That Didn’t Come Out Right… Prosecutor Realises
In a Brampton Court today, Justice Fragomeni handed down the verdict in the case against Allison Cox, a woman guilty in a case of criminal negligence, in which she is charged with manslaughter, causing the death of her autistic adopted sister, Tiffany Pinckney, who died from malnutrition in the basement of her sister’s Mississauga home.
The evidence clearly indicates that Allison Cox did not provide Tiffany Pinckney with the necessities of life, including adequate food, water and medical attention to sustain her life.
This is the general consensus across the board. The woman was deprived of the basic necessities of life and as a result of it, died in Cox’s basement on April 2, 2005. She had died in conditioned labelled as appalling.
It’s amazing that the Crown prosecutor, John Raftery, got this ruling and not because Cox is innocent in any way but because of this little snippet:
“People treat their pets better than Tiffany Pinckney was treated,” Raftery said in his closing arguments in November. “The level of care, or more precisely the neglect she received was not suitable for a human being.”
…so, you’re telling us that there is an acceptable level of negligence and that Cox went one step too far? And that if she had stayed within certain boundaries then there wouldn’t have been a problem, would there, Mr Prosecutor?
Given such a statement, it’s surprising that the judge didn’t catch on to that. That the prosecutor wasn’t called out for implying that there are acceptable; suitable levels of neglect that are all right for human beings. Perhaps it’s good that justice can be blind, otherwise it can’t be served in light of such statements.
Guilty verdict in woman’s starvation death
Stumble It!
