« This just in... | Main | Iran seizes Iraqi oil well »

Loophole in Virginia State Law Allows Mother to Kill Her Newborn

Matt at Creative Minority Report tells us of a woman in Virginia who gave birth and then suffocated her baby immediately afterward and what she did was completely legal. The police can't charge her with a crime because the state of Virginia has a loophole that allows women who have just given birth to kill their babies if the placenta is still in the them and the umbilical cord is still attached to the baby. She is guilty as sin of infanticide but free as a bird. This is what an investigator said about this case:

"In the state of Virginia, as long as the umbilical cord is attached and [the] placenta is still in the mother, if the baby comes out alive, the mother can do whatever she wants to that baby to kill it," Emerson reports. "She can shoot the baby, stab the baby or anything as long as it is still attached to her in some form by umbilical cord or something, and it's no crime in the state of Virginia."

That woman could have blown that poor baby away with a shot gun and the police couldn't do anything. The people who call themselves legislators in Virginia need to get their priorities straight and fix this. If they can ban partial-birth abortions, they sure as hell can ban post-birth abortions, too.


TrackBack URL for this entry:

Comments (13)

Just another case where the... (Below threshold)

Just another case where the law and common sense part.

This is the most disgusting... (Below threshold)

This is the most disgusting thing that I have ever read. If this loophole was "known" (and surely it was), the the legislators in Virgina - EVERY. SINGLE. ONE. OF. THEM. - have blood on their hands.

Hey. As our brilliant Prece... (Below threshold)
Dr Carlo Lombardi:

Hey. As our brilliant Precedent has said: "You want her punished with a baby?"

I suspect that this loophol... (Below threshold)

I suspect that this loophole is going to be closed by the Virginia state legislature very quickly.

I hope.

Oh my gawd, what a sick, si... (Below threshold)

Oh my gawd, what a sick, sick, sick woman.

Since a father to a child c... (Below threshold)

Since a father to a child can be required to pay child support until the child reaches eighteeen years of age, he should have the right to end the child's life at any time in that period. If you choose to disagree with me, you are a sexist. Abortion rights should apply to both parents equally!

If the baby does not look l... (Below threshold)

If the baby does not look like the daddy, the woman can save her marriage.

I am sure that if they wanted to, there would be some other law that she violated.

I bet the people who hate cruelty to animals, I am not one of them, totally support this woman's choice...

But if you accedently blow ... (Below threshold)

But if you accedently blow up a endangred lizard you get 20 years in prison and a fine of 250:000 pasaquas

So I'm really interested in... (Below threshold)

So I'm really interested in the pro-abortion perspective on this. Not from the standpoint of a gotcha question, but really what kind of thought process goes on in their head with this. Are they OK with it from the mother's choice even if they may find it revolting personally? How does the abortion argument, and privacy, and choice work for them in this case? Personally I'm appalled beyond anything that this could actually be allowed to happen without consequence.

Little interested in what s... (Below threshold)

Little interested in what sick bastard decided that infantacide was ok as long as the baby still had an umbilical cord. Someone had to right in that crazy loop hole.
Who would have thought that life begins when the umbilical cord is cut or the placenta is passed?

Murder 1... (Below threshold)

Murder 1

Some call it ABORTION in re... (Below threshold)

Some call it ABORTION in reality its MURDER

So I'm really interested... (Below threshold)
Jeff Blogworthy:

So I'm really interested in the pro-abortion perspective on this.

I'm not pro-abortion and it is difficult for me to comprehend the mindset. However, this is my thought. The pro-abortionist sees the child as property -- nothing more or less. As mere property, the owner is free to dispose of it as she wishes. This should sound familiar. The self-righteous ones want us to believe they would have opposed slavery. Right.






Follow Wizbang

Follow Wizbang on FacebookFollow Wizbang on TwitterSubscribe to Wizbang feedWizbang Mobile


Send e-mail tips to us:

[email protected]

Fresh Links


Section Editor: Maggie Whitton

Editors: Jay Tea, Lorie Byrd, Kim Priestap, DJ Drummond, Michael Laprarie, Baron Von Ottomatic, Shawn Mallow, Rick, Dan Karipides, Michael Avitablile, Charlie Quidnunc, Steve Schippert

Emeritus: Paul, Mary Katherine Ham, Jim Addison, Alexander K. McClure, Cassy Fiano, Bill Jempty, John Stansbury, Rob Port

In Memorium: HughS

All original content copyright © 2003-2010 by Wizbang®, LLC. All rights reserved. Wizbang® is a registered service mark.

Powered by Movable Type Pro 4.361

Hosting by ServInt

Ratings on this site are powered by the Ajax Ratings Pro plugin for Movable Type.

Search on this site is powered by the FastSearch plugin for Movable Type.

Blogrolls on this site are powered by the MT-Blogroll.

Temporary site design is based on Cutline and Cutline for MT. Graphics by Apothegm Designs.

Author Login

Terms Of Service

DCMA Compliance Notice

Privacy Policy