|
Post by snowy111 on Oct 5, 2004 16:35:02 GMT -6
Does anyone know what is going on in the Cathy Henderson case? She is the one who dropped a 3 month old infant on its head and fled to Missouri to bury him in a card board box. One time I read somewhere she was going to sell the infant. Is that true?
|
|
Macklin
Inactive
The more clearly we see the sovereignty of God, the less preplexed we are by the calamities of men.
Posts: 1,701
|
Post by Macklin on Oct 7, 2004 16:39:52 GMT -6
I can't believe the lack of info on Cathy Henderson, can't seem to find anything but this letter to "Her Friends"... Where someone had the gonads to put this crap on a website: It does have her address on it. (gag, choke.....puke) =:~( Heaven forbid !!!! that she suffers for not having her in-cell crafts while the child she murdered does without it's life. www.ccadp.org/cathyhenderson.htm
|
|
|
Post by Guest on Oct 10, 2004 0:14:20 GMT -6
Here's some more in the same vein... www.nord-com.net/michael.moehring/cathy/www.todesstrafe-usa.de/death_penalty/voices_tx_henderson.htmTDCJ's info on her: www.tdcj.state.tx.us/statistics/deathrow/drowlist/hendrson.jpgAnd here's an article about the case before she was sentenced. For a woman with an IQ of 78, her pen pal requests seem very articulate. Copyright 1995 The Austin American-Statesman <br>Austin American-Statesman (Texas) View Related Topics <br>May 25, 1995 SECTION: City/State; Pg. B1 LENGTH: 817 words HEADLINE: Husband, sister say Henderson isn't a 'monster' BYLINE: BOB BANTA American Statesman Staff BODY: To Warren Henderson, convicted child-killer Cathy Lynn Henderson is a kind, religious woman. "The portrait of a monster they painted in court today is not the Cathy I know,'' said her husband. To Donetta Caldwell, Cathy Henderson's sister, she is as much a victim of fate as 3-month-old Brandon Baugh, the baby that a jury says Henderson killed on Jan. 21, 1994. "If Cathy could have gotten help, treatment, maybe this wouldn't have happened,'' said Caldwell. "Her childhood was very bad. She had no role model, no family.'' The 38-year-old baby sitter faces a jury today that will decide whether she will be executed for her crime or spend life behind bars. Henderson was convicted of capital murder May 17. Henderson's husband and sister stood tearfully outside Travis County Courtroom A on Wednesday, arguing that Henderson's tortured upbringing justifies sparing her from death by injection. Inside the courtroom, psychologist Dr. Cecil Reynolds testified that Henderson was raped when she was 6 and 11 years old. He also said that Henderson has a severe form of attention-deficit disorder and that she is "severely mentally ill.'' Her IQ is 78, almost low enough to be mentally retarded, Reynolds said. Life in prison, he said, would keep her from being a further threat to others as long as she is properly medicated and given intense psychotherapy. Henderson's sister and husband are hoping testimony by Reynolds and another psychologist, Dr. Jeff Ezell, who examined Henderson last year, will save Henderson from death. "Cathy never had a family,'' said Caldwell, 40. Witnesses testified Caldwell and Henderson lived with a drunken, promiscuous, abusive mother who finally abandoned her children. Caldwell, who works as a registered nurse in Illinois, said the only reason she did not end up like her sister is that she broke away from their dysfunctional mother early. "I got away from our mother when I was 8 years old,'' Caldwell said. "I went to live with my father, and I had a pretty good life. But Cathy had to live with her until she was 14.'' But Caldwell said even the short time she spent with her mother left her with some emotional scars that still influence her life. "I have a son, 19, and a daughter, 12, and I never spanked them,'' said Caldwell. "I was afraid to spank. I was fearful of what I might do. "I do have trouble with long- term relationships with men because of what I went through. But I have certainly done better than Cathy. She spent 14 years in that environment.'' Warren Henderson, 32, says his wife has never shown evidence of being homicidal, even though she lost custody of two daughters by a previous marriage because of abuse. He says she is a loving mother to the couple's 5-year-old daughter, even though he filed for a protective order in October 1993 to keep Henderson away from the girl. Warren Henderson testified last week that in the application for the protective order, he had said Cathy Henderson had thrown a shoe at Jennifer and mistreated the girl. But Warren Henderson withdrew the application a day later. Asked why, he said Wednesday that his accusations against his wife were not true. "I don't want to talk about it anymore. "All I can tell you is that in the six years we've been married, Cathy has done some very good things,'' he said. The question in court today is whether the kinder side of Cathy Lynn Henderson weighs heavily enough to convince 12 jurors that she should be spared death. For more than a week, prosecutors Robert Smith and Dayna Blazey have presented law officers and other witnesses who have testified in detail how Henderson smashed baby Brandon Baugh's head against an unknown, blunt object while baby sitting him in her home, buried his body in a wine cooler box near Temple and fled to Missouri, where she tried to live under an assumed name. Caldwell and Warren Henderson believe the death was not intentional. "Reckless, maybe. An accident,'' said Warren Henderson. "But I truly believe it was unintentional.'' Caldwell says Henderson's burial of the baby showed compassion. "It was a motherly thing,'' she said. "If she had killed that baby, she could have thrown it into a Dumpster.'' Arguments like those may not be enough. Jurors have listened tearfully to sheriff's deputies who detailed finding the baby's body, and several broke down studying autopsy photos of the child. They also heard prosecution witnesses such as psychiatrist Mary Anderson. After listening to a chronology of drug abuse, assaults and other details of Henderson's life, Anderson said that Henderson "has shown a lack of remorse. ... She is deceitful, angry and has no respect for the law.'' "Even in prison, anyone weaker or (who) has their back turned could be vulnerable,'' said Anderson. "If I were her cellmate, I wouldn't want her to be mad at me.'' LOAD-DATE: May 25, 1995 Document 11 of 11. Terms & Conditions Privacy Copyright © 2004 LexisNexis, a division of Reed Elsevier Inc. All Rights Reserved.
|
|
little child inside
Guest
|
Post by little child inside on Oct 10, 2004 7:44:06 GMT -6
While as I read what this woman did to this child and am appauled, this case hits closer to home and I do understand some of why she did what she did. Personally, she did not intentially kill the child. In her anger she snapped.
Now, the question is, where did her anger come from? Having been raped at 6 and 11 is something that can plant a deep seed of anger, hatred, and a feeling that you are worth nothing. I know, I was molested at a young age and it really screwed me up.
If someone does not get counseling and deal with what happened, that anger festers itself so far down inside that little things can set you off. Unfortunately, this little innocent child did something that brought back horrid memories and in a fit of anger, fear and frustration the child happened to be the target that was close.
This woman does not need to be executed. She needs to be in a hospital where she can get intense counseling and medication. I'm talking years, not a month or two. Something like this one does not get over in a few days or months. It's an ongoing battle of evil that one has to fight on a daily basis
I have said enough. Having read other threads on this board, I know I will be attacked for this view. I just had to express my feelings on the feelings of someone who was raped/ molested and abused at such a young age.
|
|
|
Post by RickZ on Oct 10, 2004 9:07:19 GMT -6
While as I read what this woman did to this child and am appauled, this case hits closer to home and I do understand some of why she did what she did. Personally, she did not intentially kill the child. In her anger she snapped. Now, the question is, where did her anger come from? Having been raped at 6 and 11 is something that can plant a deep seed of anger, hatred, and a feeling that you are worth nothing. I know, I was molested at a young age and it really screwed me up. If someone does not get counseling and deal with what happened, that anger festers itself so far down inside that little things can set you off. Unfortunately, this little innocent child did something that brought back horrid memories and in a fit of anger, fear and frustration the child happened to be the target that was close. This woman does not need to be executed. She needs to be in a hospital where she can get intense counseling and medication. I'm talking years, not a month or two. Something like this one does not get over in a few days or months. It's an ongoing battle of evil that one has to fight on a daily basis I have said enough. Having read other threads on this board, I know I will be attacked for this view. I just had to express my feelings on the feelings of someone who was raped/ molested and abused at such a young age. You won't be attacked by me. You've presented a cogent argument, replete with facts and logic. Who can argue with that? I can understand the snapped part. Way back when, my sister told me about my nephew, who was an infant. He had, unknown to all, an allergy to cow's milk, so he cried all the time. She'd feed him to quiet him, but he'd scream all the louder. She told me how frustrating and close run the situation was. But frustration is not an excuse. It is a reason, and possibly exculpatory as a factor. I could see Shaken Baby Syndrome as a better excuse, not bashing in his little head. But still, it's an excuse. The little one of three months could not possibly cause harm to the mother. As to the long-term trauma of sexual abuse, that, too, I understand. And I do agree that there are long term effects associated with this crime, which tends to be passed down to others in a spiral of depravity. People who break this cycle are true heroes for humanity uphold. But, again, where do we draw the line? At what point is someone legally responsible for their actions? Are these crimes signs of mental defect? No, I don't think so. Are these crimes results of mental disease? There is the question. At what point does depression allow someone to get away with murder? Even if depressed, to cause harm, for which one doesn't care but still knows is wrong? The 'knowing is wrong' part is the issue. Can a full-blown schizophrenic have a rational ability to understand his actions? But when you get into areas of depression and frustration and pent-up anger, the question really becomes at what point do you have legally accountable status? From the article in guest's post, I find the comment from the psychiatrist Mary Henderson very important: "After listening to a chronology of drug abuse, assaults and other details of Henderson's life, Anderson said that Henderson 'has shown a lack of remorse. . . . She is deceitful, angry and has no respect for the law. Even in prison, anyone weaker or (who) has their back turned could be vulnerable,' said Anderson. 'If I were her cellmate, I wouldn't want her to be mad at me.'" Stoicism in criminal cases such as this does not sit well with me. Nor does a continued pattern of violence while incarcerated. While I do find your argument has merit, I defer to the police, prosecutors, judge, and jury who heard this case. Things come out in trial that do not make the papers, only that which is suitable for pro-inmate web pages and fanzines. If her environment is to be judged guilty of this crime, then the opening for all sorts of environmental claims will be put forth. Justice will then not be served because the environment will be responsible, not any one individual. And to claim the burial of the dead child showed compassion is ludicrous. But even more thin an argument is this: "It was a motherly thing,'' she said. "If she had killed that baby, she could have thrown it into a Dumpster.'' As if burying to hide the evidence of a crime and throwing it in a dumpster like yesterday's trash excuses either act. 'little child inside', at what point in one's life is one held accountable for one's own individual, and oftentimes unique, actions? I believe this woman was responsible for the death of a child, buried the child to hide her crime, and fled to escape any punishment for the crime. She had knowledge of what she did in a fit of rage, and was cognizant enough to try to avoid legal culpability. Does even excersizing the God-given privilege of procreation after losing custody of her two children from a prior marriage for abuse not make her somehow responsible?
|
|
little child inside
Guest
|
Post by little child inside on Oct 10, 2004 12:02:30 GMT -6
You bring up some good questions and to be honest, I wish I had answers to them, but I don't. When I was 6 months old, my birth mother seriously injured me which almost caused my death. Years and years later finally seking counseling of all that happened to me, I asked the doctor what I did so wrong to make her hate me so much to have hurt me like that. Of course, her explanation of what happened showed that this was an "accident" and she didn't hurt me. The doctor toldme that she actually believes she was not at fault. He said sometimes people do such horrendous acts at the spur of the moment (heated anger, etc.) and then when they realize what they did (especially if it's to their own child) they actually rationalize that what happened was not their fault, it was truely an accident. I don't know if what this person says is true or not, but as a child growing up it helped with me trying to understand what I did so wrong to upset her. Of course, at six months I did nothing wrong, but a child's mind works in strange ways. I do have a question though about this article. Only one doctor was quoted as having testified at her trial. Usually during a trial like this the defense AND prosecution have their own doctors examine the defendent and testify. When I am able to hear the testimonies of both doctors, it is then that I make my opinion on the person. I just wonder only why one doctor? ?
|
|
|
Post by snowy111 on Oct 11, 2004 19:56:31 GMT -6
I'm a little confused about Cathy Henderson. She said the death was an accident. Was she angry while swinging the infant? She of course doesn't state that.
|
|
|
Post by tigress2864 on Oct 15, 2004 16:46:20 GMT -6
Let me start by clarifying that I am for the death penalty in the right cercumstances. This, however, is not one of them. I know that you cannot believe as fact, everthing that is said in a court room. The police will lie, the lawyers will lie and so will witnesses, prosecutors and defendants. We cannot always assume that what is said for or against a person is the truth. It can even depend on who is running for office. We don't know all the eveidence that was presented, or even if it was presented correctly. But on this case, what I have read, leads me to the conclusion that it WAS an accident. And I know that Cathy is not the monster she was portrayed as by the police, etc. I, like "little child inside" had a horrible childhood. It leaves scars that never heal. And it can trigger behavior that cannot be controlled. I believe that events happened as Cathy decribed, and that she panicked and made some wrong choices. What she did DOES NOT warrent the death penalty. The only way they could even get it was to throw "abduction" into the charges. There was no abduction. She was babysitting. The only fitting charges for this case are involuntary manslaughter, removing the body from the crime scene, and fleeing. Yes, she made some bad choices, but that's no reason for the death penalty. She has documented records to support the bad childhood and therefore support the fact that she panicked. So would I have, if this had been me. I cannot honestly say that I might not have reacted in a similar way. Can you? So let's not hastily judge someone when honestly we know nothing about what truly happened.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Oct 15, 2004 18:08:28 GMT -6
Let me start by clarifying that I am for the death penalty in the right cercumstances. This, however, is not one of them. I know that you cannot believe as fact, everthing that is said in a court room. The police will lie, the lawyers will lie and so will witnesses, prosecutors and defendants. We cannot always assume that what is said for or against a person is the truth. It can even depend on who is running for office. We don't know all the eveidence that was presented, or even if it was presented correctly. But on this case, what I have read, leads me to the conclusion that it WAS an accident. And I know that Cathy is not the monster she was portrayed as by the police, etc. I, like "little child inside" had a horrible childhood. It leaves scars that never heal. And it can trigger behavior that cannot be controlled. I believe that events happened as Cathy decribed, and that she panicked and made some wrong choices. What she did DOES NOT warrent the death penalty. The only way they could even get it was to throw "abduction" into the charges. There was no abduction. She was babysitting. The only fitting charges for this case are involuntary manslaughter, removing the body from the crime scene, and fleeing. Yes, she made some bad choices, but that's no reason for the death penalty. She has documented records to support the bad childhood and therefore support the fact that she panicked. So would I have, if this had been me. I cannot honestly say that I might not have reacted in a similar way. Can you? So let's not hastily judge someone when honestly we know nothing about what truly happened. YES! I can honestly tell you that I would NOT have reacted in the same way EVER! I had a crappy childhood too, but having a crappy childhood does NOT make one a murderer. Murder is a choice. There are hundreds, if not thousands of alternatives to what she could have done....murder should NOT have been one of them.
|
|
|
Post by anonymous on Oct 15, 2004 19:53:44 GMT -6
Not everyone reacts the same way as everyone else. We all deal with things differently. You cannot judge a person by what you would or would not do.
|
|
|
Post by snowy111 on Oct 16, 2004 12:02:15 GMT -6
Personally I don't know what her childhood had to do with this if she accidently killed the child. She should stick with the accidental death and leave her childhood out. The point is whether or not she intended to kill the child. That should be the only point.
|
|
|
Post by tigress2864 on Oct 16, 2004 21:17:22 GMT -6
In regard to what "curious" said...I didn't mean what you refer to as murder, as far as not knowing what you would do. I meant if an "accident" like that happened, reulting in a death, how can you say how you would react? I know I would probably panic. Unless you walk in someone else's shoes, you should not judge them. Especially if you do not know the truth of the incident.
|
|
|
Post by PK on Oct 16, 2004 22:08:05 GMT -6
After reading all the articles, her grammar doesn't indicate a low IQ. She says she did CPR on a dead baby for an hour and a half while the other children slept in front of the TV. If it was an accident, why didn't she call 911? In addition, everything she says is about her and her feelings. I expect her to be executed for the crime. I don't buy the innocent part. She lost her own children and you can bet she did something for that to happen. Many people have bad childhoods and don't become murderers. She called someone to watch her kids while she ran. She could have called for help when that baby was crying, before she escalated to total rage. From the appeal: In the other cases, the court: · Rejected the appeal of death row inmate Cathy Lynn Henderson. She was convicted in 1995 of slamming 3-month-old Brandon Baugh's head against a flat surface and shattering the base of his skull in 1994 in Travis County. Henderson, 38 when convicted, argued that the trial court illegally forced her attorneys to turn over maps of where Brandon was buried. The maps never were used in court and did not play a role in Henderson's conviction, the Texas Court of Criminal Appeals said in its ruling. According to trial witnesses, Henderson killed the child in her home, stuffed his body in a wine cooler carton and buried him in a rural field before fleeing to her native state of Missouri. When arrested in Independence, Mo., she admitted to a childhood friend that "she had killed someone ... a male" and that she wanted to change her identity, according to testimony. FBI agents said Henderson gave several stories about the baby's disappearance before finally saying he fell from her arms while she was answering the phone and hit his head on the floor. A medical examiner said that was impossible because of the severity of Brandon's fatal injuries. www.chron.com/content/chronicle/metropolitan/97/12/04/d.2-0.htmlAnd the forensics: On January 21, 1994, 3-month-old infant Brandon Baugh vanished along with his baby-sitter Cathy Lynn Henderson from Henderson's Pflugerville, Texas home (near Austin). The disappearance of Henderson and the baby sparked a nationwide search and public outrage. Both their photographs were shown on the television program "America's Most Wanted" and Henderson was soon located in the State of Missouri. Eighteen days after Baugh's disappearance, the child's body was located in rural Bell County, Texas, where it had been buried inside a cardboard box in a shallow grave. Henderson was accused of causing the child's death by inflicting severe blunt trauma to his skull. Travis County District Attorneys Robert Smith and Dana Blazey requested that forensic artist Karen Taylor prepare trial displays to clearly portray the injuries to Brandon Baugh's head. Critical to the prosecution's case was the argument that the injuries were intentionally inflicted rather than accidentally as alleged by the defense. Using radiographs and autopsy photographs, drawings were prepared to depict the specific skull fractures, their size and location, and their severity in contrast to the naturally occurring suture lines of an infant skull. Back views, and left and right lateral views showed the injuries and named pertinent bones and sutures for the jury to see. Overlay tracings were also done to indicate the child's general head and facial structures in life. Travis County Medical Examiner Roberto Bayardo used the forensic art posters as he gave technical autopsy-related testimony during the trial. The diagrams fulfilled the purpose of simplifying and clarifying complex injuries and testimony. On May 18, 1995, after two hours of deliberation, the jury returned a verdict of guilty. On May 26, 1995, Henderson was sentenced to death and became the fifth woman on death row in Texas. Her attorneys plan to appeal her sentence. www.fau.edu/divdept/anthro/forensic/iaciabs.htmShe deserves to die by LI, much less cruel than what she did to Brandon Baugh, who will remain three months old forever.
|
|
|
Post by snowy111 on Oct 16, 2004 22:18:06 GMT -6
After reading all the articles, her grammar doesn't indicate a low IQ. She says she did CPR on a dead baby for an hour and a half while the other children slept in front of the TV. If it was an accident, why didn't she call 911? I really don't know what to decide, but that is a good point. Why didn't she call 911 as she was doing CPR. She would have been in a lot less trouble.
|
|
|
Post by RickZ on Oct 18, 2004 7:24:35 GMT -6
Unless you walk in someone else's shoes, you should not judge them. Especially if you do not know the truth of the incident. Sheeesh. Now you want to get rid of the US' jury system, too! First, it's the DP. Next, it's LWOP. Now, it's the jury system. What's next? Let's cut to the chase: What, exactly, are you proposing to leave the citizens of the US to wield as a weapon against criminals? And if what you propose occurs, how are we to convict them? Ouija boards?
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Oct 18, 2004 14:57:41 GMT -6
Not everyone reacts the same way as everyone else. We all deal with things differently. You cannot judge a person by what you would or would not do. Then why use a *crappy childhood* as a valid criteria?
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Oct 18, 2004 15:00:00 GMT -6
In regard to what "curious" said...I didn't mean what you refer to as murder, as far as not knowing what you would do. I meant if an "accident" like that happened, reulting in a death, how can you say how you would react? I know I would probably panic. Unless you walk in someone else's shoes, you should not judge them. Especially if you do not know the truth of the incident. Are you suggesting that you know the truth?I know for certain, without a doubt, that I would not have taken the steps she took...which all LED to guilt, BTW. Panic may almost be a given...reacting the way she did IS NOT.
|
|
|
Post by tigress2864 on Oct 24, 2004 12:35:55 GMT -6
Sheeesh. Now you want to get rid of the US' jury system, too! First, it's the DP. Next, it's LWOP. Now, it's the jury system. What's next? Let's cut to the chase: What, exactly, are you proposing to leave the citizens of the US to wield as a weapon against criminals? And if what you propose occurs, how are we to convict them? Ouija boards? That's not what I meant. I Was referring to the fact that If you don't know a person's past you can't say how they "should" react in certain situations. And if youdon't know all the factors in a case, and are appointed to the jury, you shouldn't judge them. I don't oppose the DP and I don't want to get rid of the Justice System (although it is far from perfect). I just hate to see people slamming someone when they don't know the details of the case.
|
|
|
Post by tigress2864 on Oct 24, 2004 12:43:49 GMT -6
Are you suggesting that you know the truth?I know for certain, without a doubt, that I would not have taken the steps she took...which all LED to guilt, BTW. Panic may almost be a given...reacting the way she did IS NOT. I know more than you are aware. But that's not the point. I was abused as a child. Now as an adult I have certain "triggers" that send me into a panic. When that happens, I have little or no control over my actions. So what I'm saying is that in certain situations, people do not think clearly, and sometimes do things that seem almost unbeleivable to others. If we weren't there when it happened, and weren't in the court room for the entire trial to hear ALL of the evidence, how can any of us judge this woman. I hope we're all smart enough not to believe everything we read on the internet. It's got more bulls**t than a cow pasture.
|
|
|
Post by tigress2864 on Oct 24, 2004 13:02:40 GMT -6
Let me give all of you an example of how a bad childhood can trigger abnormal behavior.
As I said, I had an abusive childhood. Now, even at the age of 40, if my husband gets angry and starts yelling (it doesn't even have to be at me), I panick. Because there is an unconscious trigger in my head that reminds me that when my step-father started yelling, the fists started flying. This trigger in my head gets set off, and I lose control. I behave completely out-of-character, and I CANNOT control it!! Sometimes it takes hours for me to calm down. Granted, I don't get violent. But someone else in another situation might, if they had to fight back in their childhood. Or they may run away, and keep running. Who knows. My point is no one knows. So yes, a bad childhood can be a major factor. In this day and age, there are alot of people with alot scars and baggage their carrying around.
Am I saying she is completely innocent? NO! I am saying I think that some of the charges may be incorrect! It COULD have been an accident which caused her to panic and do some stupid things. And there was no abduction. That's obvious. If you are babysitting someone's children by their choice, when did you abduct them? And moving/burying the body afterwards does not qualify. You can't abduct a corpse.
IF, it all happened as she claims, she does not deserve the death penalty. Involuntary manslaughter, removing the body from the crime scene, not reporting the accident, and evading arrest are the only charges applicable. This does not warrent the DP.
If you want to slam someone, why not complain about the real murderers who don't get the DP when they should have! The ones that took the lives of people with mutilation, torture, etc., and end up out on parole after 25-30 years. Those are the real animals!
|
|
|
Post by Guest on Nov 6, 2004 22:16:02 GMT -6
I had a horrible childhood. I suffered from many years of emotional ,physical and sexual abuse and I haven't killed anyone. I'm sorry the " I was a victim of abuse and that is why I killed" doesn't wash with me. It does not excuse the crime or bring back the victim .
|
|
|
Post by tigress2864 on Nov 7, 2004 14:54:06 GMT -6
I had a horrible childhood. I suffered from many years of emotional ,physical and sexual abuse and I haven't killed anyone. I'm sorry the " I was a victim of abuse and that is why I killed" doesn't wash with me. It does not excuse the crime or bring back the victim . She did not say that she "killed" because of the childhood abuse. She said that it was because of the bad childhood that she reacted the way that she did after the accident. The child was killed because of an "accident".
|
|
|
Post by Guest on Nov 7, 2004 21:44:10 GMT -6
She did not say that she "killed" because of the childhood abuse. She said that it was because of the bad childhood that she reacted the way that she did after the accident. The child was killed because of an "accident". I went back to a earlier post and reread the newspaper article that was posted there just to make sure I didn't misunderstand what I was reading. I will quote "Henderson smashed baby Brandon's head against a unknown blunt object while babysitting in her home, burried the body in a wine cooler box near Temple and fled to Missouri where she tired to live under an assumed name" The child was killed because of an "accident" . Well it must of been one heck of an "accident" so smash a baby's skull. What possible "accident " would do that kind of damage? Still doesn't wash with me.
|
|
|
Post by tigress2864 on Nov 9, 2004 2:32:06 GMT -6
Well, to each his own opinion. I, for one, do not believe every newspaper article I read. They print just as much "bull", as they do truth. And of course the prosecutors are going to word everything to their benefit. Where they use the phrase "crushed the infant's skull", the defense uses "accidently dropped the infant, which struck it's head, causing a skull fracture and death." So unless we see the actual autopsy photos, etc., we don't really know which is true, do we?
The point I was trying to make was simply that a bad childhood can cause abnormal behavior (ie: panic and running).
|
|
|
Post by snowy111 on Nov 9, 2004 7:32:06 GMT -6
Well, to each his own opinion. I, for one, do not believe every newspaper article I read. They print just as much "bull", as they do truth. And of course the prosecutors are going to word everything to their benefit. Where they use the phrase "crushed the infant's skull", the defense uses "accidently dropped the infant, which struck it's head, causing a skull fracture and death." So unless we see the actual autopsy photos, etc., we don't really know which is true, do we? The point I was trying to make was simply that a bad childhood can cause abnormal behavior (ie: panic and running). Well if you do have a history of child abuse that isn't going to help a person even if their innocent.
|
|
|
Post by guest on Nov 9, 2004 14:22:38 GMT -6
Well, to each his own opinion. I, for one, do not believe every newspaper article I read. They print just as much "bull", as they do truth. And of course the prosecutors are going to word everything to their benefit. Where they use the phrase "crushed the infant's skull", the defense uses "accidently dropped the infant, which struck it's head, causing a skull fracture and death." So unless we see the actual autopsy photos, etc., we don't really know which is true, do we? The point I was trying to make was simply that a bad childhood can cause abnormal behavior (ie: panic and running). Then again the defence words things to their clients benefit too. That is why we have juries that has to sort out what is fact and what is fiction.You are correct ,newspapers print whatever they want to print but then again I was just going on what I read. I do not believe she should die, but then again its one thing to panic and run but what she did was take the time to bury the baby and then fled to another state and changed her name. To me that is deliberate ,and not out of panic. To panic in my opinion ,you basically run with no thought to trying to cover up evidence. To me to do as she did she was working with a clear mind and not someone who paniced.
|
|
|
Post by tigress2864 on Nov 11, 2004 0:59:37 GMT -6
Well if you do have a history of child abuse that isn't going to help a person even if their innocent. I have seen her criminal record, and she was never convicted of child abuse. Therefore, it is just heresay, and mostly the accusations of her ex-husband after a bitter divorce.
|
|
|
Post by snowy111 on Nov 11, 2004 8:05:15 GMT -6
I have seen her criminal record, and she was never convicted of child abuse. Therefore, it is just heresay, and mostly the accusations of her ex-husband after a bitter divorce. Well Tigress she did lose custody of her children. For the father to get custody is rare. Just because someone abuses doesn't mean they are always charged. But your right it could be heresay.
|
|
|
Post by Marco on Dec 15, 2004 11:20:35 GMT -6
When the mother is convicted of murder, it's not that difficult for the father to get custody. I know the details of this case, and I believe the sentence was way out of proportion to her crime.
|
|
|
Post by BossKean on Dec 15, 2004 15:06:31 GMT -6
Another person blaming everyone and everything on someone else. Did she dial 911? No Did she rush the baby to the hospital? NO Did she run away to cover her crime? Yes Did she bury the baby to cover her crime? Yes
What is all the drivel about. She is a murderer and having killed a baby makes her extra guilty.
She's complaing that she cant do her knitting anymore in prison...awwww
|
|