Friday, September 14, 2007

Another Exciting Episode of "What's Wrong with This Picture?"

Yes, the fun game where those with an keen eye of observation notice things that are glaringly wrong with the picture that are not addressed or acknowledged by the main stream media.

Can YOU see what's wrong with this picture?

Hint: It's not the disgusting fact the father killed his child.


Anonymous said...

Kids having kids.

Anonymous said...

no man, he killed a child and could walk out of jail at freaking AGE 27!

I actually don't believe in the death penalty, but this guy should get life in prison caged in a little tiny box with a picture of the child.

Servius said...

13 years? He'll likely be out in 9? At the age of 27? That's it? For beating a baby to death?

marketmania said...

How about having a kid when you are 16 in the first place? Brilliant....

Anonymous said...

Hmmm. Let me give this a try. I'm thinking that a little "foreshadowing" was taking place, as my Sophomore English teacher used to say.

Looking at the caption next to the picture of the little girl, it says, "After being placed into foster care in December, she was returned to her home two weeks before her death." Seems as though we have some sort of repeat offense taking place, and there probably should have been some better care taken in returning the girl to her death.

Did I win?

Eowyn said...

Unless the laws of genetics have changed recently, there's no way that could be his daughter.

Wrong hair colour, wrong hair type, wrong skin tones.

Alfred T. Mahan said...

I'll take a crack at it. I noticed this little gem right at the end: "Judge hopes memory of child will be a life-changing inspiration for the father".

This criminal thug, if I read this clipping correctly, repeatedly punched his toddler daughter in the stomach until she died, and he got about the same sentence as someone could get for, say, a major burglary, and this judge in Cloud Cuckoo Land hopes this wrist slap will somehow change this thug's life?

He. Killed. A. Child.

Brutally and apparently with no remorse. Life without parole at hard labor making gravel...THAT might change his outlook on life.

This judge shold be impeached for being an airheaded idiot.

Ro! said...

The name "Pinky" brings the question "What are we going to do today Brain?" to mind..

Than again a lack of brain in the family makes that question obsolete.

why is the father being sentenced for “Toddler’s fatal beating”. He should be sentenced for “Toddler’s Murder” - There is a difference!

I bet that was not the first time this guy went into a rampage and beat up the kid. There gotta be a pattern. Shame n the mother, and the rest the family for not seeing this coming.

Again, I refer to the “Lack of brain” comment earlier.

FT Pete said...

No Mother - ?

Kasia said...

Eowyn, if the mother was white or very light-skinned, that could very well be his daughter.


1. He fathered a child at 16.

2. Despite some sort of troubling history (child was in foster care), child was returned home. Points to either a very bad decision on the part of the state child welfare agency and/or some duplicitousness by the mother (i.e. perhaps he wasn't supposed to have access to baby Destiny but was allowed in anyway).

3. He's only getting 9 - 13 years for beating his daughter to death. Probably because the gov't couldn't prove premeditation.

4. The tone of the article, especially the caption, is clearly intended to try to evoke sympathy for the perpetrator.

5. This is nitpicky, but I agree with Ro! - "toddler's fatal beating" is a terrible way of phrasing it. Not only does it euphemize the crime (he "fatally beat" his daughter, he didn't "kill" her), but it also is a little equivocal. It sounds like the toddler could have perpetrated the fatal beating in question.

Kasia said...

Ooh - I missed one other thing. "Paramedics were called" - by whom? Did loving Daddy call the ambulance, or was someone else home who was unwilling or unable to stop him from beating the child to death?

Captain Capitalism said...

Excellent observations by all, actually you guys pointed out some things i hadn't thought of, but I was going for the mathematics that this loser had to have fathered the child at the age of 16.

Paul E. Zimmerman said...

I'm late to the party, but I think you're wrong on this one, cappy. The numbers are not what's wrong here. What's wrong is that this POS isn't sentenced to dangle at the end of a rope. He was plenty old enough to understand the gravity of such a crime, so therefore having shown such disregard, death is the only appropriate sentence.