Murder...he's guilty of murder...meds or not...he's guilty. Generally the Bi-Polar are not dangerous...but Prozac can sometimes lead to violent episodes...especially when you STOP taking in.
Woman Refuses Blood Transfusion--Attacked by Son--Is He Guilty of Murder
by blondie 20 Replies latest watchtower medical
-
-
kls
cancer is terminal ,stabs wounds are not.
-
kls
My mother who was not a jw ,died of lung and brain cancer.She wanted no chemo ,nothing.That was her choice to die or try to live .She chose to die her way.Now should the family and doctors be charged with murder for going along with her decission? That transfusion may have saved that stabbing victim.
-
Xena
ah k, I think I may have read the account wrong kls...I thought she refused the blood for cancer then was stabbed and died prior to being able to state her wishes on receiving blood for those wounds. My thinking was that the issue was since she was terminal anyway and dying due to her own wishes should he be considered guilty of murder. My bad, sorry!
If she were stabbed and refused treatment I would probaby say the murder charge would depend on if the dr could determine what her odds of living would have been had she taken a transfusion...just how bad the wounds were....of course regardless he still needs to be punished for stabbing her - fatal or not!
-
kls
When the medical report comes out we may find then if the stab wounds were to severe ,that a transfusion may not have saved her.But if it comes out that she bled to death and blood would have saved her life ,then she would be alive today.The son must be charged no matter what,but the question is did he outright kill her, or not having blood cause her death.These are my feelings ,not a debate.
-
Globetrotter
"Apparently she was conscious and alert..."
"The Westchester County Medical Examiner said her death was caused by blood loss due to stab wounds..."
Xena, I agree he should be punished. Perhaps he could be charged with aggravated assult or attempted murder. Prove that he intended to kill her. Based on the news account, it appears to me that she made her own choices. I don't believe he is guilt of murder.
Not to make light of the situation, it reminds me of a joke that illustrates a point... A man lived in a floodplain. Torrential rains caused river to overflow. Rescue workers came by his house in a jeep to help him evacuate. He stayed, claiming "The lord will take care of me." A little while later, the water had risen beyond the first floor of his house. Rescue workers in a boat stop to help, but he told them from the second story window that "The lord will take care of me." As the waters rose, the man eventually found himself trapped on the roof of his house. A rescue helicopter came by, hoovered and dropped a harness to him. He waved off the copter, yelling "The lord will take care of me." Guess what? The waters swept him away and he drown. When he got to heaven, he asked God "Lord, why didn't you save me?!" God said "Man, I sent you a jeep, a boat and a helicopter! What more did you want?"
-
gumby
If the son is not guilty......then neither are all the christians who were responsible for killing millions who did not agree with them in past history. Killing someone as result of their personal choice in faith and action( when they have harmed NO other person), makes one no different than those who kill in the name of god.
Gumby
-
Max Divergent
To say that he's not guilty becuase of some special feature of the victim is to say that people who are different to the mainstream have a lower level of protection from violence in the law. It also puts blame on the vicitm for the outcome of the violent attack.
If Mr Average Joe gets deliberatly stabbed once and dies, his attacker is guilty of murder becuase stabbing someone is an act that an ordinary person would expect might cause death, even though it usually dosn't (assuming there's no defence like insanty, self-defence etc).
If Mr Heamophilliac Joe gets deliberatly stabbed once and dies, is his attacker to be let off murder just becuase someone else might not have died? If so, the law provides Heamophilliac Joe with less protection from murderers that his buddy Average Joe and thus he is given less protection from attackers by the law.
The only differnence is that the JW makes a choice and the heamophilliac dosn't. But it's a choice she's entitled to make, so the attacker becomes a murderer as a result of his own violent actions - no one else is to blame, and especially not the victim.
We don't reduce the culpibility of cop killers becuse cops put themselves in harms way by their job choice.
As it happens in this case anyhow, the attacker must have known that she woudn't take a transfusion which finally puts rest to any attempt to reduce his culpability (notwithstanding he may have a defence in insanity) on the blood transfusion issue. But it's really not at issue anyway to my way of thinking.
As someone else suggested, just becuse we beleive differently to somone else, we get no discount off the lawful punishment if we kill them.
Max
-
blondie
Further news update:
Coroner: Stabbing death was homicide
By Ivan H. Golden
Staff Writer
January 9, 2004
The Westchester County, N.Y., medical examiner ruled yesterday that the death of Greenwich resident Carol Ferenz was a homicide, law enforcement officials said.
Ferenz, 63, died just after midnight Jan. 1, hours after she was stabbed repeatedly in the chest and arm with a household knife at her home in Glenville, police said.
Ferenz's son, Stephen M. Ferenz, 42, who lived with his parents in Glenville, has been charged with two counts of first-degree assault of a person over 60 in connection with the incident. He is being held at the Bridgeport Community Cor-rectional Center on $1 million bond and may face additional charges.
The Westchester County medical examiner initially concluded that Ferenz died from blood loss due to stab wounds, police said. Westchester County Medical Examiner Kunjlaba Ashar would not release any information about the case yesterday, citing office policy.
But two law enforcement officials -- Greenwich police Lt. Daniel Allen and Supervisory Assistant State's Attorney James Bernardi -- said Ferenz's death has now been ruled a homicide.
Ferenz, who was treated at Greenwich Hospital and later at Westchester Medical Center in Valhalla, N.Y., declined potentially life-saving blood transfusions, in keeping with her faith as a Jehovah's Witness.
That decision may influence the state as it weighs whether to file further charges against Ferenz's son, said Bernardi, who added that the medical examiner's ruling will not dictate his choice.
"The medical examiner's opinion is a medical opinion, which is that the stabbing contributed to her death," he said. "The state still has to conclude its legal research into whether or not, as a matter of law, the actions of the defendant legally caused her death, in light of the fact that the victim refused medical treatments on religious grounds."
Bernardi said additional charges could come as soon as Tuesday, when Stephen Ferenz is next scheduled to appear in court. He declined to elaborate.
"I'm going to keep that for court," he said. "It wouldn't be fair to speculate. We have found court rulings (from similar cases). We'll talk about them when and if we file new charges."
Bernardi told State Superior Court Judge James Bingham last week that he was considering whether manslaughter or murder charges are warranted in the case.
Stephen Ferenz suffers from bipolar disorder, also known as manic depression, a condition marked by severe mood swings. Bernardi told the judge that Ferenz had stopped taking his medication about two weeks before the stabbing.Copyright © 2004, Southern Connecticut Newspapers, Inc.
-
czarofmischief
I'm bipolar myself - apparently not as severe as this guy, but I know how hard it can be to control yourself. I know the intense NEED for medication and regularity in your schedule to prevent episodes. That being said, I have to argue against letting bipolar people get away with acts they commit under the influence - consequences are very important lessons to people struggling to live with their diseases. Violence, as Yeru said, is not an integral part of our illness, but it can come forth. Therefore I think it is imperative for people with this handicap to learn control and responsibility. Extra safeguards. In the end, he chose to let himself go. He decided to go off his meds. He knew his history.
He could easily be found guilty of murder without intent, whatever that is in New York, manslaughter or murder two. It would be hard to argue for pre-meditated action, which is murder one, given the history of mental illness.
The blood thing is a red herring in my view, her stance on blood was pre-existing and also within her rights to choose. If they had been miles away from help, the transfusion wouldn't have been an option, she would have died, and then he's up for murder one. If this had happened one hundred years ago, he's guilty of murder, and he's hanging by the weekend.
Her refusal to receive a transfusion is a side issue.
I'm interested to see how he reacts to coming "down" trhough medication and how he reacts to what he's done. Obviously, he's given up his right to walk freely among us, but death might not be appropriate as he struggles to rehabilitate.
CZAR
