Judge says boy can live with child-killer for now

[Seedersandleechers]

Source: Kansas City Star

A Washington state judge says a teenage boy can keep living with his father and stepmother, even though the woman killed her own young daughters in 1991.

However, King County Superior Court Judge William Downing in Seattle also overturned a family law commissioner's decision in the case. That means the boy's biological mother can continue to seek arrangements that would keep the child from being around his stepmom.

Trisha Conlon had two boys with her former husband, John P. Cushing Jr., in the 1990s. But they split up several years ago, and John Cushing has since gotten back together with his first wife, Kristine.

She was found not guilty by reason of insanity after shooting their 4- and 8-year old daughters in California's Orange County.





Read more: http://www.kansascity.com/2011/08/29/3107324/judge-says-boy-can-live-with-child.html

---

I guess the step mother is all better now.

[tawadi]

1. This makes no sense

"After they split up, Cushing got back together with his first wife, Kristine, even though Kristine had killed their 4- and 8-year-old girls at their home in California's Orange County in 1991."
:crazy:

[perdita9]

2. If she's insane shouldn't she be locked up?

Shotgunning 2 small children seems like a heck of a serious crime. Why isn't this woman in a mental hospital?

[RaleighNCDUer]

3. Because it happened 20 years ago, and insanity is not necessarily

a permanent condition?

There are many possible reasons for insanity, and if she's been cured, is on medication to counter certain chemical deficiencies, or whatever the case, there is no reason for her to be in a mental hospital. The very fact that she is out in the world and re-married is some evidence to her no longer being a danger.

[trud]

4. yeah, right

I'd sure want her in the vicinity of my kids, not.

Dickens: “If the law supposes that,” said Mr. Bumble,… “the law is a ass—a idiot."

[RaleighNCDUer]

6. You do realize, the one you are quoting WAS the ass, who sold

Oliver as an indentured apprentice.

This is not a woman who 'escaped justice' - she was arrested and taken to trial, and declared unable to stand trial by reason of insanity. Do you think a person who gets that ruling is told "OK, we're done here. Go home."? She undoubtedly went through YEARS of treatment, psychiatric evaluations, medications, and therapy before she was allowed to go home.

Consider that the man she was married to at the time returned to her, after she had killed his daughters - would he have done that without the assurance that she was no longer dangerous?

Try a little compassion for the mentally afflicted.

[LisaL]

19. The fact that she is re-married? How does that prove anything?

She was married to that same man when she killed her daughters.

[LiberalEsto]

5. Sounds like the father is insane too

What kind of nut goes back to - the murderer of two children?

[Name removed]

13. Deleted message

Sub-thread removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[Lionessa]

7. Wow, seeing all the above posts is very disturbing, sounds like a punish forever

kind of attitude I would expect from the extreme law-n-order groups.

[Muskypundit]

9. She fucking killed two little girls.

Even if she could be ruled O.K to be allowed in public, she shouldnt be allowed anywhere near a child ever again. She is a child killer. If she was a black male she would have been executed 20 years ago.

[frylock]

12. she was fucking sick..

convince me that you believe that she shouldn't have been executed for her crime. this place has fucking gone to the shitter.

hope y'all are happy with your big tent.

[happyslug]

21. When a man tried to Kill Then President Jackson, his was ruled insane

The assassin was armed with two percussion pistols, both misfired even through both were properly loaded. A percussion pistol of that time period had a one in six thousand chance of misfiring, two one is 36,000. Both misfired, Jackson then defended himself with his cane by hitting the assassin which lead to the arrest of the assassin. At Trial it was show that that assassin was insane, a decision even President Jackson accepted, through that did NOT prevent Jackson and others to believe others were involved i.e. set this insane man up to kill Jackson so that they can blame the assassination of the act of an insane man NOT the people who talked the assassin into the attempt.

More on the attack:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Richard_Lawrence_(failed_assassin)

The interesting party Davy Crockett was involved in restraining the assassin on January 30, 1835, and would be killed at the Alamo a year and six weeks later on March 6, 1836.

My point is simple, insanity had always been grounds for a not guilty ruling by a Jury and a jury made such a ruling in the 1830s in the US, falling English Common Law Precedents dating back centuries. We do NOT execute people for crimes that they did NOT have the WILL to want to comment. We only punish people who NOT only physically does something that is against the law BUT also want to violate the law. The Insanity defense goes to the ability to have an "Evil mind". If no "evil intent" can be found, you can not be guilty of a crime.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Davy_Crockett

The question is why was Crockett in Washington in January 1835? He had LOST the 1834 election so he was out of office. This is the days BEFORE Railroads so going to Washington from Tennessee one did not do just to attend a Funeral. On the other hand if you are in DC, and a fellow Congressman died, you go to the Funeral. Crockett was an interesting Character (and one of the reason he became so popular in the US during his life time), but he is best know for supporting the rights of the rural poor to obtain land AND to discharge debts owned by such rural poor. Crockett originally supported Jackson, but joined the opposition as Jackson turned against the Native Americans (Thus Crockett opposed the Bank of the US, supported Jackson in the Nullification Crisis, but opposed Jackson over removal of the Native Americans from any East of the Mississippi). Thus Crockett joined the Whigs, but never embraced those parts of the Whigs that later became the Republican Party NOR the Southern Bourbons (Who were former Whigs, who would have been Republicans after the Civil War, except for the Civil War). Now, in many ways the Homestead Act of 1864 was something he would have supported as while as the post Civil War Bankruptcy Act. Both would have helped the rural poor. Both were passed by GOP controlled Congresses, but later restricted by the same GOP controlled Congresses to make sure the poor did NOT benefit to much from such programs. In many ways these programs were attempts by the GOP to keep supporters like Crockett inside the GOP, and it worked till the Great Depression when it became clear that the GOP never believed is such programs, but the Democratic Party had finally decided to embrace them.

[LanternWaste]

22. So said John Hawthorne to Elizabeth Proctor in the small village of Salem.

So said John Hawthorne to Elizabeth Proctor in the small village of Salem.

I imagine one day, we'll stop acting as though the mentally ill were possessed by demons, and begin accepting their illness for what it is-- an illness that may often be treated to allow the patient to live a more normal life.

[frylock]

10. to be fair, freepers would be calling for her execution..

so i guess there is some small difference between us and them after all. :sarcasm:

[Pisces]

26. I would never allow her to watch my kids, if you feel comfortable with her maybe she is available

for babysitting.

[frylock]

27. i don't have kids

[Pisces]

28. Then you don't had the same point of reference. Your empathy for the child murderer

as opposed to your concern for the child now being placed in her care is not as primal as a parents. Her hurt feelings are not the concern of a parent protecting their children.

[frylock]

30. you sound just like brian on family guy..

UNTIL YOU HAVE A CHILD!!1 meh.

is there any EVIDENCE that the child has been mistreated or abused by this woman? ever?

[Pisces]

32. You mean like his dead body, no not yet.

[frylock]

33. i'll just take that as a no. full stop.

good day to you.

[blank space]

17. Left leaning progressive are much more liable to

regressive actions than they realise - they are much mor likely to point the finger than accept any blame - Obama is a case in point, while Bush responded to the greatest act of terrorism in western history with the massive attacks on America with over 300 dead as a reason for his actions in starting a war in Afghanistan and Iraq, Obama started a war in Pakistan and Yemen and Libya on well, no real reason. He escalated the war in Afghansitan because the military industrial complex told him to, and turned Iraq into a private war zone, corporations only please. But - none of this is Obamas fault because he inherited it from Bush. Bush had 9/11 - but Obama had Bush. Bush had tax cuts for the rich, so did Obama - but it wasnt Obamas fault, Bush had temporary patriot act, Obama enshrined it and extended it, Bush had rendition and torture and was globally condemned for it, Obama enshrined it, extended it and recieved a nobel prize for it,

The mind boggles at the lefts hypocrisy.


It sounds to me if you are fond to have mental problems you are not to recover, you can never lead a normal life again, or be part of society, if you have a mental problem you are outcast forever.

I do not think people understand why you can not be held accountable for insane criminal actions. Sad people on DU, very sad.

[christx30]

20. Well, you know

sometimes life isn't fair and people kind of suck. One mistake can haunt you for the rest of your life. Whether you steal a motorcycle, shoplift, murder two kids, forget someone's birthday.
OK... sarcasm over.
Murder is hard to let go for a lot of people. I wouldn't want to hang out with a murderer. No matter why she did it. "Incompetant to stand trial" is a legal thing, and too fine of a hair for me as a person to get over. I wouldn't want her anywhere near my kids, no matter what she has happened to her in the mean time.

[Pisces]

25. The biological mother should have a say in the safety of her children. You can not take chances with

children. Completely insane to let her near children again. I don't think she should be locked away for life and never forgiven, but she should not be placed in charge of children.

[McCamy Taylor]

8. Proves that real life is never easy. If I was the biological mom, I would be having fits.

I am assuming the husband was married to the first wife when she did the killing. Where was he? Was he blind to her emotional issues? Did he fail to recognize the danger to the children? If she was mentally ill, maybe she could not help herself, but he has no such excuse. If he wants to live with the first wife, that is his decision. But unless he has grown up a lot and can now recognize when he has to protect a child, I think maybe he ought to reconsider bringing a child into that home. Mental illness is treated but does not go away.

[cali]

14. I'm not sure why you're placing most of the blame here on the husband

and yes of course mental illness can go away without medical treatment.

[Pisces]

29. Well he is the one who missed her mental illness at the time of the murders and 2) he is now

reunited with her and insisting she care for another child that is not hers biologically. This guy sounds like a moron.

[frylock]

11. the compassion on display in this thread is quite overwhelming..

could someone take a moment to remind me of the differences between DU and FR?

[Muskypundit]

15. There is plenty of compassion.

For that poor little boy who has to live his life with a person our very human (flawed) justice system says is ok. I'm siding with the boy. Please try and tell me that home doesn't sound like a crazy house.

[frylock]

16. i missed the part in the article where that poor little boy is forced to live there..

perhaps you know more about the issue. could you kindly point me to an article that would indicate that the poor little boy doesn't want to stay there? i'm quite looking forward to your reply.

[Muskypundit]

18. He is 8. There are plenty of cases where a child is abused and doesnt want to leave.

The child doesn't get a whole lot of say in the issue. I know I didn't. And looking back on that, it was a good thing my feelings as a child didn't get taken into consideration. At that age its the jobs of adults to look after the best interests of a child. And I think its slightly ridiculous to suggest that child is going to be ok in a house with a child murderer. Two children killed in cold blood.

[BeFree]

24. Poor kid

Not good for him in any way. There has to be a better place for him.

There is not much on this thread that details that the woman should suffer any more. But I guess some feel that she suffers if she is not allowed to live with the child? The child stands to lose more than she, so this judgment is not the best.

[frylock]

31. what does the child stand to lose?

is there any evidence, hearsay or otherwise, that shows the child as being mistreated, neglected, or abused by this woman?

[LisaL]

34. I don't believe there was any evidence she mistreated her

daughters in any way. In fact the neighbors believed she was super mom.

[LanternWaste]

23. I imagine many people believe that compassion for A denies compassion for B.

I imagine many people believe that compassion for A denies compassion for B; it doesn't-- but I imagine many people believes it does... :shrug: