Frederick Beach Tried For Murder Of Fetus

[Peeperann]

Federal prosecutors in New Mexico believe they may be the first to use a 2004 law to charge someone with killing a fetus while causing the death or injury of the mother.

Charges against Frederick Beach, accused of beating his pregnant girlfriend to death, include one under the Unborn Victims of Violence Act. U.S. Attorney Greg Fouratt said his office's research found "no other case in the country in which that section (of law) has been charged," the Albuquerque Journal reported Tuesday.

Attorneys for Beach, 37, said they expect to pursue any available legal challenges.

"We may be breaking ground on a new area of law," said defense attorney Amy Sirignano. "We're not sure where that will lead us."

Beach pleaded not guilty last week to killing a fetus and to first-degree murder and child abuse charges.

He is accused of beating to death Verlinda Kinsel, 29, in September and killing the fetus she had said was his. Authorities say the victim's 9-year-old son witnessed the assault.

If convicted, Beach faces life in prison.

The case is being prosecuted in federal court because Kinsel was killed on the Navajo reservation.

The Unborn Victims of Violence Act stemmed from the abduction and murder of a pregnant woman, Laci Peterson, in California in 2003. The law makes it a crime to kill a fetus in utero at any stage of development while committing another federal crime; it does not require the perpetrator to know the woman was pregnant.
http://www.abc/crime.com

[Kitty]

The Unborn Victims of Violence Act stemmed from the abduction and murder of a pregnant woman, Laci Peterson, in California in 2003. The law makes it a crime to kill a fetus in utero at any stage of development while committing another federal crime; it does not require the perpetrator to know the woman was pregnant.

I like this law.. I hate that it's needed..

[Peeperann]

I like this law.. I hate that it's needed..

I like it too, but also hate that it's needed.

[Tazzzz]

Yah, I was thinking of posting this article , Its real interesting and I can hardly wait to see what the outcome of its use will be. Its pretty sticky stuff, as far as using in court and will probly really be decided in the higher courts, to see if it will fly or not. Don't get me wrong, I am all in favor of it , its just that they will have to decide what constitutes a life, it might do better for different stages of pregnancy. I like the added part about still being able to use the charge regardless of whether the pregnancy was known or not.

The real biggy here is the crime was done on a reservation, so its a federal court and they can get away with allot more than a regular court can.

Its hard to tell were the door they are opening will lead to, could be changes in abortion laws or even say a drug or alcoholic mother and the effects the usage has on her unborn child.

[silvahalo68]

He is accused of beating to death Verlinda Kinsel, 29, in September and killing the fetus she had said was his. Authorities say the victim's 9-year-old son witnessed the assault.

Saddens me that we need this type of law, but clearly so many do not respect life at any stage of development in utero or otherwise. He killed two and forever changed the life of a 9 year old boy...he deserves punishment for that too. I hope he gets life in prison and death in hell.

[Athena]

This is an interesting law - one that I generally agree with. I wish it could be phrased differently, however, because I don't believe it constitutes murder any more than an abortion does. A fetus simply is not granted the same rights as a born individual.

This is more like destruction of property, really. If a mother had done this to herself, it would not be considered murder (generally speaking), so it's her interest in seeing that baby to birth that gives the fetus any legal standing. That's why I have difficulty considering it "murder" and am wary about applying this particular term to anything prenatal. Legal precedents can easily give way to slippery slopes. How much further can we go to protect the "rights" of the fetus before we impose on abortion rights?

Still, I do agree that individuals should suffer severe penalties, murder-like penalties, for this type of crime.

[Steph]

...Its hard to tell were the door they are opening will lead to, could be changes in abortion laws or even say a drug or alcoholic mother and the effects the usage has on her unborn child.


Tazz that's a huge issue with this law - how far the door is openend.

This is an interesting law - one that I generally agree with. I wish it could be phrased differently, however, because I don't believe it constitutes murder any more than an abortion does. A fetus simply is not granted the same rights as a born individual.

This is more like destruction of property, really. If a mother had done this to herself, it would not be considered murder (generally speaking), so it's her interest in seeing that baby to birth that gives the fetus any legal standing. That's why I have difficulty considering it "murder" and am wary about applying this particular term to anything prenatal. Legal precedents can easily give way to slippery slopes. How much further can we go to protect the "rights" of the fetus before we impose on abortion rights?

Still, I do agree that individuals should suffer severe penalties, murder-like penalties, for this type of crime.

Great Post Athena! Honestly - I don't think this law will last very long, and with someone finally being charged with it, having the standing to appeal, I think it will be declared unconstitutional before long.

I like your destruction of property analogy alot. It's important to remember WHO was in office/power at the time this law was created...

My biggest problem, and where I see constitutional issue is b/c the Defendant doesn't need to have knowledge the person is pregnant. (Unlike some state laws where the fetus must be viable outside the womb for the defendant to be charged with murder)

Thanks for posting this - very interesting