Privacy Policy
Home | Money | Entertainment | Links | Advertise | Search | Cartoons | Contact | Shop March 20, 2010
Web
NewsMax.com
Powered by
 
Calif. High Court Debates Murder of Fetus
NewsMax.com Wires
Thursday, Jan. 8, 2004
SAN FRANCISCO - Does the murderer of a pregnant woman also murder the fetus, even if the killer claims not to know about the unborn child?

The California Supreme Court heard arguments on that question Wednesday, and most justices appeared to disagree with a lower-court ruling that overturned a murder conviction of a man who says he didn't know his victim was pregnant.

Harold Taylor was convicted of murdering his former lover in a fit of rage. Investigators said Patty Fansler was at least 10 weeks pregnant when he shot her to death in her Ukiah apartment in 1999.

On appeal, Taylor argued that because he didn't know Fansler was pregnant, he could not be prosecuted for murdering her fetus.

California's fetal-murder law was passed in 1970, but the 2002 ruling by the San Francisco-based 1st District Court of Appeal was the first to find that a killer needed to know about a fetus to be guilty of murdering it.

The appeals court said that murder in California requires "malice aforethought" - a willful intent to take the life of another - and a "conscious disregard" for life. The court added that it's unreasonable to apply those standands when a fetus - unbeknowst to the killer - dies when its mother is murdered.

"As contrasted to the risk to human life, the risk to unknown fetal life is ... something the average person would not be aware of," the appeals court ruled.

But not knowing about a pregnancy "should make no difference," Deputy Attorney General Ross Moody argued Wednesday before the Supreme Court.

It would be ridiculous, Moody suggested, for a drunk driver who kills a car full of people, including a pregnant woman, to avoid prosecution in the fetus's death simply because he didn't know the woman was pregnant.

Taylor's attorney, Joseph Shipp, told the justices to uphold the appellate court's decision. "Fetal life is different," he said.

Justice Kathryn Mickle Werdegar didn't agree. "What policy reasons would there be to draw these fine lines of distinction?" she asked.

During nearly an hour of arguments, most justices appeared satisfied that prior knowledge of pregnancy was not necessary for a fetal-murder conviction. The court must rule within 90 days.

Taylor initially was sentenced to 65 years to life; the appeals court decision knocked it down to 40 years to life.

Fetal-murder laws, which exempt abortion, have been passed in 29 states, and Congress is considering a federal law. California's law applies to all fetuses beyond eight weeks; some states cover only fetuses able to live outside the womb.

© 2003 Associated Press. All Rights Reserved. This material may not be published, broadcast, rewritten or redistributed.

Editor's note:
Get FREE traffic to your Web site INSTANTLY! Click here now!

Home | Money | Entertainment | Links | Advertise | Search | Cartoons | Contact | Shop
All Rights Reserved © 2010 NewsMax.Com

106