The Stephan trial and evidence-based healthcare

[Resolute 14]

Originally Posted by GGG

The stage that each is in in their grieving process should not affect the sentance they get.

Delusion is not a stage in the grieving process.

But that same delusion is what will more than likely result in the needless suffering of another of their children.

[Mean Mr. Mustard]

Originally Posted by Resolute 14

Delusion is not a stage in the grieving process.

But that same delusion is what will more than likely result in the needless suffering of another of their children.

I am not about to defend someone like these two idiots but you realize that people grieve in different ways correct and to say that everyone follows a strict grieving process is completely moronic.

And denial is one of the stages of the most traditional model of grieving.

[Minnie]

I have long wondered, with this case, how controlling David is of Collett. Not excusing either of their actions and I think the sentences should have been much stiffer/longer. But given everything I've seen of David, I do wonder if Collett's views on things would change if she was not with him on a permanent basis.

[GGG]

Originally Posted by Resolute 14

Delusion is not a stage in the grieving process.

But that same delusion is what will more than likely result in the needless suffering of another of their children.

I'm not saying reduce his sentance. I'm saying the wife "remorsefulness" shouldn't get her a lighter sentance.

[GGG]

Originally Posted by Minnie

I have long wondered, with this case, how controlling David is of Collett. Not excusing either of their actions and I think the sentences should have been much stiffer/longer. But given everything I've seen of David, I do wonder if Collett's views on things would change if she was not with him on a permanent basis.

I would think rumours of him being abusive / controlling would have come out during and around the trial if this was the case. I think your reaction is from it being much more difficult that a mother did this then a father so we want to find some way to explain her actions.

It's the same underlying reason that got her a lighter sentence.

[Minnie]

Oh I have zero issue believing a mother can do awful stuff. My mother was a physically abusive #### who should have been locked up years ago (my father was almost as bad). I don't need to find some way to explain anything about her actions - considering her child is dead, that seems blatantly explainable/evident. I am curious though, given his comments, if he is controlling. The circles they travel in, I'm not sure anyone would say anything, especially since so many people already thought they were being crucified. I don't see any of them saying anything to anyone that would have them viewed through an even more intense lens. Abuse doesn't have to be physical and controlling types of abuse can be very subtle to other people. I would wonder if she got away from him, if her views would become very different, as she was exposed to views that haven't been ingrained in her for years and years.

[rubecube]

Originally Posted by GGG

It's the same underlying reason that got her a lighter sentence.

Oh please.

[GGG]

Originally Posted by rubecube

Oh please.

You Honestly believe mrs fake autopsy deserves a lighter sentance then it was the ambulances fault.

[Kjesse]

I had dealt with this judge when he was a lawyer, he's a very nice guy, very professional and very smart.

These people are very lucky he dealt with them so compassionately, I was expecting a greater sentence, around a year or two.

[OldDutch]

Originally Posted by Delgar

I had dealt with this judge when he was a lawyer, he's a very nice guy, very professional and very smart.

These people are very lucky he dealt with them so compassionately, I was expecting a greater sentence, around a year or two.

Well this judge owns this sentence now. If these people get caught killing or nearly killing another of their kids this judge is going to have the public come down on him hard.

I don't doubt this judge is the type of person you say he is. However, these people obviously have no remorse. Sending the Dad away for a few months on a martyr trip I think will only galvanize his beliefs. He also won't be away long enough for this mother to start to see the light. He'll be back playing neighborhood Jesus before she knows it.

I know the judge said these people had no malice, but I think you need to send a message here. These people have learned nothing and will learn nothing.

[Fuzz]

Is there room for Child Services to look at this and see if the kids are in danger? I can't imagine their actions would be bound by the verdict, right?

[Kjesse]

Originally Posted by Fuzz

Is there room for Child Services to look at this and see if the kids are in danger? I can't imagine their actions would be bound by the verdict, right?

Part of the judgment requires the mom to take the children to a doctor every 3 months.

[Fuzz]

Ah ok. Good. Missed that part.

[DownhillGoat]

Originally Posted by Delgar

Part of the judgment requires the mom to take the children to a doctor every 3 months.

Oh, well justice has been served then. The horror for her.

She will only be allowed to go out for medical appointments and church.

So on top of the complete BS sentencing, she's allowed to go to church? Drive drunk and cause no harm, most people can't get a license to drive to work. Be a complete lunatic and kill your child, and "sure, why not, you can certainly go to church because that's a completely mandatory facet of life.

What a garbage sentence.

[taco.vidal]

Wow.

Scary stuff that you are proposing.
Bye bye Charter of Rights and Freedoms.

Originally Posted by kunkstyle

Oh, well justice has been served then. The horror for her.


So on top of the complete BS sentencing, she's allowed to go to church? Drive drunk and cause no harm, most people can't get a license to drive to work. Be a complete lunatic and kill your child, and "sure, why not, you can certainly go to church because that's a completely mandatory facet of life.

What a garbage sentence.

[CaptainCrunch]

Life is cheap, and I bet their business makes them a million bucks because of their supporters.

[Mean Mr. Mustard]

Originally Posted by kunkstyle

Oh, well justice has been served then. The horror for her.


So on top of the complete BS sentencing, she's allowed to go to church? Drive drunk and cause no harm, most people can't get a license to drive to work. Be a complete lunatic and kill your child, and "sure, why not, you can certainly go to church because that's a completely mandatory facet of life.

What a garbage sentence.

It is a lenient sentence, but what good is achieved through preventing someone from going to a place of worship. The absolute admonishment that these two have received in social media and in the media in general has done more to protect other children than any lengthy prison sentence ever could. The judge did his due diligence in ensuring the children's safety through court mandated doctor's and nurse's visits, and taking the children away from their parents is a huge step which is wrought with potential negative impacts.

There are no winners in this situation. Idiocy runs amuck in their community of dimwitted non-believers in science, but locking them up only served to make them martyrs not murderers in their eyes. Making them feel the full brunt of social media outrage and having their behaviours in the public eye will do much more to prevent future tragedies.

[SebC]

Originally Posted by Mean Mr. Mustard

It is a lenient sentence, but what good is achieved through preventing someone from going to a place of worship.

Their "worship" is a contributing factor to their lunacy. These people need science, not religion.

[Mean Mr. Mustard]

Originally Posted by SebC

Their "worship" is a contributing factor to their lunacy. These people need science, not religion.

Sure, however it isn't up to you to decide who someone worships. I don't believe in anything, however I also believe that it isn't my place to tell you what religious deity you should believe in.

I don't disagree that they need to be hit over the head with a grade 8 science textbook, and there are plenty of people who would stand in a long line for the opportunity if this thread is any context. They are idiots, they are negligent parents and they are guilty of a crime. They are also still entitled to their rights as anyone else is. To prevent them from going to a place of worship would be a crime in and of itself.

[DownhillGoat]

Originally Posted by taco.vidal

Scary stuff that you are proposing.

Bye bye Charter of Rights and Freedoms.

Proposing they actually serve jail time or a conditional/house arrest sentence without caveats violates the charter how exactly?