Louise Woodward, a 19 year old British au pair was found guilty in the death of the 8 month old Matthew Eappen in Massachusetts.
Louise was hired since November 2006 by Sunil and Deborah Eappen to take care of their sons. On the 4th of February, Louise called the police to report that baby Matthew had some trouble with breathing. The paramedics arrived and saw that Matthew's eyes bulged out, which might be a sign of "shaken baby syndrome", this is when a baby is violently shaken.
An autopsy revealed that the baby had a fractured skull and a month-old wrist fracture.
Prosecutors say that Woodward admitted that she shook Matthex around, dropped him on the floor and threw him on the bed. According to some medical examiners the injuries Matthew had, could anyhow be caused bij a fall from a second-story window.
The baby didn't survive and 4 days after intake in the hospital, he died. Woodward was imprisoned without bond.
The defense claimed that she was just a teenager and didn't knew anything about the law in Massachisetts and that she shouldn't be kept in a state women's prison with hardened criminals in a foreign country. The defense argued that Louise's acts wasn't the cause of baby Matthew's death, they said that a pre-existing medical condition could have been the cause of his death. They also asked to do some extra tests to find out if Matthew had any genetic disorders that could affect the strength of his bones.
I think that the arguments of the defense are a bit exaggerated and far-fetched! They try to deny the actual fact that Louise had been too reckless with the baby. Matthew's parents trusted their nanny and paid her to take good care of their sons. That was her job, she hadn't been carefull enough, so it is normal that she's punished for her acts. The argument that she was just a teenager and didn't knew anything abou the law in Massachusetts is rather silly, because first of al, she was 19 and then you should be able to take some responsability for your acts. And secondly, what on earth makes her think that violent behavior against a baby is accepted in Massachusetts? That's rather a crazy thought isn't it?
Source:
Abonneren op:
Reacties posten (Atom)
1 opmerking:
I also find that the argument that she just was a teenager and she didn't knew the law is ridiculous. Everybody knows that you can't hurt children. I have some experiences with babysitting and I know that accidents happens. One of the children who I was babysitting for had an injury to his head. His parents brought him to a hospital. I admit I felt a bit guilty, but I knew it wasn't my fault. It was just an accident. There is no legitimating for people who hurts children on purpose. The parents of Matthew trusted Louise and she betrayed them. To have faith in a person again, will take a long time, I think... By Hanne Snoeck
Een reactie posten