[ad_1]
The California Supreme Court has overturned the murder conviction of a Central Valley woman who killed her 2-month-old son in 2018, saying the law imposes an unfair double standard on domestic violence victims when it comes to their children’s deaths. The court ruled that there are many cases where
A court ordered the woman, Britney Collins, to stand trial on Monday, but domestic violence experts say the decision is an important step toward fairer treatment under the law for the mother. said.
A Kern County jury convicted Collins after her boyfriend, Matthew Norwood, fatally assaulted her son, Abel, in a methamphetamine-fueled rage, according to court records.
Norwood was the one who slammed Abel into the walls and floor of a Tehachapi mobile home, breaking her arms, legs and ribs, lacerating her liver and cracking her skull, according to court documents. Local authorities argued that Collins was legally responsible for acting illegally. Please protect him.
According to court records, detectives told Collins after the incident that “the mother is the one taking care of the baby.” “The mother is the one who protects the baby. Right?”
Prosecutors said Collins brutalized Norwood throughout her pregnancy, including strangling her, kneeling on her stomach, banging her head against a wall and pushing her to the ground in an attempt to cause a stillbirth. He claimed he knew Norwood was dangerous. According to court records, Collins was asked how her boyfriend could be so violent with a toddler, and she said, “He’s strangling me, so why doesn’t he strangle the baby?” He said he answered.
The trial court found Collins guilty and sentenced him to life in prison. In an initial attempt to overturn the conviction, the appeals court found that Norwood was known to be in a bad mood the day after her two-month vaccination and that in response Norwood launched a deadly tirade. They argued that they should have predicted that.
However, the High Court has made new decisions regarding the dynamics of domestic violence, its prevalence among women convicted of murder and manslaughter, and the “criminalization of motherhood” under national “failure to protect” laws. made extensive use of research and took opposing views on the evidence. us
“There is no evidence that Mr. Collins knew with any reasonable degree of certainty Mr. Norwood’s intentions. [kill Abel]” Judge Kelly M. Evans wrote in the decision. “Collins (and her grandmother) believed that Norwood would change and feed on Abel as before.”
The judge said Ms Norwood’s continued abuse – he had previous convictions for domestic violence – would have made Ms Collins keenly aware of the danger he posed to her if she tried to intervene.
“Using the fact that an individual has been abused by a partner to hold that individual criminally responsible for the actions of that partner is problematic,” Evans wrote.
Academic researchers have identified hundreds of California women who have been jailed for murder or manslaughter in cases involving intimate partner violence.
Andrea N. Cimino, co-author of the 2024 Stanford Law and Criminal Justice Center report cited in Judge Goodwin H. Liu’s concurrence in a recent case, said the law’s “failing to protect” “It unfairly targets women, especially victims of abuse like Ms. Collins.”
Cimino asked, “Why is she treated like a criminal for what he did?”
A Stanford University study finds women responsible for their children’s deaths even if they were not present when the murder occurred or actively tried to stop the murder when it occurred. We have identified many other similar incidents. Others were unable to protect their children as they were beaten or strangled unconscious by the same assailants.
Like Collins, who was in her late 20s when her son was killed, many abuse victims depend on the men they abused and their families for housing, money and food. According to court documents, Collins did not have the authority to evict Norwood from the Willow Springs mobile home park where she lived with her grandmother, and there was no way for Norwood to flee after the account was depleted.
She also nearly died during Abel’s emergency C-section birth and subsequently developed a severe infection. She feared her father was abusive, but relied on Norwood to care for her baby while she recovered, according to appeals court records.
Experts say these dynamics are common in abusive relationships that can turn deadly. However, they are still not well explained in law or clearly understood by the legal system. Experts hope this ruling could change.
“We’re seeing more and more of these types of cases,” said David A. Sklansky, a professor at Stanford Law School. “The court used this case as an opportunity to provide guidance rather than invalidate the statute entirely.”
The professor said the decision does not overturn homicide by failure of protection or deny the legal principles behind it, but it does illustrate how the law is often unfairly exploited.
“Based on outdated gendered notions of the mother’s role relative to the father’s in caring for the child, Collins’ assumptions about what should have been made in determining the mother’s liability for murder based on a failure to protect It is not appropriate,” Evans wrote.
“Prosecutors and courts must be careful to prevent this type of gender bias from influencing the criminal justice system.”
[ad_2]Source link
