the Edmonton woman who strangled her own baby. What is wrong with Canada on the life issue?
Canadians prefer to view infanticide as just a sloppy abortion.
LikeLike
It’s scary… and the words of the Edmonton judge portraying the woman who strangled her baby as a victim – that was scary. As if the strangling of a baby was spilled milk and now the only question was how to make everyone living feel good about it since no one was to blame. I’ve encountered this rhetoric before when talking about welfare – conservative Christian women say to me “what about this victim?” and “what about that victim?” as if people don’t make decisions to get themselves into these messes and it’s everyone else’s job to pay money and refrain from moral judgement so that the guilty will feel better and get what they need, whether it is school-provided breakfasts or single mother welfare or government-funded day care. So you have Christian women who want families and marriage undermining family and marriage by taxing marriage-minded men to pay for the bad decisions of people who DON’T get married before having children. And they call it compassion.
LikeLike
This goes far beyond “post partum depression”. Her sentence is too light for Canadian legal precedence. And it OBVIOUSLY did not do much to help or to DETER her from killing a second child.
20 years ago I told my friends it was only a matter of time before the attitudes towards killing children in Canada came to this. The “envelope” is too easily pushed. In today’s godless utilitarian worldview, any human being who is unwanted, annoying, or expensive to maintain is at risk.
LikeLike