Welcome to Sign in | Join | Help
in
Local12.com home Home Blogs Forums User Agreement

Cecilia & Jenna's Law

Last post 10-04-2008, 4:50 PM by CJCincy3772. 4 replies.
Sort Posts: Previous Next
  •  09-13-2008, 5:05 PM 3420338

    Cecilia & Jenna's Law

    In order to prevent future tragedies on the order of cases such as Cecilia Slaby and Jenna Edwards, we the undersigned, being residents of the State of Ohio, respectfully request the adoption of the following wording to be added as a clarification of the Ohio Revised Code Section 2919.22(A):

     

    (still working on the wording of the law to be inserted here)

     

    The actual wording would add a specific penalty for leaving a child

     in a car alone when the result was detrimental to that child’s health

     or well-being. It would not require a prior history and would actually

     create a new category of child endangering.

     

     

    We the citizens of the State of Ohio, respectfully request the even-handed application of all sections of the Ohio revised Code, without regard to race or socio-economic status.

     

  •  09-13-2008, 5:58 PM 3420473 in reply to 3420338

    Re: Cecilia & Jenna's Law

    Let's start with what our Prosecutors say is wrong with the current law. Let's find the loopholes:

    “Ohio Revised Code 2919.22(A), states in relevant part that "no person, who is the parent  of a child under eighteen years of age, shall create a substantial risk to the health or safety of the child, by violating a duty of care, protection, or support." R.C. 2901.01(H) defines "substantial risk" as "a strong possibility, as contrasted with a remote or significant possibility, that a certain result may occur or that certain circumstances may exist."

     

    “Parents have a legal duty to protect their children from harm. State v. Sammons (1979), 58 Ohio St. 2d 460, 463, 391 N.E.2d 713. The crime of child endangering under R.C. 2919.22(A) may be committed by acts of omission: "an inexcusable failure to act in discharge of one's duty to protect a child where such failure to act results in a substantial

    risk to the child's health or safety is an offense under R.C. 2919.22(A)." State v. Kamel (1984), 12 Ohio St. 3d 306, 309, 466 N.E.2d 860.”

     

    The Supreme Court of Ohio has held that R.C. 2919.22(A) requires proof of a culpable mental state of recklessness as an essential element of the crime of child endangering. State v. McGee (1997), 79 Ohio St. 3d 193, 680 N.E.2d 975, syllabus. R.C. 2901.22(C) provides that a person acts recklessly when, with heedless indifference to the consequences, he perversely disregards a known risk that his conduct is likely to cause

    a certain result or is likely to be of a certain nature. A person is reckless with respect to circumstances when, with heedless indifference to the consequences, he perversely disregards a known risk that such circumstances are likely to exist.

    Lets focus on this last paragraph - the Ohio Supreme Court says that a "mental state of recklessness" is "an essential element of the crime." This does not seem to be based on anything actually stated in the ORC. Perhaps this "opinion" can be negated by providing a different definition of "recklessness," or removing the requirement of "recklessness."

    How about simply adding to the second paragraph that a mental state of recklessness is NOT required to prove carelessness?

    Should the law only cover situations where the child is harmed, or should it cover the POTENTIAL for harm?

     

  •  09-19-2008, 6:02 PM 3455748 in reply to 3420473

    Re: Cecilia & Jenna's Law

    No responses? No one has any suggestions? As furious as everyone claims to have been over the deaths of these two children? No suggestions from our Prosecutors who claim to want a new law? Our Prosecutors who have both said that they would prosecute in the future if only we could close that pesky little loophole? I guess INACTIONS speak louder than words.
  •  09-20-2008, 10:45 AM 3457511 in reply to 3420338

    Re: Cecilia & Jenna's Law

    I'm not real good with wording, but it should be noted that forgetting is as bad as negligence! It should fall under that! If it were a car ACCIDENT  they would prosecute that! It wouldn't matter if it was intentional or not! And, if a person dies as a result, vehicular manslaughter! I think 5 to 15 years in prison for that crime. What makes this any different?

  •  10-04-2008, 4:50 PM 3520369 in reply to 3455748

    Re: Cecilia & Jenna's Law

    I've never studied law and I don't think I could do a very job of wording any laws.  But I do believe there should be a law on the books that punishes parents for leaving their children in their car -- for any reason and under all circumstances.  Until they make a new law to punish the "forgetful" parents, children will continue to die.  (I watched the  Opray show with Brenda on it.  Brenda stated it "wasn't a good experience" -- hmmm, imagine that.)  Our lawmakers should get their act together and do it.  That is what they are paid for.
View as RSS news feed in XML
Inergize Digital Media This site powered by Inergize Digital Media. The views expressed here do not necessarily reflect the views of this station.