Mom stands accused of killing baby with methamphetamine tainted breast milk

Status
Not open for further replies.
well the prosecution could argue 3 things:
1) she didn't know that breast feeding from a meth user transferred to her baby, which really everyone knows. then they get involuntary manslaughter
2)that she knew it transferred but was a meth addict and didn't give enough of a fuck about her baby to quit. which we've seen all the time. crack babies got mommies. she would then get voluntary manslaughter.
3) the baby expenses were cuting into her meth habit, and she wanted to get rid of her baby in an indescrete manner. well its a strecth, but this would be murder

now in Texas, we'd go for #3, but really in california, she'll most likely be prosecuted by means of method 2. about what is the penalty for voluntary manslaughter in cali?
 
I believe that the women, if she did brestfeed is guilty...
(knowing first hand watching my neice be brest fed I have read many books and reserched alot for my sister wile she was pregnent) Did you poeple know that putting on normal nail polish can give the unborn baby birthdefects if the child is suseptable (sp?) to it?? Wile brestfeeding my sister never drank one drop of caffenated soda b/c we have read that it can harm the child, and once she did drink a half cup of pepsi..(she craved it soo much) wile brestfeeding and her child wouldnt go to sleep almost the whole night...of course she doesnt drink anything with caffene in it anymore...what im trying to say is that if that tiny amount of caffene effected my neice imagine what sort of effect meth would have on the baby? Babys happen to be NOT immune to anything when they are first born..unless the bitch did meth wile she was still preg....and then you have to think about second hand smoke in a closed room? The women should be booked in my opinion...shes a dumb selfish crackhead that had no right having the baby in the first place...seriously this makes me sick to think that anyone would even smoke a cig around a baby...and for me even drink soda or not feed their baby organic food (but this is my opinion) I think they should shoot her ass up with so much meth she O.D.'s and see how much her baby suffered...but thats just me...((sorry if i was stating the obvious))
 
In Baby Murder Trial, 2 Views of Mom
Accused of allowing the boy to ingest meth, Amy Prien of Riverside County is portrayed as a conscientious mother or a negligent addict.

By Lance Pugmire, Times Staff Writer

Amid emotional testimony Tuesday, prosecution and defense attorneys presented jurors with starkly divergent characterizations of a Perris woman on trial for allegedly killing her 3-month-old son.

From these perspectives, Amy Prien, 31, was either a loving mother or a negligent methamphetamine addict. Prien is charged with murdering her son in January 2002 by allowing him to ingest a lethal amount of meth, possibly through her breast milk.

She wiped away tears with her sleeve as defense witness Jack Haskins told jurors about his relationship with his late grandson, Jacob Wesley Smith.

"I deeply fell in love with Jacob; he was a wonderful baby," said Haskins, the boy's paternal grandfather. "I bonded with him instantly. He never cried. He laughed and smiled with me. He'd lay in my arms and he'd absolutely listen to me."

Stephen Yagman, Prien's attorney, also called Prien's former boss and one of her former Mead Valley neighbors to the stand. They told jurors they considered Prien a good mother who never showed signs of methamphetamine use.

"I can't imagine [Prien] hurting her child in any way," said Mark Eades, the former neighbor, who added that a murder conviction "would be wrong."

In her cross-examination, Riverside County supervising Deputy Dist. Atty. Allison Nelson confronted defense witnesses about Prien's drug use, asking Prien's former boss, Charles Bonner of Corona, "Do drug addicts make good parents?" and "Do good parents take the limited resources they have and spend them on drugs?"

Bonner said that, in Prien's case, it would not change his opinion that she is a conscientious mother.

Yagman's first defense witness was Denise Ferris, deputy county coroner. He questioned her about her signatures on three differing death certificates in the case.

The first certificate, issued the month the baby died, said the manner of death was pending, with such elements as toxicology results awaited. An amended certificate, dated April 4, 2002, labels the manner of death an "accident." The third certificate, dated July 15, 2002, says the manner of death was "homicide."

Asked why the change was made, Ferris described a policy change in the sheriff-coroner's office about such classifications, because there appeared to be neglect in the case. The new policy went into effect after April 4, thus the change in manner of death on the final certificate.

Outside court, Yagman said, "Our theory is the district attorney got them to change it."

During a jury break Tuesday, Judge W. Charles Morgan rejected a defense request to dismiss two misdemeanor charges against Prien for allegedly being under the influence of a controlled substance during the time of her son's death.

http://www.latimes.com/news/local/la-me-prien27aug27,1,626594.story
 
BlueAdonis said:
You don't think that before women start to breast feed, they read up on it, and do some research before allowing their newborn child to suck out one of their bodily fluids? I would imagine any concerned mother (or 'informed' at best) would look into what and what doesn't pass through her breast milk.

In my opinion, yes, she should be charged. It may have been involuntarily, but she was the cause of the babies death. How the hell can you argue with something like this:
Click to expand...

I couldn't agree more. This story makes me sick - ignorance is no excuse.
 
Either way, the district attorney notching up homicide on the coroners certificate is just bullshit. Is it true that many district attorney's in the states have political aspirations and they further this by getting big headlines on their cases?

Don't get me wrong the mother should see jailtime, but her other children will also suffer. The entire situation is tragic, there can be no winners out of this no matter what comes of it. But that storey comes accross as looking for a linching party, not a trial.

Cuddles :(
 
Last edited:
the mothers baby didnt die just because of a simple accident, she was doing something illegal and it killer her baby.
 
^^^I concur.

cuddlefish, mods are allowed to use the word "whore" too. It's not as if he was using it to refer to another member of the board. :\

Sometimes we just have to call 'em like we see 'em, right?
 
Using the word whore is not what I'm objecting to.

What a sorry assed whore.
Click to expand...

Is not fuckin' appropriate to the situation and does not contribute to the discussion. Empathy/sympathy seems be foreign words to you two.

ElaStic Clouds:
the mothers baby didnt die just because of a simple accident, she was doing something illegal and it killer her baby.
Click to expand...
Maybe you just worded that wrong but if you have objections to doing something illegal why are you a member of this board. What she did was not just illegal but incredibly stupid and selfish. She will carry this for the rest of her life. Part of me wonders if this was more amoral than immoral.

Like I said before she needs to be punished but going to town on her is going to do no good. I wonder if a little more effort went into education as opposed to vilification, more of these situations might be avoided.

I just believe prevention is the best approach. This is a classic case of a system which has completely failed.

Cuddles :X

*puts on flame retardant suit*
 
Actually, I was starting my own discussion, within this thread, as to what a sorry excuse for a human being this woman appears to be.
Click to expand...

You started a discussion with the words "What a sorry assed whore" ?

Whoa, how do you go about ordering pizza?

If you don't want to participate in my discussion, feel free to exclude yourself from it.
Click to expand...

Something tells me I'm not going to have to do much to avoid such a discussion, given that you started it with those most eloquent and insightful of conversation starters, "What a sorry assed whore". I think Walt Whitman wrote a poem titled What a sorry assed whore.

So, {edit - I am a mean person who cannot argue without calling people mean names} , let's see what there is to discuss about this sorry assed whore. Yeah, don't you just hate people who hurt other people. I mean, pick up a telephone book. I think the best way to discriminate between those who I choose to vilify and ignore are the ones the media chooses to focus on as well. I don't need to think for myself.

Cool, now that that's out of the way, and that discussion has run as far as it could ever go, I have a discussion topic I'd like to bring in...if I may, forgotten.

I really don't think this women, or anyone in her category of criminal intent (given that she had no criminal intent) should ever be imprisoned. I think the courts should be more creative. She should have to serve 1000 hours community service in a baby clinic, or something that relates to her crime. She had no criminal intent, or premeditation, and so there's no reason to believe that she will willfully harm anyone else in the future, and so does not need to be kept separated from society. There's no need to protect anyone from this woman, because she had no criminal intent in the first place.

You see, forgotten, {edit - this has nothing to do with Drugs In The Media, and I must have nothing better to do than release agression on a fellow bluelighter in a less-than-mature manner}
 
Last edited by a moderator:
^^^Ohhhh! beaten to to it. Nicely put

What a sorry assed whore is supposed to generate new discusion within the thread? How old are you?

I have sympathy for the woman, and I'm sorry that she has to go through something so tragic. On the other hand, if she wasn't such a sorry assed whore, this probably wouldn't have happened.
Click to expand...

Ohhh, sarcasm the lowest form of humour *bows*

I hope you don't go out to pubs and have discussions like this. Wait...... maybe I do.

Now that's sympathy for you. Or is that too subtle.

Cuddles;)
 
Last edited:
The woman had intent on doing drugs
Click to expand...

No, the woman did drugs. Intent...no, she did drugs.

It's the same thing as getting wasted, and getting behind the wheel of a car.
Click to expand...

actually, that raises an interesting point. In writing my post I left that out as an example. In terms of my argument, it's the exact opposite. A person who kills someone whilst behind the wheel of a car whilst drunk, is someone who understands the danger they are putting other people in. Thus, people need to be protected from these drunken maniacs. There is the danger that having understood the danger of driving drunk one time, they may do it again, because they understood the danger and the law. More to the point, there is no law against breast-feeding whilst having a meth content in your blood. Incidentally, it is not illegal to have meth in your blood, only on your person.

This woman did not understand the danger she was putting her child in, and as such cannot be, under the same logical premise, considered a danger for reoffending in a similar manner. For a definition of logical premise goto a philosophical dictionary. Search in google.

"pub"
Click to expand...

Please don't ever come to Australia, for my sake, I might meet you.

{edit- again, this has nothing to do with the purpose of this forum. Please continue insulting each other over Instant Messenger, thanks}
 
Last edited by a moderator:
cuddlefish- I wasn't being sarcastic. If I were to introduce this topic at any "pub" around here, I'm sure all the patrons would feel the same way I do.
Click to expand...

I'm not surprised by that statement, I've heard that in the south one risks being ostracized or banised for the crime of expressing an alternate view.

And since you brought it up, if you were to introduce this topic at any "pub" around here and argue your point in the same fashion you would probably be missing a couple of teeth by the end of the ensuing melee.

Cuddles :)

*Gloves up*
 
Last edited:
cuddlefish, im not objecting to doing something illegal, and this board is certainly not illegal. if she died of meth abuse then TS to her, but it affected someone else, on top of that it was an innocent baby. i just wanted my 2 cents.
 
forgotten is right. there really is no way she wouldn't have known that her breast milk had meth in it.

i already made a similar post above, but i will reiterate...
I can guarantee you she knew this, but she was a meth addict and did not have enough will power to stop doing it for the sake of her baby. it was in her hopes that there would not be enough meth in her breast milk to kill her baby but she was wrong. its tragic, and in her mind she thought the chances were very low that anything would happen. And since giving up meth is extremely difficult, the risk was worth it. But something did happen, and she has to accept the consequence

there was criminal intent and she commited voluntary manslaughter
 
Last edited:
although i will admit that forgotten was a bit harsh. A LOT of people would have done what she did if they though the risks were low enough.

i mean honestly, how many people have gotten behind the wheel while intoxicated, or gotten drunk or high while babysitting small children, or kept a gun where others could get to it. if not you then prolly someone you know. but they got away with it. would you call them sorry assed whores as well?

this isn't directed at you forgotten, but to everyone who made a similar reaction
 
Hazzar!!...Disscussion. {no personal attacks on other posters of this forum, please} forgotten is learning. I'm not arguing that innorance is a defence by any means (see first post P1) but there are some really stupid people out there.

Bowdenta: There's no way she would not have known that her milk would not have meth in it? I think that's a pretty strong conclusion from the limited information that we have. Does formula cost much? If she knew, I'd think that she would have spent the extra few dollars and used formula to feed the child when she was using.

My original objection is to the changing of the death certificate. Homicide is a bit of a stretch. I have my own strong opinion.
I can guarantee that she did not intend to kill her baby.

THE WOOD: Scum she may be but we do not have enough information on the circumstances or the situation to judge.

Ahhh mob mentality

Cuddles ;)
 
Last edited by a moderator:
Status
Not open for further replies.
Top