Every once in awhile we hear in the news of a mother dropping off their newborn child at a safe spot such as a Firestation, hospital or a school with no questions asked within 72 hours of giving birth. Safe havens such as these give the option to indecisive mothers a chance to do something right for their baby and no one has to know. You have all probably read about the teen from The University of Southern California who gave birth to a child and dumped the baby in a trash bin behind a popular university restaurant (for all you USC students the 29th Street Cafe) in 2005, later found by a homeless man.
Holly Ashcraft, now 22 from Billings Montana is currently facing charges of involuntary manslaughter and child abuse for the alleged disposing of her newborn baby. This case has had a rollercoaster of decisions including first being charged three times for murder, having the case dismissed for lack of evidence, and today November 8th having her bail reduced by a judge. Seems to me that the authorities are going way to easy with this woman even though she has done this before. The prosecutors in this case continue to believe that Ashcraft's baby was born alive and she dumped it in the trash bin in order to get rid of her son while the defense lawyer, Mark Geragos, continues to argue that there is no evidence Ashcraft knew she was pregnant or that the baby was born alive. Also arguing that putting the child in a box in the dumpster was not intentional. What kind of defense is that?
It seems to me that this would be an easy case to prosecute. A year before the baby was found in the alley behind a restaurant, Holly gave birth to a child in a dormitory bathroom in 2004; she claims the baby was still born. Holly had gone to a nearby clinic after giving birth complaining of bleeding, and after having been examined the doctor could tell she had just given birth. When asked by authorities if she was pregnant, Holly first denied ever having been pregnant but later admitted that she had given birth in a bathroom. The remains of the first child have never been found and Ashcraft was never tried or charged in connection to that case.
As I read more and more information on this case the more appalled I get. First of all, who could do this twice and get away with it? How could a judge let this woman to continue to live free? But I must give some credit to her defense lawyer for coming up with some clever defense tactics.
Not only does this woman need a psychological evaluation but she needs to go to jail. She intentionally took the life of her two children and is not suffering any consequences. Holly continues to say she is not guilty. Only time will tell if Holly will ever have to go to jail. But it seems the longer this case continues, the more lenient the circumstances are for this woman.
3 comments:
I agree. This case is right out of a Law and Order episode (literally — the producers based one SVU on the Ashcraft story). I think the circumstantial evidence that comes from Ashcraft having given birth once before (spending 9 mo. pregnant TWICE and still not recognizing the symptoms?!?!?) outweighs any "doubt" that the baby died before it was born. This is an appalling example of negligence.
As I re-read this post, I remember you referred earlier that the reason why there is so much much-ado-about-nothing going on might be due to the fact that there is so much difficulty and complication in trying to prove the still-born state of her baby that she dumped. Still, I feel that her first pregnancy should raise red flags and give them all the more reason to push aggressively rather than back away. Now that I think about it, I don't understand how/why her lawyers would want to defend someone like her. It's boggling.
It's amazing that Mark Geragos can sleep at night...
just an insane story and a blackeye for all humanity.
Post a Comment