Alabama woman charged in her unborn baby’s death, cops say another woman pulled trigger

Legal marriage is a contract..............

"
Although adultery is a misdemeanor in most of the states with laws against it, some — including Michigan and Wisconsin — categorize the offense as a felony.

Punishments vary widely by state. In Maryland, the penalty is a paltry $10 fine. But in Massachusetts, an adulterer could face up to three years in jail."

Wow those BACKWARDS northern states.............

 

In some cases, adultery has even been a death penalty....once the spouse finds out.

 

If lady A starts to attack her yes. If you physically attack someone they have a right to defend themselves. If in the course of said struggle your life becomes threatened you should have the right to use lethal force to defend your own life.

 

Marshae Jones, Alabama Woman Indicted for Death of Her Fetus, Won’t Be Prosecuted
https://news.yahoo.com/marshae-jones-alabama-woman-indicted-190530291.html

Not even a misdemeanor charge for her violent attack on the woman. We have a violent assault and a dead person and no charges for anyone involved. How is that justice? Are pregnant women now free to assault other people with impunity?

"“The bottom line is that the doctrine of transferred intent is not applicable to a charge of manslaughter and has never been recognized as such by Alabama statutory or case law,” they said in a motion filed Monday.

“Furthermore,” they added, “it defies reason and logic to believe that Ms. Jones should have known that Ms. Jemison would use deadly physical force against her and thereby cause the death of her unborn child.”"

What does that have to do with anything, her assault, for which she is not even being charged, resulted in the death of another person. Certainly she had reason to believe the person she attacked would resist and fight back and protect themselves.

 

Approaching someone is a crime? That's the basis of the rest of your post. Approaching someone makes them the aggressor. So if I approach you to shake hands, I'm an aggressor. Where is the line drawn here?

 

Exactly what was the violence A initiated? Could you provide an account of what it was......from last December.......that was just charged this month?

 

Please
Show how your assessment fits this case. Is there some account.....newspaper, video anything that supports what you say.

 

Are you denying it occured or pleading ignorance of the facts?

 

If you would read my earliest posts on this thread it will answer your question. Everything i have written is in that context.

Yes context matters, as much as content.

 

I never said that, so you do not really need to get silly with your strawman.. However, the person that initiates the contact is the aggressor. That is how the law sees it. Period. Secondly, the law looks at intent. "A" looking for a confrontation.

 

Are you avoiding the questions? It would appear so.

 

You can write anything you want to get the context you want. That doesn't mean what you wrote is true.

 

Yes and it's possible for your opinion to be wrong.

 

It's not a strawman, it's exactly what you wrote.
Here it is.
"B" did not approach "A". "A" approached "B". That makes "A" the initiator and aggressor."

 

That is true but since the charges were dropped it would appear my arguments were more on point.

 

That proves nothing. My point is that based on the very little information I have the woman who defended herself did nothing wrong in doing so.

 

No, your point is that with very little information, you can justify the use of a gun.

 

Whatever.... there is no talking to you goodbye.

 

Yes, I did write that part. I just did not even write or imply the other BS you were attempting to spread by making it apply to "shaking hands", even though I doubt you are that dense to where you did not know exactly what I meant. It is almost as if you are arguing for the sake of arguing.

 

The question wasn't asked to me, I am curious why you asked it, are youvdenying violence was involved? Have you even read the OP or the news reports?

Are you denying it occured or pleading ignorance of the facts?

 

Not at all. You wrote the part about the approaching person being the aggressor. I'm simply making the argument what your words are. You and others are making the situation very black and white and how the law works. Given your example, if walk towards you and raise my hand to shake it, I'm being aggressive. In my example do you "know what I meant"? Given the case we're talking about, do you "know what Woman A" meant?

 

Why don't you deal with what actually happened here and it is always a good idea to read the OP and links before you engage.

 

I think this is the correct decision.... this woman is not a general threat to others and has already suffered enough mental and physical pain in this process..

And yes, I expect this decision will unleash all of the violent pregnant women in the world on a massive assault and killing spree..

 

I was talking about the subject of the 2 women. You are taking it out of context, making up scenarios that don't pertain and saying "hur dee hur....what if she just wanted to shake hands".

From what can be put together from the articles:

Fact: "A" had a beef with "B".
Fact: "A" was the instigator.
Fact: "A" attacked "B"
Fact: "B" shot at "A", hitting her in the stomach.

There was obviously bad blood between the two. I seriously doubt "A" approached "B" to shake her hand. However, it really does not matter even if she wanted to kiss her bum. "A" approached "B", knowing there was bad blood between them. Had she not approached "B", then the incident would not have occurred. Everything that took place after she approach "B" is her fault. Period. That is how the law looks at it.

 

I've read accounts that would appear to be some fistacuffs. That about right?