Jump to content
The Official Site of the Vancouver Canucks
Canucks Community

Woman in vegetative state for 14 years gives birth


ChuckNORRIS4Cup

Recommended Posts

6 hours ago, SabreFan1 said:

That's one of the reasons the cops told them no.

 

Not me.  It puts one scumbag behind bars but has the potential, no matter if it's only a 20%-30% chance, to open Pandora's Box a few years down the road if the Supreme Court gets it's hands on the case.

I think the only concern I would have if I was an employee is that the DNA I offer to provide to prove my innocents, comes with a written document to sign showing that my DNA is permanently destroyed after, so it doesn't get misplaced ever at some random crime scene.

Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, lmm said:

I would not count on that.

Did you hear about the right to die case where the patient, also in a vegitative state was offered a spoon to their lips and when the mouth opened it "proved" the desire to live. I think there is a story or legal case called the spoon.

You never know, maybe this "couple" has been having a relationship for a long time, maybe the father comes forward and offers to marry her...

Nope never heard that case.

 

It sounds like she was 29 from recent articles, and has been there for 14 years so she would of been 15 when she first became a patient at this facility. 

Link to post
Share on other sites

The problem with DNA is it does not prove you did a crime, it only proves the lab believes your DNA was found at the crime scene.

An example/possibility:

A guy that works at that facility goes to a female workers house, they get to knocking boots and having a great time. At the end of the night, the guy says thanks for a great time thinking it is a one nighter. The gal thought she had met her soul mate. She goes all "Basic Instinct" crazy and cleans herself up, but saves the guy's sperm in a container. She goes to the hospital and uses a turkey baster to inject the man's sperm into the comatose lady.

It sounds way out there, and I'd say extremely unlikely but my point is DNA only proves your DNA was at the scene, not how it got there.

If you ever have company over for dinner, don't let them into your bathroom as they could pull hair from your hairbrush and drop it at one of their crime scenes... 

remember most folk believe DNA proves you did it.

Link to post
Share on other sites
10 minutes ago, gurn said:

The problem with DNA is it does not prove you did a crime, it only proves the lab believes your DNA was found at the crime scene.

An example/possibility:

A guy that works at that facility goes to a female workers house, they get to knocking boots and having a great time. At the end of the night, the guy says thanks for a great time thinking it is a one nighter. The gal thought she had met her soul mate. She goes all "Basic Instinct" crazy and cleans herself up, but saves the guy's sperm in a container. She goes to the hospital and uses a turkey baster to inject the man's sperm into the comatose lady.

It sounds way out there, and I'd say extremely unlikely but my point is DNA only proves your DNA was at the scene, not how it got there.

If you ever have company over for dinner, don't let them into your bathroom as they could pull hair from your hairbrush and drop it at one of their crime scenes... 

remember most folk believe DNA proves you did it.

While true, when there’s a baby involved it’s pretty open and shut.

Link to post
Share on other sites
9 hours ago, ChuckNORRIS4Cup said:

I think the only concern I would have if I was an employee is that the DNA I offer to provide to prove my innocents, comes with a written document to sign showing that my DNA is permanently destroyed after, so it doesn't get misplaced ever at some random crime scene.

It's going straight to a national DNA database.  Years ago fingerprints/mug shots were supposed to get destroyed if you were found innocent of a crime that you were charged with.  However it turned out that PD's across the country were sending copies of the fingerprints to the FBI to keep in a database.  Nobody ever made a big stink about it so I wouldn't be surprised if they still do that to this day.  I also wouldn't doubt the same holds true with DNA these days.

Link to post
Share on other sites
3 hours ago, SabreFan1 said:

It's going straight to a national DNA database.  Years ago fingerprints/mug shots were supposed to get destroyed if you were found innocent of a crime that you were charged with.  However it turned out that PD's across the country were sending copies of the fingerprints to the FBI to keep in a database.  Nobody ever made a big stink about it so I wouldn't be surprised if they still do that to this day.  I also wouldn't doubt the same holds true with DNA these days.

Yeah doesn't surprise me, but that would be my only concern giving them DNA I would want some kind of written proof saying it was destroyed after, and if they said no then I probably would deny allowing them doing it. Sure it wouldn't help me in clearing my name, but I don't care, they can investigate me all they want I know it wasn't myself who did this so really would just be wasting my time and everyone's time in the end.

Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, ChuckNORRIS4Cup said:

Yeah doesn't surprise me, but that would be my only concern giving them DNA I would want some kind of written proof saying it was destroyed after, and if they said no then I probably would deny allowing them doing it. Sure it wouldn't help me in clearing my name, but I don't care, they can investigate me all they want I know it wasn't myself who did this so really would just be wasting my time and everyone's time in the end.

Now think about the fishing expedition that a judge is approving and in a few years time could be made routine if the Supreme Court upholds it.  After you refused, they arrest you and by terms of the search warrant, strap you down and either swab your cheek or take your blood, then toss you in jail for the initial refusal under charges including obstruction of justice.

 

Now imagine this same situation for much smaller crimes once DNA testing becomes extremely cheap to do. 

 

This is the kind of door you open up when you make exceptions because of one case.

Link to post
Share on other sites
3 hours ago, SabreFan1 said:

Now think about the fishing expedition that a judge is approving and in a few years time could be made routine if the Supreme Court upholds it.  After you refused, they arrest you and by terms of the search warrant, strap you down and either swab your cheek or take your blood, then toss you in jail for the initial refusal under charges including obstruction of justice.

 

Now imagine this same situation for much smaller crimes once DNA testing becomes extremely cheap to do. 

 

This is the kind of door you open up when you make exceptions because of one case.

No I totally see the point, and how it could easily be abused in the long run, but I have no problem if they can come to an understanding that if you're not guilty then your stuff gets destroyed, but chances are they will try to avoid that and just keep it. Would be nice if they could come to some agreement for that part, then I don't think there would be as many worries from people, but then again comes down to trust and that's hard sometimes anyways. Heck I'm sure a certain amount of years ago they started taking blood samples from all new borns to keep track of their DNA somehow behind people's backs, wouldn't surprise me tbh.

Link to post
Share on other sites
22 minutes ago, ChuckNORRIS4Cup said:

No I totally see the point, and how it could easily be abused in the long run, but I have no problem if they can come to an understanding that if you're not guilty then your stuff gets destroyed, but chances are they will try to avoid that and just keep it. Would be nice if they could come to some agreement for that part, then I don't think there would be as many worries from people, but then again comes down to trust and that's hard sometimes anyways. Heck I'm sure a certain amount of years ago they started taking blood samples from all new borns to keep track of their DNA somehow behind people's backs, wouldn't surprise me tbh.

I'd be surprised because there's no way in h*ll the hundreds of thousands of healthcare professionals would keep that quiet.  As Trump is learning, it's difficult enough to even get a handful of your friends and business associates to keep secrets.

Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, SabreFan1 said:

I'd be surprised because there's no way in h*ll the hundreds of thousands of healthcare professionals would keep that quiet.  As Trump is learning, it's difficult enough to even get a handful of your friends and business associates to keep secrets.

They probably wouldn't even know tbh, they just have to do it for finding out there blood type then bam some computer takes the readings and now they have it in their system forever, or who knows what these computers really do with all the information now a days.

Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, ChuckNORRIS4Cup said:

They probably wouldn't even know tbh, they just have to do it for finding out there blood type then bam some computer takes the readings and now they have it in their system forever, or who knows what these computers really do with all the information now a days.

Nah.  Too many people would know about it even then.  If you were to say you could see mandatory at birth DNA databases happening in the next 20 years or so, I'd agree that's a possibility for sure since more and more Millennials are willing to give up their privacy.

Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, SabreFan1 said:

Nah.  Too many people would know about it even then.  If you were to say you could see mandatory at birth DNA databases happening in the next 20 years or so, I'd agree that's a possibility for sure since more and more Millennials are willing to give up their privacy.

Never say never, but it is a far fetch I understand, but I like to think outside the box a lot. They all be walking around with chips in their hand soon :lol:

Link to post
Share on other sites
Just now, ChuckNORRIS4Cup said:

Never say never, but it is a far fetch I understand, but I like to think outside the box a lot. They all be walking around with chips in their hand soon :lol:

The biochip industry is one of the fastest growing industries in the US.  That includes DNA chipping among many other kinds.

Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, SabreFan1 said:

The biochip industry is one of the fastest growing industries in the US.  That includes DNA chipping among many other kinds.

Yeah I saw a video years ago about I believe a family that had done it, and trying to say this is the future, to protect their kids if anything bad was to ever happened to them so they could locate them, but they were definitely trying to sell it to the public.

Link to post
Share on other sites
6 minutes ago, ChuckNORRIS4Cup said:

Yeah I saw a video years ago about I believe a family that had done it, and trying to say this is the future, to protect their kids if anything bad was to ever happened to them so they could locate them, but they were definitely trying to sell it to the public.

Those kids are going to resent their parents when they get older.  There was an episode like that on Black Mirror on Netflix.  The kid ended up hating her parent.

 

Good show.

Link to post
Share on other sites
5 minutes ago, SabreFan1 said:

Those kids are going to resent their parents when they get older.  There was an episode like that on Black Mirror on Netflix.  The kid ended up hating her parent.

 

Good show.

Never seen it, but makes sense I would of be pissed with my parents for doing it to 

Link to post
Share on other sites
Just now, ChuckNORRIS4Cup said:

Never seen it, but makes sense I would of be pissed with my parents for doing it to 

It was set in a near-futuristic world.  The chip enabled the parent to track a kid and allowed them to see what the kid was seeing as well as censor what the kid could hear and see.  Too bad Justin.tv sold out a few years ago or I'd broadcast the episode.  I used to broadcast movies and shows after Sabres games for people back then.

Link to post
Share on other sites
  • 2 weeks later...

They got the guy through the DNA testing.  If he gets a lawyer worth his/her salt, this case will eventually make it's way to the federal appellate courts, up to and including the US Supreme Court.

 

In the meantime, he's likely screwed in the Arizona state courts and will be in prison during the years it takes for the case to make it's way through the courts.

 

 

Link to post
Share on other sites
On 1/10/2019 at 11:20 PM, Violator said:

New info says that a doctor examined her just under nine months ago.youd think they would notice she never had her once monthlys.unless that doesnt happen in a vegitative state.

I'm no doctor, but if a vegetative state means she stops menstruating, then she couldn't get pregnant. So yes, you'd think someone would have noticed.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.

×
×
  • Create New...