"Nude" Skater Hits Rockefeller Ice
Adam Lambert Says He's A Performer, Not A Babysitter
Protest To Keep 9/11 Trials Out Of NYC
Lacrosse Sex Scandal — Sexual Assault or Prank?
Woman Sues Publishing Company Over Sexist Sales Culture
Last Sunday, the Daily News had a story with the graphic, "says it all" headline: Baby dead in bucket of vomit. Last Friday night, before going to sleep with her three month old baby next to her, a young mother left a bucket next to her bed because she wasn't feeling well. She threw up in the middle of the night, and the next day, she discovered her baby daugher in the bucket - apparently the baby fell in. Baby Niah Ford was pronounced dead, and an autopsy found she died of drowning and asphyxiation. Yesterday, mother Savarin Dejesus was arrested for criminally negligent homicide and endangering the welfare of a child. Newsday reports that the police waited for autopsy results before charging her: "A three-month-old just doesn't walk into a bucket."
Dejesus and her baby had been living at the Fox House, a group home on East 117th Street. One woman told the NY Times that the baby "didn't look neglected" while another who knew Dejesus said, “I guess it was just a big mistake, a stupid mistake, a big, big mistake.”
add to stumble upon
add to reddit
tweet this
post to facebook
Why is she being prosecuted? Was she drunk or ill?
She had been out all night 'partying', returning home around 8AM. She is being charged with negligent homicide. Negligent homicide is a charge brought against persons, who by inaction, allow others under their care to die.
This is such a tragedy. I always feel that not many young girls cope well with motherhood especially in today's society when most 18 year olds are carefree and having fun. At that age no one wants to be tied down with responsibility but unfortunately DeJesus did have this baby and was unable to take care of her. I am sad for both mother and daughter.
"Negligent homicide is a charge brought against persons, who by inaction, allow others under their care to die."
But Jen's headline calls it murder, which is willful and premeditated. Sloppy editing, or did the mom make a determined choice to shove her own kid, head-first, into a bucket of vomit?
Point taken, Leonardo. I was confused with my definitions of homicide/murder/manslaughter.
The headline doesn't say anything about murder. It reads, "Mom Charged with Baby's Death". Did it get changed?
Mark go grab some coffee and join us again in 5 minutes.
I mean if you're already going back to make corrections to the article, how about doing it properly? It is just re-re-tarded already with this site. It irks me to no end that you people make money with this site yet continue to constantly fail to edit it above a fourth grade level.
>>>she discovered that her baby daugher in the bucket
re-re, there is NOTHING I would love more than to put an end to commenter complaints about typos et al. Believe you me, we're trying work on it.
I do a lot of legal work for homeless people and, God bless them, my heart goes out to them.
"The 18-year-old mom said she left Niah with another resident when she went out for a drink Friday night, a source said.
She returned, took the baby back to her room and threw up in the bucket before falling asleep.
She found Niah in the container at 2:40 p.m., cops said."
This, however, boils my fucking blood. If you can't afford to support a child financially, emotionally, whatever, please don't have or raise one. Abortion is entirely legal in this country and we have a robust adoption industry. This child-woman's three-month-old daughter suffered a horrific death because this woman was in no way equipped to deal with her.
And if she was waking up at 2:40 p.m., there is absolutely no way she had just a drink. Sure, maybe she was just sick, but I'm not that inclined to give a woman who left her 3-month-old with somebody in a frigging group home the benefit of the doubt.
>>>re-re, there is NOTHING I would love more than to put an end to commenter complaints about typos et al. Believe you me, we're trying work on it.
If I told my boss this was my top priority and there was NOTHING I wanted more, and this was the content I was producing, believe you me, I would no longer be employed. You should not be either, IMHO.
First of all, shelters have baby sitters?
Also, she is 18. Maybe they should charge the person who served her alcohol too.
Irony would be that after her all night partying, if she ended up pregnant again.
Sorry Tina, I'll try harder next time so as not to upset you. Alas, my job sometimes requires me to not surf the 'net for the entire day. =+)
Wow, re-re, you need to back the f**k off! As I understand it, this site is written/edited by people who have "day jobs" and for whom this is a pleasurable sideline.
Just stop reading this site; then you won't feel obligated to scold the contributors.
Pathetic.
I guess the lesson here is that bad grammar is a bigger crime than homicide.
dr-
Actually, you are wrong. This is how Jake makes a living, believe it or not. Regardless, the comment was made in response to Jen's comment that there is NOTHING she would like more than to correct the problems. And I feel I should continue to read the site, and provide constructive criticism so they understand the need to improve. After all, Jen is obviously now aware that the issues need to be addressed. Without people like me bringing these issues up, they would never be corrected, or it wouldn't be a priority to edit at an adult level.
It's funny that I feel *obligated* to scold them, yet they don't feel obligated to edit their site properly.
And what about any of this is pathetic? That I enjoy reading Gothamist, want to see it prosper, but fret that it won't due to the annoying lack of editing? Or the fact that there is a lack of editing in the first place? Which do you think is more pathetic?
dr-
This is all aside from the fact that her own comment about working on fixing the problems is in itself poorly written:
>>>Believe you me, we're trying work on it.
I mean COME ON.
This has got to be the single most disgusting story I've seen so far this year. I just about blew my coffee across the room this morning when I first heard it on NY1.
About the typos and grammar errors: Jeebus, just hire a copyeditor and be done with it. Most freelancers charge anywhere from $20-$40 an hour. Since it would take very little time to edit a single post, maybe you could set up an arrangement with someone to just pay him or her a dollar or two per post.
Re-re, YOU are pathetic, getting so angry about all this. As you obviously consider it your personal duty (otherwise "[the errors] would never be corrected") to point out the errors, perhaps you could do everyone the service of rewriting, in their entirety, the posts you consider especially egregious and posting that version in the comments.
Chris's suggestion to filter the posts through a copyeditor is a good one. It's also constructive, not a peevish rant!
Seriously, who gives a shit about the infrequent error? Given the insane amount of text-message abbreviations we have to deal with these days ("u" and "ur" being prime examples), I frankly don't mind if Jen makes an error.
The fact that people repeatedly freak out about it on this site...pick better fights. Really.
dr-
I'm not really angry at all, I'm not sure where you are getting that from. I still don't understand why it's pathetic to let the people whom I patronize know when I am not happy with a service they are providing. I make them money by trafficing their site and clicking their ad links, so I'm their customer. If you are served bad food in a restraunt, do you just choke it down, or do you mention it to the waiter, so they can fix it and avoid making the mistake for future customers?
When people disagree with items in the NYT or find errors in the paper, do they not write a letter to the editor? As a business owner, I'd certainly rather have someone tell me something that would keep them as a customer instead of just leaving and never coming back again with no explanation.
And use your own logic, if you don't like my comments, don't read them.
Here we go about the typos again.
I agree with Ryan. Shut the fuck up already. If you find a typo just point it out, don’t have a pissy fit about it and bitch, its taking attention away from the subject.
"A three-month-old just doesn't walk into a bucket."
True, but 3 month olds can get into anything these days, some smart ones can even get into properly sealed pill bottles.
Re-Re, for all your grammatical prowess, you have forgotten one thing, keep it on topic! Really. Now stop.
I do want to comment on the person who stated that if you can't afford a kid, then have an abortion. So should only rich people have children? Many of our amazing writers, poets, doctors, politicians, would have never been born if we had followed this (flawed) "economic" rule. Maybe you don't realize it, but your statement is elitist. We have enough elitists in this world. Maybe we should ask THEM to stop spawning.
"I do want to comment on the person who stated that if you can't afford a kid, then have an abortion. So should only rich people have children? Many of our amazing writers, poets, doctors, politicians, would have never been born if we had followed this (flawed) "economic" rule. Maybe you don't realize it, but your statement is elitist. We have enough elitists in this world. Maybe we should ask THEM to stop spawning."
My statement isn't elitist in the least - actually acknowledging that a child bears the brunt of his or her parents' poor judgment is acknowledging reality, something most elitists aren't too hot at. If you think I'm arguing that only rich people should have children, I suggest you bolster your reading comprehension skills. I merely pointed out that somebody who is dwelling in a homeless shelter and likely addicted to or using drugs may not be in the best position to be a parent and pointed out that abortion/adoption/foster care are all viable options. Yes, we'd all like to think that the best place for a child is with his or her natural parents, but that's simply not always the case.
And please, please give up your romantic view of the noble poor and their offspring in homeless shelters. Shelters are terrible, terrible places to raise a child - even the best ones. Only somebody who dwells in a frigging fantasy world would think otherwise.
I will bet you the shelter did not provide a cot for the baby, you are never suppossed to sleep in the same bed as your baby!!!
Also, that being said...it is very difficult to find a place to get an abortion for free in New York City, if you aree poor, catholic, spanish, and have no insurance.
Also, unless you have a healthy white child, it is very difficult to find a good family to adopt your kid, and more often than not your kid will shuttled from foster home to foster home.
I will bet you no charges would have been filed had this been in Long Island to a middle class lady.
ST,
what we have here is a failure to communicate, well, effectively. I agree that shelters are no place for kids. But the solution is not abortion. I am pro-choice, and abortion can't be the only option for a young mother. Suggesting to someone in a shelter that she abort her baby is about economics. It's not that it will be a health risk for her or the baby, right? The thing is, once you start making suggestions like that, it can lead to other, economic-based, suggestions and where does it stop? The key is providing sex education early on. Wait, was that too noble and romantic??? Cheers.