Warning

 

Close

Confirm Action

Are you sure you wish to do this?

Confirm Cancel
Member Login

Site Notices
Posted: 10/12/2007 8:46:19 AM EST
W. Va. Mother Convicted Of Killing Kids Set Free

kdka.com/local/local_story_284231724.html




Courts in West Virginia have said repeatedly that Marybeth Davis should not have a new trial in the deaths of her two small children.

But, after being convicted in 1997 and told she would never get out of prison, Davis is a free woman again.

She was originally sentenced to life in prison without parole.

A West Virginia jury convicted Davis in 1997 of giving her infant son, Seth, an insulin overdose in 1981. He remained in a near-vegetative state until he died years later at age 21.

Davis was also found guilty of killing her 3-year-old daughter, Tegan, with diet pills loaded with caffeine.

During the trial, prosecutors argued Davis suffered from Munchausen Syndrome by proxy, a mental disorder where parents, usually moms, hurt their children to get attention.

The jury agreed with that argument. Davis has claimed since day one that she was innocent and her children died of rare genetic disorders.

In a dramatic turn of events, Davis was let out of prison this week. In a plea bargain agreement, she pleaded guilty to two counts of attempting to injure someone by poisoning them.

The attorney who represented her during her 1997 said there was a simple explanation after Davis lost 10 years of her life behind bars.

“She was confronted with a deal, in which if she muttered yes, at the end of a paragraph or two, she would get immediate release,” Paul Detch, her former defense attorney, said.

“She took what would be the rational decision - she muttered yes - and, that's the obvious that influenced her decision,” he said.

As part of the plea bargain agreement, there’s a gag order in effect. Davis is under court order not to discuss her case or assert her innocence or she’ll be sent back to prison.
(© MMVII, CBS Broadcasting Inc. All Rights Reserved.)


WTF?
Link Posted: 10/12/2007 9:05:15 AM EST
She needs to die.
Link Posted: 10/12/2007 9:05:23 AM EST
What's really amazing is that she didn't blame everything on her husband and/or boyfriend.
Link Posted: 10/12/2007 9:05:30 AM EST
swirling...


Link Posted: 10/12/2007 9:06:38 AM EST
[Last Edit: 10/12/2007 9:07:00 AM EST by DK-Prof]

Originally Posted By Admiral_Crunch:
Yeah, I don't see how gag orders are compatible with the First Amendment.


If it's part of an AGREEMENT - as a condition of her parole - I don't see it being legally different from things like non-compete agreements that companies can enter into with employees.It's not a first amendment restriction if you voluntarily enter in a contract.


I'll agree to never speak of geese again, if you pay me $1000. If we strike that deal, my first amendment rights have not been violated at all.
Link Posted: 10/12/2007 9:08:11 AM EST

Originally Posted By DK-Prof:

Originally Posted By Admiral_Crunch:
Yeah, I don't see how gag orders are compatible with the First Amendment.


If it's part of an AGREEMENT - as a condition of her parole - I don't see it being legally different from things like non-compete agreements that companies can enter into with employees.It's not a first amendment restriction if you voluntarily enter in a contract.


I'll agree to never speak of geese again, if you pay me $1000. If we strike that deal, my first amendment rights have not been violated at all.


Too late for you DK.
Link Posted: 10/12/2007 9:08:45 AM EST

Originally Posted By DK-Prof:

Originally Posted By Admiral_Crunch:
Yeah, I don't see how gag orders are compatible with the First Amendment.


If it's part of an AGREEMENT - as a condition of her parole - I don't see it being legally different from things like non-compete agreements that companies can enter into with employees.It's not a first amendment restriction if you voluntarily enter in a contract.


I'll agree to never speak of geese again, if you pay me $1000. If we strike that deal, my first amendment rights have not been violated at all.


In this case, yeah, I can see that. Good point. But what about instances where a judge says "Oh, by the way, if you talk about this case to anyone, you're going to jail."?
Link Posted: 10/12/2007 9:08:46 AM EST
Huh.

A gag order about a plea deal...can't say I've ever heard about that before.
Link Posted: 10/12/2007 9:09:30 AM EST

Originally Posted By DK-Prof:

Originally Posted By Admiral_Crunch:
Yeah, I don't see how gag orders are compatible with the First Amendment.


If it's part of an AGREEMENT - as a condition of her parole - I don't see it being legally different from things like non-compete agreements that companies can enter into with employees.It's not a first amendment restriction if you voluntarily enter in a contract.


I'll agree to never speak of geese again, if you pay me $1000. If we strike that deal, my first amendment rights have not been violated at all.


I highlighted it because I am wondering what was so secret about the "deal" that required a gag order in the first place?

As an aside, as taxpayers, I think we have a right to know what happens in our courtrooms. Never much liked the idea of undisclosed settlements either. Too much stuff behind closed doors undermines the perception of integrity. Not that I would ever accuse lawyers of having any in the first place.

Link Posted: 10/12/2007 9:10:13 AM EST

Originally Posted By Admiral_Crunch:


In this case, yeah, I can see that. Good point. But what about instances where a judge says "Oh, by the way, if you talk about this case to anyone, you're going to jail."?


That would be compeltely outrageous, I agree - unless we are talking about national security stuff ( that someone perhaps learned by accident without signing any agreement with the government)
Link Posted: 10/12/2007 9:11:05 AM EST
[Last Edit: 10/12/2007 9:11:26 AM EST by tommytrauma]

Originally Posted By DK-Prof:

Originally Posted By Admiral_Crunch:
Yeah, I don't see how gag orders are compatible with the First Amendment.


If it's part of an AGREEMENT - as a condition of her parole - I don't see it being legally different from things like non-compete agreements that companies can enter into with employees.It's not a first amendment restriction if you voluntarily enter in a contract.


I'll agree to never speak of geese again, if you pay me $1000. If we strike that deal, my first amendment rights have not been violated at all.


Paypal sent!
Link Posted: 10/12/2007 9:12:23 AM EST

Originally Posted By John_Wayne777:
Huh.

A gag order about a plea deal...can't say I've ever heard about that before.



Maybe I misunderstood the story.

I don't think the gag order applies to the plea deal - I think it prohibits her from going on Oprah and talking about her case, and also prohibits her from claiming she was "innoncent" and try to get sympathy from anyone. The way I understood it, the deal simply prevents her from trying to claim she is not guilty, and from profiting from her case by talking to the press about it.
Link Posted: 10/12/2007 9:12:35 AM EST

Originally Posted By DK-Prof:

Originally Posted By Admiral_Crunch:
Yeah, I don't see how gag orders are compatible with the First Amendment.


If it's part of an AGREEMENT - as a condition of her parole - I don't see it being legally different from things like non-compete agreements that companies can enter into with employees.It's not a first amendment restriction if you voluntarily enter in a contract.


I'll agree to never speak of geese again, if you pay me $1000. If we strike that deal, my first amendment rights have not been violated at all.


Private party agreements are one thing - there's no "state action" and therefore no 1st Amendment problem at all. Agreements in which the state tells someone not to speak about a certain subject or they'll be thrown in prison, however, are a little more problematic. Then again, the text of the First Amendment starts with "Congress shall make no law," so it doesn't literally apply to court orders.
Link Posted: 10/12/2007 9:13:46 AM EST
Why the fuck didn't they leave the bitch for the mother lovin rats?
Link Posted: 10/12/2007 9:35:10 AM EST

Originally Posted By danno-in-michigan:

Originally Posted By DK-Prof:

Originally Posted By Admiral_Crunch:
Yeah, I don't see how gag orders are compatible with the First Amendment.


If it's part of an AGREEMENT - as a condition of her parole - I don't see it being legally different from things like non-compete agreements that companies can enter into with employees.It's not a first amendment restriction if you voluntarily enter in a contract.


I'll agree to never speak of geese again, if you pay me $1000. If we strike that deal, my first amendment rights have not been violated at all.


Private party agreements are one thing - there's no "state action" and therefore no 1st Amendment problem at all. Agreements in which the state tells someone not to speak about a certain subject or they'll be thrown in prison, however, are a little more problematic. Then again, the text of the First Amendment starts with "Congress shall make no law," so it doesn't literally apply to court orders.


The state didn't tell her to do shit. They asked, she agreed.
Link Posted: 10/12/2007 9:41:30 AM EST
[Last Edit: 10/12/2007 9:41:57 AM EST by SJSAMPLE]
The did the same thing with Lauren "Bambi" Bambenik (the former Playboy chick who became a cop and then supposedly killed her ex-husband's girlfriend (or something).

After years on the run, she was caught in Canada and returned.
She did a few more years and then was released if she agreed to shut up and not try to claim innocence any more.
Link Posted: 10/12/2007 9:44:13 AM EST
Since when is someone sentenced to life, and then offered a plea where she can get out?

Maybe the judge was just pissed off about this, and decided to tell her, "You're admitting you're guilty. That's why I have to let you go. But you're going to go through life as a guilty person... if you try to assert your innocence, back into prison you go".
Link Posted: 10/12/2007 9:44:56 AM EST
WV is still 30 years behind the rest of the country so this kind of thing doesn't surprise me, our "courts" are pathetic at best
Link Posted: 10/12/2007 9:46:58 AM EST

Originally Posted By SJSAMPLE:
The did the same thing with Lauren "Bambi" Bambenik (the former Playboy chick who became a cop and then supposedly killed her ex-husband's girlfriend (or something).

After years on the run, she was caught in Canada and returned.
She did a few more years and then was released if she agreed to shut up and not try to claim innocence any more.


THANK YOU for bringing up Bambi, and now I can post this important bulletin:

Bambenek suing Dr. Phil show over loss of leg


A former Milwaukee policewoman trying to prove her innocence in a 20-year-old murder case has sued the Dr. Phil show, blaming producers for the situation that led to the loss of her right leg.

The suit filed this week in Superior Court, says Laurie (Bambi) Bembenek was hurt in 2002 when she tried to escape from an apartment where she had been taken and kept by producers of the Dr. Phil show.

During a panic attack, she tied bed sheets together as a rope but fell from the second floor after they unravelled. The impact caused several severe fractures and the loss of her leg, the suit said.


Link Posted: 10/12/2007 10:01:28 AM EST

Originally Posted By Merrell:

Originally Posted By SJSAMPLE:
The did the same thing with Lauren "Bambi" Bambenik (the former Playboy chick who became a cop and then supposedly killed her ex-husband's girlfriend (or something).

After years on the run, she was caught in Canada and returned.
She did a few more years and then was released if she agreed to shut up and not try to claim innocence any more.


THANK YOU for bringing up Bambi, and now I can post this important bulletin:

Bambenek suing Dr. Phil show over loss of leg


A former Milwaukee policewoman trying to prove her innocence in a 20-year-old murder case has sued the Dr. Phil show, blaming producers for the situation that led to the loss of her right leg.

The suit filed this week in Superior Court, says Laurie (Bambi) Bembenek was hurt in 2002 when she tried to escape from an apartment where she had been taken and kept by producers of the Dr. Phil show.

During a panic attack, she tied bed sheets together as a rope but fell from the second floor after they unravelled. The impact caused several severe fractures and the loss of her leg, the suit said.




I never knew that's how she lost her leg.

ARFCOM strikes again!
Top Top