Well. They’ve not been found guilty, and the prosecution wasn’t even ready to present the case. If it was such a CLEAR case of abuse, the case would be ready to go, right?

KxVicious, have you NOT SEEN or SEEN the cigarette burns on the baby? Have you SEEN or NOT SEEN the baby? I guess the baby fell on the cigarette or maybe it was walking and stepped on a lit cigarette. Yeah, that’s probably what happened.  I’ll bet one of the babies stole a cigarette from someone and was smoking it and the other baby kicked it out of his hands and that is the cause of the burns on his feet. You can never tell these days what 5 month old children will do. They are getting into trouble at extremely early ages nowadays.

Sirk, have you SEEN cigarette burns on the baby? Have you SEEN the baby? Did a DOCTOR say that it was IRREFUTABLY cigarette burns?

The last time I checked, osteogenesis imperfecta had nothing to do with cigarette burns on a baby’s feet. Cigarette burns on a child anywhere is just plain mean.  If the mom actually didn’t do any of the abuse, she should still be held accountable for letting someone else do this to her children. If I left my child in someone’s care and came home and found something like this, the authorities would have been called immediately. If she was scared of him, for the sake of her babies she should have left and went to a shelter for her children’s safety. NO EXCUSES! He has to sleep sometime or if she went to work she could have told someone and the authorities could have picked the babies up.  Again, NO EXCUSES!

If no medical condition could be proven to cause this,which I doubt, I would give each 20 years to think about it and in about that length of time the babies should be old enough to look out for them selves,and might even have a bone to pick with their parents then.

Hmmm, sounds like neither should be out to me! But, why not they can make money this way with bonds! Sale a bag of pot and see what you get 20 yrs but beat your children and you get a slap on the back…

I wonder about the possibility of Osteogenisis Imperfecta. The lawyer alluded to that in an early interview. Have the children been evaluated?

It doesnt take a rocket scientist to figure out who the culprits are in this case, and to let her out on bond is wrong.

When were they found guilty? The article says the prosecutors are not ready. Just curious how some of you know their guilt when they haven’t gone to trial.

We treat dogs better than we have these children. Letting them out is so wrong for those children.