Mom faces third trial in baby’s death

[Melanie_]

Winnipeg Free Press

The second trial of Michelle Camire, mother of 4, ended again with a hung jury.

This is a tragic story, and anyone who has been a parent can understand that frustration and exhaustion is a bad combination. For this woman, it was multiplied, as she had triplets and a 20 month old, so I can absolutely sympathize with her mental state. But….her child died. She threw her 3 month old into the bassinet, and he suffered massive head injuries – he lay in the bassinet for 2 hours, and then died. Her defense is

However, defence lawyer Rod Brecht argued Camire's actions on that tragic morning are no different than what countless other frustrated parents do on a daily basis.

"Is she the only person who has thrown their child into a padded bassinet, or on a bed, or a couch? Do you really think she's the only person to do that? I suggest it happens daily in this city, province and country," he asked jurors.

He is basically saying that abuse is acceptable, it’s OK to throw a baby around a bit – everyone else does it. Even if the baby dies, we can excuse the parent’s action, because we accept that parents can take out their frustration on their children.

I know she didn’t mean to do it, I know it was a momentary lapse in judgment, and I know that any punishment meted out by the Crown won’t even compare to what she will live with for the rest of her life. Her remorse is not in question, and jail time wouldn’t serve a purpose in this case. But she has pleaded not guilty, and the argument she has presented can’t be accepted as a reasonable defense. It leaves children vulnerable, and marginalizes them as expendable dependent on their parents’ mental state. Obviously, there are enough jurors in these two trials that disagree with me.... what do you think?

[Drea]

That's a tough one Melanie...

On the one hand, she DID kill the child (albeit unintentionally).

On the other hand... four children in diapers... I cannot even imagine how I'd cope with four bawling babies! Ack I'd probably run screaming from the house and be charged with abandonment!

I feel really sorry for her. She will think of this child every single moment for the rest of her life -- and each thought will be of how she could've handled it differently. I think that would be punishment enough. I would be surprised if she doesn't attempt suicide.

Friend of mine was shot while taking a dump in an outdoor toilet (many years ago). Some kids were target practicing and using the outhouse as a target. The friend died. The boy that shot him tried to kill himself by hitting himself over the head with a rock... it was just terrible for both the killer and the family of the dead man. Although it was an accident, this boy will be haunted by it forever. I'm sure that the boy and his family said "if only" about a million times. As many times as the family of the dead man... "if only he had come in the house to go" (he was working on an old car and didn't want to get the house all dirty so he used the old outhouse).

This woman is saying this over and over and over and over to herself... "if only I had..., if only I had just done this or that"

Nothing will bring the child back. Jailing her won't. Taking away her other children won't.

It was an accident IMO.

[Riverwind]

On the one hand, she DID kill the child (albeit unintentionally).

I think this illustrates the issue with mandatory sentances. True justice in this case would call for a guilty conviction, counselling but no jail time. The jury probably could agree on a verdict if they had the option of specifying the sentance as well.

[Melanie_]

Oh, I'm with you, Drea, on the 4 kids in diapers comment -- my 4 kids have an 11 year age span, and they don't even all live at home anymore, and I still have days where I want to run from the house screaming. I can empathize with the frustration she was going through, but I can't justify taking my frustration out on them.

Riverwind, good point about the mandatory sentencing. I hadn't thought of that, and I don't see jail time as necessary in this case. Counselling is probably the best option.

My concern here, though, is with the defense that was offered. She is pleading not guilty, with the contention that it is acceptable to throw your infant around - everyone does it. She is basically asking us to condone abuse, and call it an "accident" when it goes too far. If we accept this, it sets children's protection services back 100 years.

[Drea]

She did do it, therefore she is guilty.

It's the punishment (or lackthereof) that will be the issue. I think counselling is in order... as well as some help in day to day life dealing with so many babies...

[Remiel]

I am worried about how you measure objectivity in such cases.

I think the first question I would ask is if I felt that the punishment I chose would be the same one I would have given a father that had done the same thing, under the same circumstances, with the same mental state. I hope that that does not seem an inappropriate suggestion. Were the situation reversed, of course, the question to ask would be too...

[FTA Lawyer]

She did do it, therefore she is guilty.

It's the punishment (or lackthereof) that will be the issue. I think counselling is in order... as well as some help in day to day life dealing with so many babies...

Criminal law requires an act and criminal intent...even for manslaughter where the consequence (death) is unintentional. If she did not have the necessary criminal intent, she is not guilty in spite of the act. I rather suspect that this woman could be tried a hundred times and each jury will have at least one person who cannot get past the "there but for the grace of God go I" analysis.

At some point, the Crown will have to conclude there is no public interest in pursuing another trial, but recent history would suggest that they will not throw in the towel until after trial #3 (In the Ferguson case - the Alberta Mountie who killed the young guy in cells - the conviction which has stood up to all appeals was obtained after 2 prior hung juries).

FTA

[Sharon den Adel]

I hadn't heard of this case until now, and I can certainly sympathize with this woman. It would be incredibly hard to care for four children under the age of two. However, it doesn't excuse her crime. Despite the fact she didn't intend to harm her child, the child died as a direct result of her actions, and for this she must be punished.

It is simply not okay to throw a child into a cot and claim that it is okay, because everyone does it.

I wouldn't like to see this woman imprisoned, I don't feel prison is the answer for her. Rather, support and counselling, plus assistance in raising her children would be more beneficial than a jail cell.