[EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
>[EMAIL PROTECTED] (William J. Foristal) writes [in part]:
>Ironically, the law does not specify the rights of a fetus who is NOT
>"subsequently born" but dies as a result of the criminal action. Given
>the legality of abortion, it seems a defense attorney could argue that
>the fetus had no rights at the time of its death.
Maybe someone can recall a case where a pregnant woman was shot in the
stomach and the shooter was charged with murder for the death of the fetus
despite the argument the fetus is not a full human being.
The law can make sense if people use their heads. Abortion is legally
reasonable because of the rights of the woman. That should in no way provide
a shield to a killer. Theological arguments about life are beside the point.
I wish I could help the case presented. The law can be read any way a
lawyer cares to read it as in the above case.
Best, Terry
"Lawyer - one trained to circumvent the law" - The Devil's Dictionary
Subscribe/Unsubscribe, email: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
In the body of the message enter: subscribe/unsubscribe law-issues
