Man charged with murder after tricking girlfriend into taking abortion drug

This topic is locked from further discussion.

#1 Posted by Aljosa23 (25130 posts) -

(CBS/WTSP/AP) TAMPA--John Andrew Welden, a 28-year-old son of a Tampa fertility doctor, was charged with first degree murder on Tuesday for allegedly tricking his girlfriend into taking the abortion drug that killed her unborn fetus, according to CBS affiliate WTSP.

 According to prosecutors, Welden forged his father's signature on a prescription for Cytotec after a March ultrasound at his father's practice confirmed the pregnancy. Welden allegedly relabeled the pill bottle as "Amoxicillin" and told his girlfriend to take the antibiotic.

The federal indictment stated Welden "...intentionally attempted to kill and did kill, the unborn child," reported WTSP.

Dr. Stephen Welden has not been charged with any wrongdoing.

Defense attorneys said John Welden's actions were "aberrant" but they pointed out that he has no criminal history.

According to WTSP, Welden was a pre-med student at the University of South Florida.

He was denied bail on Wednesday and could face up to life in prison if convicted.

http://www.cbsnews.com/8301-504083_162-57584805-504083/john-welden-fla-man-tricked-his-girlfriend-with-abortion-drug-that-killed-unborn-child-report-says/

This is some tricky stuff. Even if the legal status of a fetus isn't technically human, this is still an incredibly heinous crime but I'm not sure if I agree with the charge. There's the discrepancy that it wouldn't even be manslaughter if the woman had taken the pill herself. The most sensible thing to do would be to create a new crime for killing an unborn fetus.

Thoughts?

#2 Posted by yellosnolvr (19302 posts) -
rofl
#3 Posted by xdude85 (4430 posts) -

So it was basically an abortion yet they're calling it murder? Yeah that makes a lot of sense.

#4 Posted by Vari3ty (11111 posts) -

Good. The jackass deserves it. 

#5 Posted by Sword-Demon (6970 posts) -

So it was basically an abortion yet they're calling it murder? Yeah that makes a lot of sense.

xdude85

an abortion without the consent of the mother is definitely illegal. (unless the mother's life is in danger)

idk if it can be considered murder though.

#6 Posted by Aljosa23 (25130 posts) -

So it was basically an abortion yet they're calling it murder? Yeah that makes a lot of sense.

xdude85

Yeah that's essentially it. The guy is still a scumbag but murder seems a bit harsh. I'm not sure how one can be pro abortion but agree with the charge.

#7 Posted by konvikt_17 (22253 posts) -

what an asshole

#8 Posted by MrPraline (21321 posts) -
yeah I have trouble with the murder charge. Guy is a scumbag, agreed, but it seems like going with "murder" (under the legal definition) is a bit tricky considering it wouldn't be murder legally if she aborted the baby herself. A decent lawyer should definitely to able to beat this.
#9 Posted by Strakha (1788 posts) -

I don't see it as any more of a murder than when the women has knowledge of it. It's certainly a crime though and a serious one in my book but I'm not exactly pro-abortion in the first place.

#10 Posted by XilePrincess (13130 posts) -

So it was basically an abortion yet they're calling it murder? Yeah that makes a lot of sense.

xdude85
What's the difference between this and shoving her down the stairs or kicking her in the stomach until she has a miscarriage? He intentionally did something that he knew would cause the death of the fetus inside her against her wishes. That's not cool. Forcing miscarriage or abortion on somebody is wrong, no matter what your stance on abortion is. I don't think murder is the right charge, but this is definitely NOT okay and does not draw any parallels to fathers' rights in terms of abortion, and while I know that this thread will become about that, I really wish it wouldn't.
#11 Posted by Bucked20 (6951 posts) -

Its murder,no different than punching her stomach to have a miscarriage

#12 Posted by lostrib (37708 posts) -

Its murder,no different than punching her stomach to have a miscarriage

Bucked20

is that murder?

#13 Posted by TacticalDesire (10713 posts) -

Oh, and all of this took place in my city, lovely.

#14 Posted by tagyhag (15867 posts) -
If the woman aborted it without the consent of the guy it wouldn't be murder. :P He should be charged with assault, murder is way too harsh.
#15 Posted by Jimn_tonic (819 posts) -

If the woman aborted it without the consent of the guy it wouldn't be murder.tagyhag

#16 Posted by toast_burner (21764 posts) -

[QUOTE="Bucked20"]

Its murder,no different than punching her stomach to have a miscarriage

lostrib

is that murder?

Depends on where you're from. I know it isn't in the UK.

#17 Posted by Wolfetan (7522 posts) -
yeah I have trouble with the murder charge. Guy is a scumbag, agreed, but it seems like going with "murder" (under the legal definition) is a bit tricky considering it wouldn't be murder legally if she aborted the baby herself. A decent lawyer should definitely to able to beat this. MrPraline
This. Its not murder.
#18 Posted by JustSignedUp (1148 posts) -
he should be charged with man slaughter tops, murder is taking it way too far. abortions happen all the time which was probably his mindset in doing this. 1st degree murder is meant for psychopaths like tamserav and bin laden
#19 Posted by whipassmt (14035 posts) -

(CBS/WTSP/AP) TAMPA--John Andrew Welden, a 28-year-old son of a Tampa fertility doctor, was charged with first degree murder on Tuesday for allegedly tricking his girlfriend into taking the abortion drug that killed her unborn fetus, according to CBS affiliate WTSP.

According to prosecutors, Welden forged his father's signature on a prescription for Cytotec after a March ultrasound at his father's practice confirmed the pregnancy. Welden allegedly relabeled the pill bottle as "Amoxicillin" and told his girlfriend to take the antibiotic.

The federal indictment stated Welden "...intentionally attempted to kill and did kill, the unborn child," reported WTSP.

Dr. Stephen Welden has not been charged with any wrongdoing.

Defense attorneys said John Welden's actions were "aberrant" but they pointed out that he has no criminal history.

According to WTSP, Welden was a pre-med student at the University of South Florida.

He was denied bail on Wednesday and could face up to life in prison if convicted.

http://www.cbsnews.com/8301-504083_162-57584805-504083/john-welden-fla-man-tricked-his-girlfriend-with-abortion-drug-that-killed-unborn-child-report-says/

This is some tricky stuff. Even if the legal status of a fetus isn't technically human, this is still an incredibly heinous crime but I'm not sure if I agree with the charge. There's the discrepancy that it wouldn't even be manslaughter if the woman had taken the pill herself. The most sensible thing to do would be to create a new crime for killing an unborn fetus.

Thoughts?

Aljosa23

A human fetus is a human. It is not a cat or a wallabee.

#20 Posted by whipassmt (14035 posts) -

[QUOTE="lostrib"]

[QUOTE="Bucked20"]

Its murder,no different than punching her stomach to have a miscarriage

toast_burner

is that murder?

Depends on where you're from. I know it isn't in the UK.

what crime would that be considered in the UK?

#21 Posted by whipassmt (14035 posts) -

I'm not sure why people are suggesting that the charge should be manslaughter or assault instead of murder. As the indictment says Welden "intended to kill and did kill" the kid. Manslaughter and assault don't seem to be fitting charges because, to my knowledge manslaughter is killing someone without intending to kill them (i.e. if you're fighting in a parking lot and you hit the guy and he falls and bumps his head and dies) and assault is when you hurt someone but neither kill nor intend to kill them.

#22 Posted by jeremiah06 (7169 posts) -
They can't charge him with murder... If a fetus isn't human...
#23 Posted by Ring_of_fire (15660 posts) -

If the baby was viable to live outside the womb.....I could see the murder charge........the guy should rot in jail though.

#24 Posted by Aljosa23 (25130 posts) -

A human fetus is a human. It is not a cat or a wallabee.

whipassmt

It is not legally human nor alive otherwise abortion would be illegal.

#25 Posted by jeremiah06 (7169 posts) -

I'm not sure why people are suggesting that the charge should be manslaughter or assault instead of murder. As the indictment says Welden "intended to kill and did kill" the kid. Manslaughter and assault don't seem to be fitting charges because, to my knowledge manslaughter is killing someone without intending to kill them (i.e. if you're fighting in a parking lot and you hit the guy and he falls and bumps his head and dies) and assault is when you hurt someone but neither kill nor intend to kill them.

whipassmt
He hurt the mother but a fetus isn't legally human so he can't get murder... assault is all they can hope for... unless they want to reclassify what a fetus is... even if convicted they'd win the appeal...
#26 Posted by whipassmt (14035 posts) -

[QUOTE="whipassmt"]

A human fetus is a human. It is not a cat or a wallabee.

Aljosa23

It is not legally human nor alive otherwise abortion would be illegal.

I think the term you are looking for is "a person". Not human, to claim that a human fetus is not human would be preposterous. And yes a fetus is alive, otherwise the book I used for a human disease class wouldn't have used the phrase "dead fetus".

Also I think in most countries abortion generally is illegal or at least substantially restricted.

#27 Posted by jeremiah06 (7169 posts) -

[QUOTE="Aljosa23"]

[QUOTE="whipassmt"]

A human fetus is a human. It is not a cat or a wallabee.

whipassmt

It is not legally human nor alive otherwise abortion would be illegal.

I think the term you are looking for is "a person". Not human, to claim that a human fetus is not human would be preposterous. And yes a fetus is alive, otherwise the book I used for a human disease class wouldn't have used the phrase "dead fetus".

Also I think in most countries abortion generally is illegal or at least substantially restricted.

Us law says it ain't alive until it's taken a breath outside the womb... thus you cannot be dead without first living... remember this is a legal matter common sense is irrelevant...
#28 Posted by the_bi99man (11047 posts) -

tumblr_mjmeot6Wbv1rqf5p6o2_400.gif

Just....

worf-startrek-facepalm.gif

#29 Posted by whipassmt (14035 posts) -

[QUOTE="whipassmt"]

I'm not sure why people are suggesting that the charge should be manslaughter or assault instead of murder. As the indictment says Welden "intended to kill and did kill" the kid. Manslaughter and assault don't seem to be fitting charges because, to my knowledge manslaughter is killing someone without intending to kill them (i.e. if you're fighting in a parking lot and you hit the guy and he falls and bumps his head and dies) and assault is when you hurt someone but neither kill nor intend to kill them.

jeremiah06

He hurt the mother but a fetus isn't legally human so he can't get murder... assault is all they can hope for... unless they want to reclassify what a fetus is... even if convicted they'd win the appeal...

Actually I think in many states it is murder to kill a fetus (sometimes with other sections of the law clarifying that this does not apply to a licensed physician committing an abortion with the consent of the mother). For instance when Ariel Castro the kidnapper killed those fetuses he was charged with aggravated murder (I think aggravated means that these murders were legally more serious than normal murder because they were done in the course of Castro committing another crime). Likewise if you kill a pregnant woman it is double-homicide in many states.

If any laws say that a fetus isn't "human" than that is a foolish law, a human mother and human father produce a human offspring.

#30 Posted by Serraph105 (28159 posts) -

[QUOTE="xdude85"]

So it was basically an abortion yet they're calling it murder? Yeah that makes a lot of sense.

XilePrincess

What's the difference between this and shoving her down the stairs or kicking her in the stomach until she has a miscarriage? He intentionally did something that he knew would cause the death of the fetus inside her against her wishes. That's not cool. Forcing miscarriage or abortion on somebody is wrong, no matter what your stance on abortion is. I don't think murder is the right charge, but this is definitely NOT okay and does not draw any parallels to fathers' rights in terms of abortion, and while I know that this thread will become about that, I really wish it wouldn't.

An act of violence of course.

At any rate I absolutely agree that an abortion requires the consent of the mother. Also charge definetly sets a bad precident.

#31 Posted by whipassmt (14035 posts) -

[QUOTE="whipassmt"]

[QUOTE="Aljosa23"]It is not legally human nor alive otherwise abortion would be illegal.

jeremiah06

I think the term you are looking for is "a person". Not human, to claim that a human fetus is not human would be preposterous. And yes a fetus is alive, otherwise the book I used for a human disease class wouldn't have used the phrase "dead fetus".

Also I think in most countries abortion generally is illegal or at least substantially restricted.

Us law says it ain't alive until it's taken a breath outside the womb... thus you cannot be dead without first living... remember this is a legal matter common sense is irrelevant...

I think you're oversimplifying and incorrect. For one thing different states have different laws. For another thing, the federal Partial-Birth Abortion Ban Act of 2003 forbids partial-birth abortions which take place before the baby takes a breath outside of the womb.

#32 Posted by whipassmt (14035 posts) -

The original post mentions a "federal indictment". Why is the federal government prosecuting instead of the state? Is it because the offense involved a pill, is that what gives the feds jurisdiction?

#33 Posted by Strakha (1788 posts) -

[QUOTE="whipassmt"]

A human fetus is a human. It is not a cat or a wallabee.

Aljosa23

It is not legally human nor alive otherwise abortion would be illegal.

In this case it is actually considered legally human under US law and thus the murder charge. I agree it doesn't make too much sense it is in one case but not the other. It is what it is. I don't make these laws or pretend to understand them. If women laid their eggs like birds do it would solve a lot of problems. Though I have to wonder if that were the case would it still only be murder if the male smashed the egg rather than the female? 

#34 Posted by whipassmt (14035 posts) -

[QUOTE="Aljosa23"]

[QUOTE="whipassmt"]

A human fetus is a human. It is not a cat or a wallabee.

Strakha

It is not legally human nor alive otherwise abortion would be illegal.

In this case it is actually considered legally human under US law and thus the murder charge. I agree it doesn't make too much sense it is in one case but not the other. It is what it is. I don't make these laws or pretend to understand them. If women laid their eggs like birds do it would solve a lot of problems. Though I have to wonder if that were the case would it still only be murder if the male smashed the egg rather than the female?

I think it's illegal under U.S. federal law to kill an eagle egg, it has something to do with endangered species.

#35 Posted by zeroyaoi (1934 posts) -
What a terrible person.
#36 Posted by jeremiah06 (7169 posts) -

[QUOTE="jeremiah06"][QUOTE="whipassmt"] I think the term you are looking for is "a person". Not human, to claim that a human fetus is not human would be preposterous. And yes a fetus is alive, otherwise the book I used for a human disease class wouldn't have used the phrase "dead fetus".

Also I think in most countries abortion generally is illegal or at least substantially restricted.

whipassmt

Us law says it ain't alive until it's taken a breath outside the womb... thus you cannot be dead without first living... remember this is a legal matter common sense is irrelevant...

I think you're oversimplifying and incorrect. For one thing different states have different laws. For another thing, the federal Partial-Birth Abortion Ban Act of 2003 forbids partial-birth abortions which take place before the baby takes a breath outside of the womb.

The vagueness of this whole matter works is his favor... like I said the appeal (unless they browbeat him into waving that right) would see a murder charge overturned...
#37 Posted by NEWMAHAY (3760 posts) -

[QUOTE="Bucked20"]

Its murder,no different than punching her stomach to have a miscarriage

lostrib

is that murder?

I really hope its considered murder
#38 Posted by whipassmt (14035 posts) -

Also, in addition to this guy going to jail, would this offense also screw up the guy's possibility of becoming a doctor (he was a pre-med student), since he purposely mislabled a drug.

So basically in addition to his actions being morally reprehensible, they were also incredibly stupid in that he ruined his chances of becoming a doctor and will likely go to jail.

#39 Posted by whipassmt (14035 posts) -

[QUOTE="whipassmt"]

[QUOTE="jeremiah06"] Us law says it ain't alive until it's taken a breath outside the womb... thus you cannot be dead without first living... remember this is a legal matter common sense is irrelevant...jeremiah06

I think you're oversimplifying and incorrect. For one thing different states have different laws. For another thing, the federal Partial-Birth Abortion Ban Act of 2003 forbids partial-birth abortions which take place before the baby takes a breath outside of the womb.

The vagueness of this whole matter works is his favor... like I said the appeal (unless they browbeat him into waving that right) would see a murder charge overturned...

would it? On what grounds would it be overturned? If the law defines his actions as murder, then I don't see an appeal doing any good.

#40 Posted by seanb12398 (66 posts) -
Murder? Are you kidding? What he did is messed up obviously but no. A fetus is a group of cells. Not a living breathing person. And living breathing people are who murder applies to.
#41 Posted by osirisx3 (1819 posts) -

good we need less people on earth not more.

#42 Posted by whipassmt (14035 posts) -

Murder? Are you kidding? What he did is messed up obviously but no. A fetus is a group of cells. Not a living breathing person. And living breathing people are who murder applies to. seanb12398
An adult is a group of cells. A fetus is living. And murder applies to people who aren't breathing (for instance if you shoot a guy who's hooked up to ventilator it's still murder).

#43 Posted by jeremiah06 (7169 posts) -

[QUOTE="jeremiah06"][QUOTE="whipassmt"] I think you're oversimplifying and incorrect. For one thing different states have different laws. For another thing, the federal Partial-Birth Abortion Ban Act of 2003 forbids partial-birth abortions which take place before the baby takes a breath outside of the womb.

whipassmt

The vagueness of this whole matter works is his favor... like I said the appeal (unless they browbeat him into waving that right) would see a murder charge overturned...

would it? On what grounds would it be overturned? If the law defines his actions as murder, then I don't see an appeal doing any good.

The classification of the fetus... This being defined as not "alive" is what makes this case so confusing... they'd argue it couldn't be murder... the DA needs to pursue charges other than just murder if they want him to serve jail time... hopefully this makes it to the supreme court so a precedence can be set...
#44 Posted by whipassmt (14035 posts) -

[QUOTE="whipassmt"]

[QUOTE="jeremiah06"] The vagueness of this whole matter works is his favor... like I said the appeal (unless they browbeat him into waving that right) would see a murder charge overturned...jeremiah06

would it? On what grounds would it be overturned? If the law defines his actions as murder, then I don't see an appeal doing any good.

The classification of the fetus... This being defined as not "alive" is what makes this case so confusing... they'd argue it couldn't be murder... the DA needs to pursue charges other than just murder if they want him to serve jail time... hopefully this makes it to the supreme court so a precedence can be set...

I don't know what federal law says about it, since the article says "federal indictment" I think he is being prosecuted under federal law. In some, maybe even many states, this is legally defined as murder.

#45 Posted by AdamPA1006 (6420 posts) -

Its hard to be against abortion nowadays if I say I'm against it people look at me like I have 3 heads. Anyone in this thread against abortion? I guess there really in no logical reason to say you support abortion in certain cases (like mother raped) but others not. Unless anyone wants to enlighten me

#46 Posted by Rattlesnake_8 (18414 posts) -
yeah I have trouble with the murder charge. Guy is a scumbag, agreed, but it seems like going with "murder" (under the legal definition) is a bit tricky considering it wouldn't be murder legally if she aborted the baby herself. A decent lawyer should definitely to able to beat this. MrPraline
Agreed.
#47 Posted by JustSignedUp (1148 posts) -
an unborn baby that doesnt even know what 2+2 that needs to be sacrificed to fix a paraplegic college professor's spine = worth
#48 Posted by worlock77 (22547 posts) -

Meh. I doubt the prosecutor seriously intends to try him for murder. This is a fairly common tactic. Aim for a high charge in order to get the defendant to agree to a plea to a lesser charge.

#49 Posted by lostrib (37708 posts) -

an unborn baby that doesnt even know what 2+2 that needs to be sacrificed to fix a paraplegic college professor's spine = worthJustSignedUp

what does this have to do with the issue?

#50 Posted by JustSignedUp (1148 posts) -

[QUOTE="JustSignedUp"]an unborn baby that doesnt even know what 2+2 that needs to be sacrificed to fix a paraplegic college professor's spine = worthlostrib

what does this have to do with the issue?

all this guy did was abort a baby, the most he should get charged with is public mischief