Court Opinion

ID: 9711676
Source: CourtListenerOpinion
Date Created: 2023-08-26 04:36:32.769592+00
Date Added: 2024-06-11T18:23:06.618969
License: Public Domain

Dissenting Opinion
Jackson, J.
I am not able to concur in the majority opinion and dissent thereto.
I am of the opinion the appellant’s motion for new trial should have been sustained. There was, in my opinion a failure on the part of the State to prove the guilt of the defendant beyond a reasonable doubt.
Not one of the baby-sitters called the condition of the baby to the attention of either the appellant or his wife. The mother of one of the sitters was the wife of a policeman and was called by her daughter to examine the child, but she neither directed the attention of appellant, his wife, nor any social agency of the city to the condition of the child or the house.
It seems to me appellant is being punished for the twin offenses of being poor and ignorant. Admittedly the conditions of the child and the home in which it died were far different than would obtain in the case of a more affluent or sophisticated person. That does not mean, however, that appellant was guilty of the criminal offense charged.
The motion for new trial should have been sustained.
Note. — Reported in 231 N. E. 2d 147.