Defendant, who was born and raised in Taiwan, married Thomas L. in 2001 and became a stepmother to his young daughter, T.L. Thomas’s previous wife died of cancer when T.L. was around two years old. Thomas and defendant had a daughter together, and defendant stayed home to care for the two girls. On May 11, 2004, defendant beat and strangled six-year-old T.L. into a persistent vegetative state when defendant became enraged by T.L.’s dishonesty and disobedience. According to defense witnesses, which included several family members and church associates, defendant’s violent outburst was uncharacteristic because she loved T.L. and was a very caring person. Various psychotherapists testified the episode likely was the result of defendant’s own abusive upbringing; her rigid culturally-influenced attitudes about her role as a wife and mother and a child’s duty to unquestioningly obey parental authority; and defendant’s mental problems, including depression and possibly post-traumatic stress syndrome. According to them, these and other factors culminated in her explosion into an atypical rage on the night in question. Whether or not defendant’s behavior was out of character is irrelevant to the tragic consequences suffered by T.L. Defendant’s statement to Detective Charles Husted revealed that she completely overreacted to behavior that is typical of a six-year-old child. The statement recounted the following events: Around 9:00 p.m., defendant observed T.L. grab or push her younger sister, who was 16 months old. When defendant questioned T.L. about what had happened, T.L. lied and stated she had been playing with a stuffed animal. Defendant confronted T.L. about the lie, spanked her repeatedly on the buttocks and hands, slapped her across the face four or five times, and pulled on her ears. After T.L. apologized for lying, they hugged and defendant then sent the child to stand in the bathroom for a time-out. When Thomas telephoned defendant around 10:00 p.m., she did not mention punishing T.L. After the phone call, defendant went to check on T.L., who had been in the bathroom about an hour. T.L. was sitting down rather than standing up as defendant had instructed her. Because defendant did not want to wake the baby, who was sleeping in a room near the bathroom, defendant hauled T.L. by the neck to the master bedroom walk-in closet. Defendant scolded T.L. and when she did not receive a satisfactory response, defendant spanked the child five or six times on the buttocks with a plastic hanger, breaking the hanger in the process. Still angry, defendant continued to press T.L. about her lying and asked, “What if I told you I won’t push you again, but I did? I lied to you. I’m lying to you. How do you feel?” Defendant pushed T.L., who fell to the floor and hit her head. Defendant heard a big bump and T.L. said it hurt. Defendant made the girl stand up and then pushed her to the floor again. T.L. blinked her eyes and then closed them. T.L. did not wake up despite defendant’s repeated attempts to arouse her. Defendant assumed T.L. had fallen asleep from exhaustion or was pretending to be asleep so that she did not have to deal with defendant. Defendant carried T.L. to bed and covered her with a blanket. Although defendant claimed that she did not realize T.L. was unconscious, her claim is belied by the fact she put a diaper on the six-year-old child to ensure that she did not wet the bed. Defendant checked on T.L. twice during the night. When she was still unresponsive at 6:00 a.m. the next morning, defendant called a friend in New Jersey, who suggested that defendant call someone who lived closer. Defendant telephoned a woman, who attended the same church in Oakland. The woman told defendant to take T.L. to the hospital immediately. Upon her arrival at the emergency room, T.L. was lethargic and limp, her eyes were closed, and her breathing was shallow. Defendant admitted hitting T.L. and asked a nurse not to call social services. Detective Husted responded to a child abuse call and interviewed defendant later that day, during which she made the statements we have summarized above. Dr. Angela Rosas, a pediatrician specializing in child abuse cases, examined T.L., who was comatose, completely unresponsive even to painful stimuli, and on a ventilator. Her pupils were fixed and dilated, indicating serious injury to the deep parts of her brain. T.L. had multiple bruises and injuries all over her body, including small bruises called petechiae on her face, neck, chest and shoulders, bleeding from her mouth, bruises on both ears, abrasions to her lips, and multiple linear bruises on her lower back and buttocks. The linear bruises were consistent with being beaten forcefully with a hanger. Dr. Rosas also observed petechiae and bruises around T.L.’s neck and chin, consistent with grab marks and strangulation. Her suspicions regarding strangulation were confirmed when she reviewed the scans of T.L.’s brain, which disclosed a “classic” asphyxiation injury. The scans showed swelling and severe oxygen deficit, which Rosas opined was caused by the compression and obstruction of T.L.’s windpipe for around four to six minutes, or by a partial obstruction for a longer period of time. All of the child’s brain tissue was destroyed, except for the portion that controlled her breathing. She was in a persistent vegetative state. If T.L. had received medical care significantly earlier, she would have had a better outcome. According to Dr. Rosas, T.L. also had a moderate subdural hematoma on the left side of her head. This is a collection of blood between the brain and the surrounding casing, and is usually caused by an impact injury. The injury was consistent with T.L. hitting her head on the closet floor. In Rosas’s opinion, the hematoma did not contribute to T.L.’s persistent vegetative state, but it had contributed to her need to be hospitalized. Dr. Rosas concluded that the strangulation occurred after defendant beat T.L. with the hanger and pushed her to the ground. This was so because if T.L. had been asphyxiated first, she would not have been able to stand up for the beating or to be shoved to the ground. According to Rosas, T.L. will never be able to see, talk, hear, walk, or eat again. When Detective Husted told defendant that it looked as if someone had choked T.L., defendant admitted she had pulled T.L. up from the floor with both hands around her neck, but she denied that she had squeezed her neck. The jury convicted defendant of three counts of corporal injury to a child based on defendant beating T.L. with a hanger (count four), causing a subdural hematoma when she pushed T.L. to the floor (count three), and asphyxiating T.L. until she almost died (count two). The jury also convicted defendant of willful harm to a child based on defendant’s failure to obtain medical care for T.L. in a timely manner (count five). [此贴子已经被作者于2010/12/29 22:23:44编辑过]
不明白这个男人是不是中邪了，还要judge和jury show mercy on her, she did not show mercy on little Truly. 可惜即使重新起诉，first degree murder也不大可能，也就不会有death sentence了，顶多是second degree murder.
不明白这个男人是不是中邪了，还要judge和jury show mercy on her, she did not show mercy on little Truly. 可惜即使重新起诉，first degree murder也不大可能，也就不会有death sentence了，顶多是second degree murder.
中文报道很误导。read the following report, that's not at all as"并打罗信洁巴掌，用衣架打她屁股，然后将她推倒在更衣间里" 以下是引用gclara在12/29/2010 10:22:00 PM的发言：
Defendant, who was born and raised in Taiwan, married Thomas L. in 2001 and became a stepmother to his young daughter, T.L. Thomas’s previous wife died of cancer when T.L. was around two years old. Thomas and defendant had a daughter together, and defendant stayed home to care for the two girls. On May 11, 2004, defendant beat and strangled six-year-old T.L. into a persistent vegetative state when defendant became enraged by T.L.’s dishonesty and disobedience. According to defense witnesses, which included several family members and church associates, defendant’s violent outburst was uncharacteristic because she loved T.L. and was a very caring person. Various psychotherapists testified the episode likely was the result of defendant’s own abusive upbringing; her rigid culturally-influenced attitudes about her role as a wife and mother and a child’s duty to unquestioningly obey parental authority; and defendant’s mental problems, including depression and possibly post-traumatic stress syndrome. According to them, these and other factors culminated in her explosion into an atypical rage on the night in question. Whether or not defendant’s behavior was out of character is irrelevant to the tragic consequences suffered by T.L. Defendant’s statement to Detective Charles Husted revealed that she completely overreacted to behavior that is typical of a six-year-old child. The statement recounted the following events: Around 9:00 p.m., defendant observed T.L. grab or push her younger sister, who was 16 months old. When defendant questioned T.L. about what had happened, T.L. lied and stated she had been playing with a stuffed animal. Defendant confronted T.L. about the lie, spanked her repeatedly on the buttocks and hands, slapped her across the face four or five times, and pulled on her ears. After T.L. apologized for lying, they hugged and defendant then sent the child to stand in the bathroom for a time-out. When Thomas telephoned defendant around 10:00 p.m., she did not mention punishing T.L. After the phone call, defendant went to check on T.L., who had been in the bathroom about an hour. T.L. was sitting down rather than standing up as defendant had instructed her. Because defendant did not want to wake the baby, who was sleeping in a room near the bathroom, defendant hauled T.L. by the neck to the master bedroom walk-in closet. Defendant scolded T.L. and when she did not receive a satisfactory response, defendant spanked the child five or six times on the buttocks with a plastic hanger, breaking the hanger in the process. Still angry, defendant continued to press T.L. about her lying and asked, “What if I told you I won’t push you again, but I did? I lied to you. I’m lying to you. How do you feel?” Defendant pushed T.L., who fell to the floor and hit her head. Defendant heard a big bump and T.L. said it hurt. Defendant made the girl stand up and then pushed her to the floor again. T.L. blinked her eyes and then closed them. T.L. did not wake up despite defendant’s repeated attempts to arouse her. Defendant assumed T.L. had fallen asleep from exhaustion or was pretending to be asleep so that she did not have to deal with defendant. Defendant carried T.L. to bed and covered her with a blanket. Although defendant claimed that she did not realize T.L. was unconscious, her claim is belied by the fact she put a diaper on the six-year-old child to ensure that she did not wet the bed. Defendant checked on T.L. twice during the night. When she was still unresponsive at 6:00 a.m. the next morning, defendant called a friend in New Jersey, who suggested that defendant call someone who lived closer. Defendant telephoned a woman, who attended the same church in Oakland. The woman told defendant to take T.L. to the hospital immediately. Upon her arrival at the emergency room, T.L. was lethargic and limp, her eyes were closed, and her breathing was shallow. Defendant admitted hitting T.L. and asked a nurse not to call social services. Detective Husted responded to a child abuse call and interviewed defendant later that day, during which she made the statements we have summarized above. Dr. Angela Rosas, a pediatrician specializing in child abuse cases, examined T.L., who was comatose, completely unresponsive even to painful stimuli, and on a ventilator. Her pupils were fixed and dilated, indicating serious injury to the deep parts of her brain. T.L. had multiple bruises and injuries all over her body, including small bruises called petechiae on her face, neck, chest and shoulders, bleeding from her mouth, bruises on both ears, abrasions to her lips, and multiple linear bruises on her lower back and buttocks. The linear bruises were consistent with being beaten forcefully with a hanger. Dr. Rosas also observed petechiae and bruises around T.L.’s neck and chin, consistent with grab marks and strangulation. Her suspicions regarding strangulation were confirmed when she reviewed the scans of T.L.’s brain, which disclosed a “classic” asphyxiation injury. The scans showed swelling and severe oxygen deficit, which Rosas opined was caused by the compression and obstruction of T.L.’s windpipe for around four to six minutes, or by a partial obstruction for a longer period of time. All of the child’s brain tissue was destroyed, except for the portion that controlled her breathing. She was in a persistent vegetative state. If T.L. had received medical care significantly earlier, she would have had a better outcome. According to Dr. Rosas, T.L. also had a moderate subdural hematoma on the left side of her head. This is a collection of blood between the brain and the surrounding casing, and is usually caused by an impact injury. The injury was consistent with T.L. hitting her head on the closet floor. In Rosas’s opinion, the hematoma did not contribute to T.L.’s persistent vegetative state, but it had contributed to her need to be hospitalized. Dr. Rosas concluded that the strangulation occurred after defendant beat T.L. with the hanger and pushed her to the ground. This was so because if T.L. had been asphyxiated first, she would not have been able to stand up for the beating or to be shoved to the ground. According to Rosas, T.L. will never be able to see, talk, hear, walk, or eat again. When Detective Husted told defendant that it looked as if someone had choked T.L., defendant admitted she had pulled T.L. up from the floor with both hands around her neck, but she denied that she had squeezed her neck. The jury convicted defendant of three counts of corporal injury to a child based on defendant beating T.L. with a hanger (count four), causing a subdural hematoma when she pushed T.L. to the floor (count three), and asphyxiating T.L. until she almost died (count two). The jury also convicted defendant of willful harm to a child based on defendant’s failure to obtain medical care for T.L. in a timely manner (count five). [此贴子已经被作者于2010/12/29 22:23:44编辑过]
真是够狠的后妈!小孩子也下得了这么狠的手.这么多年的植物人到12岁去世,太残忍了.这女的真该弄去枪毙了.
这次生完老二，我要做个大手术，很害怕如果自己不幸Over，俩孩子可怎么办，
我是万万舍不得把孩子交给老公的，不是不相信他，而是不相信他将来找的后妈，除非老公书面保证永不再娶，可是不现实阿。
看了这个新闻，我更加下定决心，手术前把遗嘱立了，孩子交给我父母，劳工每个月给钱吧。
不知道為什麼這些華人新聞標題總喜歡用“或”，而且都用錯
港媒，台媒挺爱用这个词的，在不确定的情况下用这个字我觉得很妥当的呀， 文章也说了“罗信洁宣告死亡后，警方周日表示，高维莉可能会面临新的谋杀控罪，但是否会起诉仍将交由沙加缅度县地检处决定”，所以本来是否被控谋杀就是待定的
看来当妈了之后死皮赖脸也要好好活着啊。。。否则孩子就是这个小女孩一样的悲惨下场。
新闻上的，生活中的，现实看下来我就没见过一个好后妈。
这次生完老二，我要做个大手术，很害怕如果自己不幸Over，俩孩子可怎么办，
我是万万舍不得把孩子交给老公的，不是不相信他，而是不相信他将来找的后妈，除非老公书面保证永不再娶，可是不现实阿。
看了这个新闻，我更加下定决心，手术前把遗嘱立了，孩子交给我父母，劳工每个月给钱吧。
bless ，祝mm手术顺利！！！
这女的面相不是那么恶呢，怎么做出这么恶毒的事。可怜的小姑娘亲妈癌症死了，又被恶后妈打成这样
新闻上的，生活中的，现实看下来我就没见过一个好后妈。
这次生完老二，我要做个大手术，很害怕如果自己不幸Over，俩孩子可怎么办，
我是万万舍不得把孩子交给老公的，不是不相信他，而是不相信他将来找的后妈，除非老公书面保证永不再娶，可是不现实阿。
看了这个新闻，我更加下定决心，手术前把遗嘱立了，孩子交给我父母，劳工每个月给钱吧。
re，我也常担心自己万一不在了，孩子咋办
感觉男主人挺苦的，先是前妻死了，然后大女儿成了植物人，6年后也死了。现在的妻子重罪坐牢，小女儿怕也要有阴影。什么人生啊
他苦什么啊，大女儿的死和他有密不可分的关系。女儿有再大的错（一个那么小的女儿能多么罪大恶极？），他一个当爹的也不能看着后妻那么虐待她
新闻上的，生活中的，现实看下来我就没见过一个好后妈。
这次生完老二，我要做个大手术，很害怕如果自己不幸Over，俩孩子可怎么办，
我是万万舍不得把孩子交给老公的，不是不相信他，而是不相信他将来找的后妈，除非老公书面保证永不再娶，可是不现实阿。
看了这个新闻，我更加下定决心，手术前把遗嘱立了，孩子交给我父母，劳工每个月给钱吧。
纯疑问，法律上可行么？
新闻上的，生活中的，现实看下来我就没见过一个好后妈。
这次生完老二，我要做个大手术，很害怕如果自己不幸Over，俩孩子可怎么办，
我是万万舍不得把孩子交给老公的，不是不相信他，而是不相信他将来找的后妈，除非老公书面保证永不再娶，可是不现实阿。
看了这个新闻，我更加下定决心，手术前把遗嘱立了，孩子交给我父母，劳工每个月给钱吧。
bless you!
哎，没妈的孩子真可怜。
Defendant, who was born and raised in Taiwan, married Thomas L. in 2001 and became a stepmother to his young daughter, T.L. Thomas’s previous wife died of cancer when T.L. was around two years old. Thomas and defendant had a daughter together, and defendant stayed home to care for the two girls.
On May 11, 2004, defendant beat and strangled six-year-old T.L. into a persistent vegetative state when defendant became enraged by T.L.’s dishonesty and disobedience.
According to defense witnesses, which included several family members and church associates, defendant’s violent outburst was uncharacteristic because she loved T.L. and was a very caring person. Various psychotherapists testified the episode likely was the result of defendant’s own abusive upbringing; her rigid culturally-influenced attitudes about her role as a wife and mother and a child’s duty to unquestioningly obey parental authority; and defendant’s mental problems, including depression and possibly post-traumatic stress syndrome. According to them, these and other factors culminated in her explosion into an atypical rage on the night in question.
Whether or not defendant’s behavior was out of character is irrelevant to the tragic consequences suffered by T.L. Defendant’s statement to Detective Charles Husted revealed that she completely overreacted to behavior that is typical of a six-year-old child. The statement recounted the following events:
Around 9:00 p.m., defendant observed T.L. grab or push her younger sister, who was 16 months old. When defendant questioned T.L. about what had happened, T.L. lied and stated she had been playing with a stuffed animal. Defendant confronted T.L. about the lie, spanked her repeatedly on the buttocks and hands, slapped her across the face four or five times, and pulled on her ears. After T.L. apologized for lying, they hugged and defendant then sent the child to stand in the bathroom for a time-out.
When Thomas telephoned defendant around 10:00 p.m., she did not mention punishing T.L. After the phone call, defendant went to check on T.L., who had been in the bathroom about an hour. T.L. was sitting down rather than standing up as defendant had instructed her. Because defendant did not want to wake the baby, who was sleeping in a room near the bathroom, defendant hauled T.L. by the neck to the master bedroom walk-in closet. Defendant scolded T.L. and when she did not receive a satisfactory response, defendant spanked the child five or six times on the buttocks with a plastic hanger, breaking the hanger in the process.
Still angry, defendant continued to press T.L. about her lying and asked, “What if I told you I won’t push you again, but I did? I lied to you. I’m lying to you. How do you feel?” Defendant pushed T.L., who fell to the floor and hit her head. Defendant heard a big bump and T.L. said it hurt. Defendant made the girl stand up and then pushed her to the floor again. T.L. blinked her eyes and then closed them. T.L. did not wake up despite defendant’s repeated attempts to arouse her. Defendant assumed T.L. had fallen asleep from exhaustion or was pretending to be asleep so that she did not have to deal with defendant. Defendant carried T.L. to bed and covered her with a blanket. Although defendant claimed that she did not realize T.L. was unconscious, her claim is belied by the fact she put a diaper on the six-year-old child to ensure that she did not wet the bed.
Defendant checked on T.L. twice during the night. When she was still unresponsive at 6:00 a.m. the next morning, defendant called a friend in New Jersey, who suggested that defendant call someone who lived closer. Defendant telephoned a woman, who attended the same church in Oakland. The woman told defendant to take T.L. to the hospital immediately.
Upon her arrival at the emergency room, T.L. was lethargic and limp, her eyes were closed, and her breathing was shallow. Defendant admitted hitting T.L. and asked a nurse not to call social services. Detective Husted responded to a child abuse call and interviewed defendant later that day, during which she made the statements we have summarized above.
Dr. Angela Rosas, a pediatrician specializing in child abuse cases, examined T.L., who was comatose, completely unresponsive even to painful stimuli, and on a ventilator. Her pupils were fixed and dilated, indicating serious injury to the deep parts of her brain. T.L. had multiple bruises and injuries all over her body, including small bruises called petechiae on her face, neck, chest and shoulders, bleeding from her mouth, bruises on both ears, abrasions to her lips, and multiple linear bruises on her lower back and buttocks. The linear bruises were consistent with being beaten forcefully with a hanger.
Dr. Rosas also observed petechiae and bruises around T.L.’s neck and chin, consistent with grab marks and strangulation. Her suspicions regarding strangulation were confirmed when she reviewed the scans of T.L.’s brain, which disclosed a “classic” asphyxiation injury. The scans showed swelling and severe oxygen deficit, which Rosas opined was caused by the compression and obstruction of T.L.’s windpipe for around four to six minutes, or by a partial obstruction for a longer period of time. All of the child’s brain tissue was destroyed, except for the portion that controlled her breathing. She was in a persistent vegetative state. If T.L. had received medical care significantly earlier, she would have had a better outcome.
According to Dr. Rosas, T.L. also had a moderate subdural hematoma on the left side of her head. This is a collection of blood between the brain and the surrounding casing, and is usually caused by an impact injury. The injury was consistent with T.L. hitting her head on the closet floor. In Rosas’s opinion, the hematoma did not contribute to T.L.’s persistent vegetative state, but it had contributed to her need to be hospitalized.
Dr. Rosas concluded that the strangulation occurred after defendant beat T.L. with the hanger and pushed her to the ground. This was so because if T.L. had been asphyxiated first, she would not have been able to stand up for the beating or to be shoved to the ground. According to Rosas, T.L. will never be able to see, talk, hear, walk, or eat again.
When Detective Husted told defendant that it looked as if someone had choked T.L., defendant admitted she had pulled T.L. up from the floor with both hands around her neck, but she denied that she had squeezed her neck.
The jury convicted defendant of three counts of corporal injury to a child based on defendant beating T.L. with a hanger (count four), causing a subdural hematoma when she pushed T.L. to the floor (count three), and asphyxiating T.L. until she almost died (count two). The jury also convicted defendant of willful harm to a child based on defendant’s failure to obtain medical care for T.L. in a timely manner (count five).
[此贴子已经被作者于2010/12/29 22:23:44编辑过]
亲生孩子跟非自己生的孩子的区别。这么晚了，这个男人上哪里去了？
死了，这种男人，活着也跟死了没区别
新闻上的，生活中的，现实看下来我就没见过一个好后妈。
这次生完老二，我要做个大手术，很害怕如果自己不幸Over，俩孩子可怎么办，
我是万万舍不得把孩子交给老公的，不是不相信他，而是不相信他将来找的后妈，除非老公书面保证永不再娶，可是不现实阿。
看了这个新闻，我更加下定决心，手术前把遗嘱立了，孩子交给我父母，劳工每个月给钱吧。
你没有这个权利吧！
这女人怎么没有自杀呢？还活着？16个月的亲生女儿也不要了？男人怎么晚上也不回家的？出差？
坏人不容易自杀的吧，想不开走绝路的通常是老好人大包子
可怜的小孩。。。
RE!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
★ Sent from iPhone App: iReader Huaren 3.8 - iPhone Lite
这女的面相不是那么恶呢，怎么做出这么恶毒的事。可怜的小姑娘亲妈癌症死了，又被恶后妈打成这样
不明白这个男人是不是中邪了，还要judge和jury show mercy on her, she did not show mercy on little Truly. 可惜即使重新起诉，first degree murder也不大可能，也就不会有death sentence了，顶多是second degree murder.
这种人就要让她在监狱里尝尝被人虐待的滋味，让她死太便宜她了，要让她生不如死
气人啊，把孩子打晕了这么久还到第二天才说，这女人真是该死，我真是生气。
他们LD，老公在湾区挣钱。估计每个礼拜回来一次。
沒媽的孩子像棵草。。
★ Sent from iPhone App: iReader Huaren 3.8 - iPhone Lite
新闻上的，生活中的，现实看下来我就没见过一个好后妈。
这次生完老二，我要做个大手术，很害怕如果自己不幸Over，俩孩子可怎么办，
我是万万舍不得把孩子交给老公的，不是不相信他，而是不相信他将来找的后妈，除非老公书面保证永不再娶，可是不现实阿。
看了这个新闻，我更加下定决心，手术前把遗嘱立了，孩子交给我父母，劳工每个月给钱吧。
bless mm!
what made 高 hated the girl so much? beat to death....sigh.
以下是引用gclara在12/29/2010 10:22:00 PM的发言：
Defendant, who was born and raised in Taiwan, married Thomas L. in 2001 and became a stepmother to his young daughter, T.L. Thomas’s previous wife died of cancer when T.L. was around two years old. Thomas and defendant had a daughter together, and defendant stayed home to care for the two girls.
On May 11, 2004, defendant beat and strangled six-year-old T.L. into a persistent vegetative state when defendant became enraged by T.L.’s dishonesty and disobedience.
According to defense witnesses, which included several family members and church associates, defendant’s violent outburst was uncharacteristic because she loved T.L. and was a very caring person. Various psychotherapists testified the episode likely was the result of defendant’s own abusive upbringing; her rigid culturally-influenced attitudes about her role as a wife and mother and a child’s duty to unquestioningly obey parental authority; and defendant’s mental problems, including depression and possibly post-traumatic stress syndrome. According to them, these and other factors culminated in her explosion into an atypical rage on the night in question.
Whether or not defendant’s behavior was out of character is irrelevant to the tragic consequences suffered by T.L. Defendant’s statement to Detective Charles Husted revealed that she completely overreacted to behavior that is typical of a six-year-old child. The statement recounted the following events:
Around 9:00 p.m., defendant observed T.L. grab or push her younger sister, who was 16 months old. When defendant questioned T.L. about what had happened, T.L. lied and stated she had been playing with a stuffed animal. Defendant confronted T.L. about the lie, spanked her repeatedly on the buttocks and hands, slapped her across the face four or five times, and pulled on her ears. After T.L. apologized for lying, they hugged and defendant then sent the child to stand in the bathroom for a time-out.
When Thomas telephoned defendant around 10:00 p.m., she did not mention punishing T.L. After the phone call, defendant went to check on T.L., who had been in the bathroom about an hour. T.L. was sitting down rather than standing up as defendant had instructed her. Because defendant did not want to wake the baby, who was sleeping in a room near the bathroom, defendant hauled T.L. by the neck to the master bedroom walk-in closet. Defendant scolded T.L. and when she did not receive a satisfactory response, defendant spanked the child five or six times on the buttocks with a plastic hanger, breaking the hanger in the process.
Still angry, defendant continued to press T.L. about her lying and asked, “What if I told you I won’t push you again, but I did? I lied to you. I’m lying to you. How do you feel?” Defendant pushed T.L., who fell to the floor and hit her head. Defendant heard a big bump and T.L. said it hurt. Defendant made the girl stand up and then pushed her to the floor again. T.L. blinked her eyes and then closed them. T.L. did not wake up despite defendant’s repeated attempts to arouse her. Defendant assumed T.L. had fallen asleep from exhaustion or was pretending to be asleep so that she did not have to deal with defendant. Defendant carried T.L. to bed and covered her with a blanket. Although defendant claimed that she did not realize T.L. was unconscious, her claim is belied by the fact she put a diaper on the six-year-old child to ensure that she did not wet the bed.
Defendant checked on T.L. twice during the night. When she was still unresponsive at 6:00 a.m. the next morning, defendant called a friend in New Jersey, who suggested that defendant call someone who lived closer. Defendant telephoned a woman, who attended the same church in Oakland. The woman told defendant to take T.L. to the hospital immediately.
Upon her arrival at the emergency room, T.L. was lethargic and limp, her eyes were closed, and her breathing was shallow. Defendant admitted hitting T.L. and asked a nurse not to call social services. Detective Husted responded to a child abuse call and interviewed defendant later that day, during which she made the statements we have summarized above.
Dr. Angela Rosas, a pediatrician specializing in child abuse cases, examined T.L., who was comatose, completely unresponsive even to painful stimuli, and on a ventilator. Her pupils were fixed and dilated, indicating serious injury to the deep parts of her brain. T.L. had multiple bruises and injuries all over her body, including small bruises called petechiae on her face, neck, chest and shoulders, bleeding from her mouth, bruises on both ears, abrasions to her lips, and multiple linear bruises on her lower back and buttocks. The linear bruises were consistent with being beaten forcefully with a hanger.
Dr. Rosas also observed petechiae and bruises around T.L.’s neck and chin, consistent with grab marks and strangulation. Her suspicions regarding strangulation were confirmed when she reviewed the scans of T.L.’s brain, which disclosed a “classic” asphyxiation injury. The scans showed swelling and severe oxygen deficit, which Rosas opined was caused by the compression and obstruction of T.L.’s windpipe for around four to six minutes, or by a partial obstruction for a longer period of time. All of the child’s brain tissue was destroyed, except for the portion that controlled her breathing. She was in a persistent vegetative state. If T.L. had received medical care significantly earlier, she would have had a better outcome.
According to Dr. Rosas, T.L. also had a moderate subdural hematoma on the left side of her head. This is a collection of blood between the brain and the surrounding casing, and is usually caused by an impact injury. The injury was consistent with T.L. hitting her head on the closet floor. In Rosas’s opinion, the hematoma did not contribute to T.L.’s persistent vegetative state, but it had contributed to her need to be hospitalized.
Dr. Rosas concluded that the strangulation occurred after defendant beat T.L. with the hanger and pushed her to the ground. This was so because if T.L. had been asphyxiated first, she would not have been able to stand up for the beating or to be shoved to the ground. According to Rosas, T.L. will never be able to see, talk, hear, walk, or eat again.
When Detective Husted told defendant that it looked as if someone had choked T.L., defendant admitted she had pulled T.L. up from the floor with both hands around her neck, but she denied that she had squeezed her neck.
The jury convicted defendant of three counts of corporal injury to a child based on defendant beating T.L. with a hanger (count four), causing a subdural hematoma when she pushed T.L. to the floor (count three), and asphyxiating T.L. until she almost died (count two). The jury also convicted defendant of willful harm to a child based on defendant’s failure to obtain medical care for T.L. in a timely manner (count five).
[此贴子已经被作者于2010/12/29 22:23:44编辑过]
新闻上的，生活中的，现实看下来我就没见过一个好后妈。
这次生完老二，我要做个大手术，很害怕如果自己不幸Over，俩孩子可怎么办，
我是万万舍不得把孩子交给老公的，不是不相信他，而是不相信他将来找的后妈，除非老公书面保证永不再娶，可是不现实阿。
看了这个新闻，我更加下定决心，手术前把遗嘱立了，孩子交给我父母，劳工每个月给钱吧。
Bless MM手术一切顺利！！！
狂点头
泼妇是中年已育妇女居多。有些当了妈的总是yy自己善良宽容，忘了对象仅限于自己的孩子
呵呵，你自己不就是现身说法的一个最好的例子吗？