RedsZone.com - Cincinnati Reds Fans' Home for Baseball Discussion - View Single Post - woman who can't swim sentenced to jail for failing to save drowning child

savafan · 10-20-2005, 11:49 AM

http://www.post-gazette.com/pg/05293/591657.stm

Thursday, October 20, 2005
Pittsburgh Post-Gazette

If a woman who cannot swim leaps into a rain-swollen creek and saves the life of a friend's toddler, she is a hero. If instead she yells for help to the child's father, she's a typical mortal.

What she's not is a criminal. Falling short of heroism is no crime. Making it one, as occurred recently in Blair County, sets a dangerous precedent.

The Blair County district attorney prosecuted a nonswimmer, Susan Newkirk, for endangering the welfare of a child after she summoned a 2-year-old's father to rescue him rather than leaping herself into South Poplar Run after Hurricane Ivan turned it into a torrent in September 2004.

A jury convicted Ms. Newkirk in July and a judge sentenced her to jail this month for a year and a half.

Blair District Attorney Dave Gorman said Ms. Newkirk had a duty to try to save the child and insisted it was irrelevant that she couldn't swim because two other people, including a nonswimmer, attempted a rescue. Apparently it is irrelevant to Mr. Gorman that they failed. The child died.

Apparently it is also irrelevant that American Red Cross life guarding instructors warn the strong swimmers who are their students never to leap in unprepared. There is no point in two people dying, these instructors caution. Still, tragically, people perish that way every year.

The boy's father, Thomas E. Reffner, was not paying Ms. Newkirk to watch his child and hadn't asked her to supervise him. Still, when the boy first got close to the creek, she took him back to his father. Later, she returned to the creek; the youngster toddled after her and fell in.

It's a stretch to argue that a nonswimmer has a moral obligation to risk her life to rescue another person. It's dangerous to take that a step further and hold her to the higher standard of criminal responsibility.

Where does it stop? Could passersby be sent to jail for not running into flaming buildings or not pulling a driver from a burning car? We agree with David Herring, a professor of child welfare law at the University of Pittsburgh, that this is an "aggressive prosecution."

Ms. Newkirk is in jail while her public defender is appealing the conviction. Not just for her, but for everyone's sake, let's hope she wins.

10-20-2005, 11:49 AM	#1
savafan Maple SERP Join Date: Jun 2000 Location: Cincinnati, Ohio Posts: 17,485	woman who can't swim sentenced to jail for failing to save drowning child http://www.post-gazette.com/pg/05293/591657.stm Thursday, October 20, 2005 Pittsburgh Post-Gazette If a woman who cannot swim leaps into a rain-swollen creek and saves the life of a friend's toddler, she is a hero. If instead she yells for help to the child's father, she's a typical mortal. What she's not is a criminal. Falling short of heroism is no crime. Making it one, as occurred recently in Blair County, sets a dangerous precedent. The Blair County district attorney prosecuted a nonswimmer, Susan Newkirk, for endangering the welfare of a child after she summoned a 2-year-old's father to rescue him rather than leaping herself into South Poplar Run after Hurricane Ivan turned it into a torrent in September 2004. A jury convicted Ms. Newkirk in July and a judge sentenced her to jail this month for a year and a half. Blair District Attorney Dave Gorman said Ms. Newkirk had a duty to try to save the child and insisted it was irrelevant that she couldn't swim because two other people, including a nonswimmer, attempted a rescue. Apparently it is irrelevant to Mr. Gorman that they failed. The child died. Apparently it is also irrelevant that American Red Cross life guarding instructors warn the strong swimmers who are their students never to leap in unprepared. There is no point in two people dying, these instructors caution. Still, tragically, people perish that way every year. The boy's father, Thomas E. Reffner, was not paying Ms. Newkirk to watch his child and hadn't asked her to supervise him. Still, when the boy first got close to the creek, she took him back to his father. Later, she returned to the creek; the youngster toddled after her and fell in. It's a stretch to argue that a nonswimmer has a moral obligation to risk her life to rescue another person. It's dangerous to take that a step further and hold her to the higher standard of criminal responsibility. Where does it stop? Could passersby be sent to jail for not running into flaming buildings or not pulling a driver from a burning car? We agree with David Herring, a professor of child welfare law at the University of Pittsburgh, that this is an "aggressive prosecution." Ms. Newkirk is in jail while her public defender is appealing the conviction. Not just for her, but for everyone's sake, let's hope she wins. __________________ This is the Cal Ripkin Jr. of typos. If you ask me to join your fantasy baseball league and I select Legolas in the first round, don't be angry at me. It's not my fault I've read up on the players and you haven't.