Mom gets 60 days in infant death / LJWorld.com

Archive for Friday, December 15, 2006

Yearlong term shortened for testimony in dad’s trial

December 15, 2006

A judge on Thursday ordered a Lawrence woman to serve 60 days in jail for failing to protect her infant daughter from deadly abuse at the hands of the baby's father.

"Ms. Hendrickson understands fully that her baby paid the ultimate price," said Kay Huff, defense attorney for 25-year-old Brandi Mae Hendrickson. "Society's judgment is very harsh on mothers in Ms. Hendrickson's position."

Judge Paula Martin sentenced Hendrickson to a one-year jail term but said she would be released on parole after 60 days. She also will be released from jail for work and parenting classes as she tries to regain custody of her older, preschool-aged daughter.

Hendrickson's 5-month-old daughter, Risha Lafferty, died in October 2005 with a fractured skull and signs of being shaken. Last month, a jury convicted the baby's father, Jay D. Decker, of first-degree murder. He is due to be sentenced Jan. 3 and faces 20 years in prison.

Defense attorney Huff had asked Martin to give Hendrickson a sentence without jail time. She said her client was naive, had a below-average IQ and made decisions slowly - factors that Huff said might account for Hendrickson's failure to call the authorities when the baby repeatedly turned up with injuries while she was at work and Decker was baby-sitting.

Hendrickson initially was charged with felony child endangerment, but she pleaded to a misdemeanor as part of a deal to testify against Decker. Assistant District Attorney Brandon Jones asked the judge to impose a 12-month jail sentence, the maximum the judge could have ordered.

"Ms. Hendrickson knew or had to know : that that child was being abused," Jones said. "It's the state's position that no person of any capacity could think that those were all accidents and sit there as a mother and do nothing."

The judge said she considered factors including Hendrickson's mental ability and her cooperation with the state. She also considered the fact that if Hendrickson had been convicted of a felony, she likely only would have served probation under state sentencing guidelines.

Ironically, because of sentencing guidelines, defendants can face more time behind bars for a misdemeanor than a low-level felony. Judges have more discretion to order jail time in misdemeanor cases than in felony cases, which are controlled by a sentencing grid that weighs the crime's severity level and the defendant's criminal history.

Discussion

LJWorld.com doesn't necessarily condone the comments here, nor does it review every post.
Read our full policy. Also, read about banned accounts and harassing comments.

15 December 2006
at 5:38 a.m.

Suggest removal

Permalink

roger_o_thornhill (Anonymous) says…

“…her client was naive, had a below-average IQ and made decisions slowly”

This is true of at least 1/5 of the current prison population. If you divide 3,000,000 by 5 you get the picture.
15 December 2006
at 6:45 a.m.

Suggest removal

Permalink

crazyks (Anonymous) says…

60 days? For a dead baby? This is ridiculous.

You know, it's pretty easy to pretend to be dumb when you know everyone, including your attorney and the judge, will feel sorry for you and you'll get off practically scott free.
15 December 2006
at 8:40 a.m.

Suggest removal

Permalink

TheEleventhStephanie (Anonymous) says…

She should be applauded for killing sitting there doing nothing while her baby's daddy killed her kid? Uh, whaaaat?

Or perhaps I'm not getting your sarcasm?
15 December 2006
at 8:41 a.m.

Suggest removal

Permalink

TheEleventhStephanie (Anonymous) says…

She should be applauded for sitting there doing nothing while her baby's daddy killed her kid? Uh, whaaaat?

Or perhaps I'm not getting your sarcasm?
15 December 2006
at 9:07 a.m.

Suggest removal

Permalink

bankboy119 (Anonymous) says…

Our “justice” system is disgusting. 10+ years for substance abuse but 60 days because you're an idiot and let your child die. Refreakindiculous
15 December 2006
at 9:10 a.m.

Suggest removal

Permalink

cellogrl (Anonymous) says…

Okay Culture Warrior, while you were being sarcastic, it was still in poor taste. Keep in mind that a child died here. Probably not appropriate.
15 December 2006
at 9:31 a.m.

Suggest removal

Permalink

stops4armadillos (Anonymous) says…

“Culture_Warrior” — how about tacky, tasteless, ignorant buffoon? A child was murdered. What about that is funny to you? Get some therapy.

15 December 2006
at 9:40 a.m.

Suggest removal

Permalink

cheeseburger (Anonymous) says…

Was Judge Martin's decision based on existing sentencing guidelines, or was this ridiculous sentence something of her own doing? If the latter, her record of poor decision-making over the years may be cause for the voters to oust her when we next vote to retain judges.
15 December 2006
at 9:43 a.m.

Suggest removal

Permalink

TheEleventhStephanie (Anonymous) says…

Lucky for Brandi Mae that her last name isn't Neighbors, or she might be looking at more like 60 years instead of 60 days.
15 December 2006
at 9:57 a.m.

Suggest removal

Permalink

jafs (Anonymous) says…

According to the article, there are stricter guidelines for felony sentencing than misdemeanor - perhaps this should be looked at by the legislature - 1 year would have been the maximum sentence allowed by law. This makes no sense at all.
15 December 2006
at 10:17 a.m.

Suggest removal

Permalink

monkeyspunk (Anonymous) says…

She plead out in return for testimony against Decker. Hence the misdemeanor.
15 December 2006
at 10:28 a.m.

Suggest removal

Permalink

ControlFreak (Anonymous) says…

CW,

Humans ARE animals. They are part of the Kingdom Animalia, just like everything else.

So to say “we value animal life more than human life” makes no sense.

It would be the same as saying: we value human life more than human life.

Also, comparing the killing of a 5 mo. old baby with a first trimester abortion is ludicrous and inflamatory. I see that you are only attempting to create a disturbance and have little objective to offer on the subject. The two subjects are completely separate.
15 December 2006
at 10:49 a.m.

Suggest removal

Permalink

blessed3x (Anonymous) says…

“Also, comparing the killing of a 5 mo. old baby with a first trimester abortion is ludicrous and inflamatory. I see that you are only attempting to create a disturbance and have little objective to offer on the subject. The two subjects are completely separate.”

–––––––––––––––––––––—

Culture Warrior was being sarcastic but unfortunately there is much truth in his words.

Anyone remember Professor Peter Singer? He sees no difference between the two and he continues to be supported by this nations educational system. It would seem from his list of authored works and his stance as an animal rights activist that he would indeed, in some instances, put the life of an animal over that of a human. So….condemn CW all you want, but his sarcastic comments are the real-life views of some on the left.
15 December 2006
at 10:53 a.m.

Suggest removal

Permalink

OldEnuf2BYurDad (Anonymous) says…

Her failure to protect her child had much more to do with her value system than it did her I.Q. Are mentally retarded people unable to tell right from wrong? I don't think so.

The ugly truth here is that this case was “made” when the D.A. found a way to put a wedge in-between the mother and the father. Getting her to help them throw him under the bus was part of her deal. Sure, she could/should have gotten more time, but our justice system depends heavily on criminals turning on criminals.

“Some” justice is better than none. If she hadn't cut a deal, the D.A. would have had some difficulty bringing a case that was sure to convict somebody.
15 December 2006
at 11:50 a.m.

Suggest removal

Permalink

Ceallach (Anonymous) says…

Am I reading the article correctly? She was sentenced to 60 days … . . but will be released to work and released for counseling … if so, then she was really only sentenced to 60 nights in jail. Right?

Our society is increasingly devaluing human life. Abortion on one end, euthanasia on the other and assisted suicide everywhere in between. How long until we are on the endangered species list? (We being the huddling middle class. I'm sure the “elite” will always be allowed to survive.)

15 December 2006
at 1:53 p.m.

Suggest removal

Permalink

kansasfire911 (Anonymous) says…

I hope if I am ever in deep doodoo Judge Martin gets my case. Its about time to vote her out!
15 December 2006
at 2 p.m.

Suggest removal

Permalink

rednekbuddha (Kelly Powell) says…

Give her the other kid back….and within a few years that kid starts having bruises all over it, who is she going to blame for that?
15 December 2006
at 2:18 p.m.

Suggest removal

Permalink

Marion (Marion Lynn) says…

Culture_Warrior wrote:

“Progressives value other species in the animal kingdom more than they value human life.”

Marion writes:

Truer words were never written!

Thanks.

Marion.
15 December 2006
at 2:19 p.m.

Suggest removal

Permalink

shirinisb (Anonymous) says…

Why doesn't the JW ever post a picture of this horrible woman? Is it because good moms might attack her in the street? Also why wasn't she charged with felony murder? Her actions directly lead to the child's death.
15 December 2006
at 3:12 p.m.

Suggest removal

Permalink

shirinisb (Anonymous) says…

Awesome. Thanks, I've been looking for a while but I couldn't find one.
15 December 2006
at 3:17 p.m.

Suggest removal

Permalink

comgetsom (Anonymous) says…

I personally just want to see the sorry excuse for a father get what he deserves & i just hope he has prayed that risha laffertys Family for give him before he gets out………….
15 December 2006
at 4:20 p.m.

Suggest removal

Permalink

MyName (Anonymous) says…

>Progressives value other species in the animal kingdom more than they value human life.

This is the stupidest thing I've heard in a long time, and the proof is that complete morons like you are allowed still allowed to speak freely in this country and waste as much bandwidth you feel is neccessary in order to demonstrate your complete lack of any kind of reasoning capability. If this country were founded by more “conservative minded” people (e.g. people who share your idiotic ideas of justice), you'd be locked up in a hole right now for speaking out against a government official in public.

The most the Judge could have given out, by law, was one year. It's not uncommon to have 2/3 or 3/4 of that time spent on probation if the person isn't guilty of prior offenses. This is even more common now that the prison system in Kansas is close to capacity. The bottom line is that the Judge is handling the case correctly according to the law.

If you don't like the way it was handled, then talk to your legislators or to the district attorney. Have them pass more draconian sentencing guidelines, raise taxes to build more prison, and prosecute those half-wit incompetant mothers how are out roaming the streets. Because that's the biggest danger to society in Kansas is those half-wit mothers who shack up with child abusing social rejects.

(In case you can't tell, that was a proper use of sarcasm. Sarcasm only works if you have half a brain to begin with which, judging by your earlier worthless trolling attempts, you clearly lack)
15 December 2006
at 4:26 p.m.

Suggest removal

Permalink

Jackalope (Anonymous) says…

Her original charge was a felony that had a sentencing guideline range of a possible minimum of 5 months in prison and a maximum possible of 13 months in prison. She would have had to have at least one other person felony and a non person felony conviction before there would be anything but presumed probation. She instead struck a plea bargain with the District Attorney to reduce it to a misdemeanor charge which had a possible 12 month sentence in the County Jail so she could testify against the other person charged with the child's death. She plead to a charge that has the same possible maximum penalty as some of the misdemeanor cruelty to animals charges. Interestingly enough, a second conviction for cruelty to animals is a felony with up to one year in the county jail, but not less that 5 days. Felony cruelty to animals has a mandatory, albeit small, jail term of 5 days, while there is not mandatory term for endangerment of a child, her misdemeanor conviction. Just the facts. Draw your own conclusion.

15 December 2006
at 4:39 p.m.

Suggest removal

Permalink

MyName (Anonymous) says…

The conclusion is that legislators make a habit of punishing felonies harsher than misdemeanors. However, the people who wrote the laws probably didn't plan on having “child endangerment” be routinely applied to an incident that results in the death of a child, while they probably intended to have felony cruelty be applied to more severe cases of crueltry.