4 ms·

Surely the burden of proof is on the prosecution? I don't have a problem with this. If a child - even an unborn one - dies in mysterious circumstances, I would

Surely the burden of proof is on the prosecution? I don't have a problem with this. If a child - even an unborn one - dies in mysterious circumstances, I would prefer the inconvenience of a fruitless investigation over the prospect of living in a society where we don't even care enough to ever be suspicious.

freejazz 1y ago
So you want the state to investigate every single miscarriage? Where did "mysterious circumstances" come from? I didn't see it mentioned anywhere in this thread... Do you think a miscarriage is a "mysterious circumstance"? I can only assume so, given your response. That seems like the result of what could only be tremendous ignorance.
- mstridder1 1y ago
  [flagged]
  - freejazz 1y ago
    It's not a strawman. You said "mysterious circumstances" when we are talking about miscarriages. Do you think they are the same or not? It's a very simple question. >Do you not want police to investigate reports of someone disposing of human remains in a dumpster? What does this have to do with a miscarriage????
    - mstridder1 1y ago
      [flagged]
      - freejazz 1y ago
        > Obviously nobody's being investigated for routine miscarriages. Sorry, how does a third party know the miscarriage was "routine?" What is a non-routine miscarriage? Why would it be criminal, it's still a miscarriage? What's the suspicion? The article you refer to, the investigation happened, not because there was a miscarriage, but because a body was seen being dumped... Maybe it was the mistake of the other poster for sharing that link, but I do not see what it has to do with your point at all. Either miscarriages are illegal or not... you said they should be investigated when they are "mysterious circumstances" and I am repeatedly asking you to explain when a miscarriage is a mysterious circumstance? Even more so, when is it such that it has any relevancy to this discussion about the state tracking a woman's pregnancy through digital data. >Oh, check out the links that started this discussion. tldr- A woman was seen disposing of a baby's body in a dumpster, prompting an investigation. She was ultimately cleared as it was indeed a miscarriage. What about all the other incidents in the other article besides the one you decided to talk about because you are not willing to state whether or not you think a miscarriage is a "mysterious circumstance?" Which seems like a very straightforward question and I do not understand your unwillingness to provide a response when your previous posts make it very unclear as to whether or not you think a miscarriage is a normal occurrence.
        mstridder1 1y ago
        >I do not understand your unwillingness to provide a response ... as to whether or not you think a miscarriage is a normal occurrence Why would I? It's such a rude question. We are discussing the nuances of suspicious "miscarriages" that appear to be home abortions constituting valid reason for investigation and possible prosecution, and you are hung up on ridiculous strawmen as if you're the only person who understands the issue so everybody else who disagrees must be an uninformed sociopath. It's disrespectful and immature. Yes, I have the basic concepts of mammalian biology well understood. And this will be my signoff to you and this discussion.
        freejazz 1y ago
        > We are discussing the nuances of suspicious "miscarriages" that appear to be home abortions constituting valid reason for investigation and possible prosecution No. We weren't. We were talking about miscarriages being tracked through these kinds of apps. You selected one of over 20 examples provided by one poster. > you are hung up on ridiculous strawmen as if you're the only person who understands the issue so everybody else who disagrees must be an uninformed sociopath It was your strawman. You talked about "suspicious miscarriages" or whatever the exact term was. Something you made up on your own. > Yes, I have the basic concepts of mammalian biology well understood That's actually not clear at all as evidenced by the several other posters that took the same exact issue with your bizarre characterizations. But great job making yourself into some sort of victim here!
      - JohnBooty 1y ago
        I find the "shouldn't we investigate dumping possible human remains into a dumpster?" question to be a red herring at best but: yes, sure, we should. I do not find it relevant to menstruation data captured by an application. If we have the remains, we know the age of the fetus or baby, and can prove whether a particular suspect is the mother of that fetus or baby. Obviously nobody's being investigated for routine miscarriages. It is absolutely not at all obvious to me that this will continue to be the case, especially if the data to do so exists -- which is the central point of this discussion about why women would rightfully view the sharing of their menstrual data as a potential safety risk. In fact the opposite is much more "obvious" to me: I think a lot of people in America (and elsewhere) would absolutely support such a thing.
      - stevenbedrick 1y ago
        At least one county prosecutor in WV is, in fact, discussing investigating routine miscarriages: https://www.wvnstv.com/news/local-news/prosecutor-warns-of-potential-charges-against-women-who-miscarry-in-west-virginia/ https://www.wvnstv.com/news/local-news/prosecutor-warns-of-p... From the article: > State law does not require a woman to notify authorities when she miscarries, but Truman said that women who miscarry in West Virginia can protect themselves against potential criminal charges by reporting the miscarriage to local law enforcement. > > “Call your doctor. Call law enforcement, or 911, and just say, ‘I miscarried. I want you to know,'” advised Truman. Now, in fairness, the state's association of prosecutors has clarified that this is not official policy and that the association as a whole does not support it. But it's definitely not out of the realm of possibility. https://www.newsandsentinel.com/news/local-news/2025/06/prosecuting-attorney-group-comes-out-against-criminal-charges-for-miscarriages/ https://www.newsandsentinel.com/news/local-news/2025/06/pros...
      - ryandrake 1y ago
        > Obviously nobody's being investigated for routine miscarriages. Not obvious that this will remain the case. These advocates did not just disappear once they achieved their goal of overturning RvW. They are working towards their next milestones. I guarantee you there are at least politically active citizens in all 50 states who would support criminalizing routine miscarriage, if not actual elected officials working towards it, and speaking publicly about it.
fhdkweig 1y ago
For a conviction, yes, the burden of proof is on the prosecution. But in the meantime, you have to pay for a lawyer, and you will be sitting in jail for a year because they don't give bail for murderers. And as for the lawyer bills, the court doesn't refund you the money when you are found innocent, and it isn't going to be cheap, not for murder. The process is the punishment.
- deleted 1y ago
  [deleted]
hoistbypetard 1y ago
There is nothing mysterious about a miscarriage. They are common. According to the Mayo Clinic: > Miscarriage is the sudden loss of a pregnancy before the 20th week. About 10% to 20% of known pregnancies end in miscarriage. But the actual number is likely higher. This is because many miscarriages happen early on, before people realize they're pregnant. https://www.mayoclinic.org/diseases-conditions/pregnancy-loss-miscarriage/symptoms-causes/syc-20354298 https://www.mayoclinic.org/diseases-conditions/pregnancy-los... Subjecting a person who is already upset about her miscarriage to a fruitless investigation is cruel and stupid; I’d prefer to live in a society where we understand that miscarriages happen as a part of nature and don’t need to further torment the people who suffer from them.
- mstridder1 1y ago
  As I understand it, in this case, a witness saw a woman throwing a child's remains in a dumpster. After investigation, it was cleared as a miscarriage. What would you prefer? We turn a blind eye to people disposing of bodies? Cops refuse to investigate such reports? It sounds like everything worked as intended here. Of course it's unfortunate for the innocent woman involved, but this is clearly not a witchhunt.
  - JohnBooty 1y ago
    This line of discussion inevitably boils down to what one's definition of a human life is and whether a fetus at a particular stage of development meets that definition. Let's not have that discussion here on HN. It's not going to be fruitful.

freejazz 1y ago

So you want the state to investigate every single miscarriage? Where did "mysterious circumstances" come from? I didn't see it mentioned anywhere in this thread... Do you think a miscarriage is a "mysterious circumstance"? I can only assume so, given your response. That seems like the result of what could only be tremendous ignorance.

mstridder1 1y ago
[flagged]
- freejazz 1y ago
  It's not a strawman. You said "mysterious circumstances" when we are talking about miscarriages. Do you think they are the same or not? It's a very simple question. >Do you not want police to investigate reports of someone disposing of human remains in a dumpster? What does this have to do with a miscarriage????
  - mstridder1 1y ago
    [flagged]
    - freejazz 1y ago
      > Obviously nobody's being investigated for routine miscarriages. Sorry, how does a third party know the miscarriage was "routine?" What is a non-routine miscarriage? Why would it be criminal, it's still a miscarriage? What's the suspicion? The article you refer to, the investigation happened, not because there was a miscarriage, but because a body was seen being dumped... Maybe it was the mistake of the other poster for sharing that link, but I do not see what it has to do with your point at all. Either miscarriages are illegal or not... you said they should be investigated when they are "mysterious circumstances" and I am repeatedly asking you to explain when a miscarriage is a mysterious circumstance? Even more so, when is it such that it has any relevancy to this discussion about the state tracking a woman's pregnancy through digital data. >Oh, check out the links that started this discussion. tldr- A woman was seen disposing of a baby's body in a dumpster, prompting an investigation. She was ultimately cleared as it was indeed a miscarriage. What about all the other incidents in the other article besides the one you decided to talk about because you are not willing to state whether or not you think a miscarriage is a "mysterious circumstance?" Which seems like a very straightforward question and I do not understand your unwillingness to provide a response when your previous posts make it very unclear as to whether or not you think a miscarriage is a normal occurrence.
      - mstridder1 1y ago
        >I do not understand your unwillingness to provide a response ... as to whether or not you think a miscarriage is a normal occurrence Why would I? It's such a rude question. We are discussing the nuances of suspicious "miscarriages" that appear to be home abortions constituting valid reason for investigation and possible prosecution, and you are hung up on ridiculous strawmen as if you're the only person who understands the issue so everybody else who disagrees must be an uninformed sociopath. It's disrespectful and immature. Yes, I have the basic concepts of mammalian biology well understood. And this will be my signoff to you and this discussion.
        freejazz 1y ago
        > We are discussing the nuances of suspicious "miscarriages" that appear to be home abortions constituting valid reason for investigation and possible prosecution No. We weren't. We were talking about miscarriages being tracked through these kinds of apps. You selected one of over 20 examples provided by one poster. > you are hung up on ridiculous strawmen as if you're the only person who understands the issue so everybody else who disagrees must be an uninformed sociopath It was your strawman. You talked about "suspicious miscarriages" or whatever the exact term was. Something you made up on your own. > Yes, I have the basic concepts of mammalian biology well understood That's actually not clear at all as evidenced by the several other posters that took the same exact issue with your bizarre characterizations. But great job making yourself into some sort of victim here!
    - JohnBooty 1y ago
      I find the "shouldn't we investigate dumping possible human remains into a dumpster?" question to be a red herring at best but: yes, sure, we should. I do not find it relevant to menstruation data captured by an application. If we have the remains, we know the age of the fetus or baby, and can prove whether a particular suspect is the mother of that fetus or baby. Obviously nobody's being investigated for routine miscarriages. It is absolutely not at all obvious to me that this will continue to be the case, especially if the data to do so exists -- which is the central point of this discussion about why women would rightfully view the sharing of their menstrual data as a potential safety risk. In fact the opposite is much more "obvious" to me: I think a lot of people in America (and elsewhere) would absolutely support such a thing.
    - stevenbedrick 1y ago
      At least one county prosecutor in WV is, in fact, discussing investigating routine miscarriages: https://www.wvnstv.com/news/local-news/prosecutor-warns-of-potential-charges-against-women-who-miscarry-in-west-virginia/ https://www.wvnstv.com/news/local-news/prosecutor-warns-of-p... From the article: > State law does not require a woman to notify authorities when she miscarries, but Truman said that women who miscarry in West Virginia can protect themselves against potential criminal charges by reporting the miscarriage to local law enforcement. > > “Call your doctor. Call law enforcement, or 911, and just say, ‘I miscarried. I want you to know,'” advised Truman. Now, in fairness, the state's association of prosecutors has clarified that this is not official policy and that the association as a whole does not support it. But it's definitely not out of the realm of possibility. https://www.newsandsentinel.com/news/local-news/2025/06/prosecuting-attorney-group-comes-out-against-criminal-charges-for-miscarriages/ https://www.newsandsentinel.com/news/local-news/2025/06/pros...
    - ryandrake 1y ago
      > Obviously nobody's being investigated for routine miscarriages. Not obvious that this will remain the case. These advocates did not just disappear once they achieved their goal of overturning RvW. They are working towards their next milestones. I guarantee you there are at least politically active citizens in all 50 states who would support criminalizing routine miscarriage, if not actual elected officials working towards it, and speaking publicly about it.

fhdkweig 1y ago

For a conviction, yes, the burden of proof is on the prosecution. But in the meantime, you have to pay for a lawyer, and you will be sitting in jail for a year because they don't give bail for murderers. And as for the lawyer bills, the court doesn't refund you the money when you are found innocent, and it isn't going to be cheap, not for murder. The process is the punishment.

deleted 1y ago
[deleted]

hoistbypetard 1y ago

There is nothing mysterious about a miscarriage. They are common. According to the Mayo Clinic: > Miscarriage is the sudden loss of a pregnancy before the 20th week. About 10% to 20% of known pregnancies end in miscarriage. But the actual number is likely higher. This is because many miscarriages happen early on, before people realize they're pregnant. https://www.mayoclinic.org/diseases-conditions/pregnancy-loss-miscarriage/symptoms-causes/syc-20354298 https://www.mayoclinic.org/diseases-conditions/pregnancy-los... Subjecting a person who is already upset about her miscarriage to a fruitless investigation is cruel and stupid; I’d prefer to live in a society where we understand that miscarriages happen as a part of nature and don’t need to further torment the people who suffer from them.

mstridder1 1y ago
As I understand it, in this case, a witness saw a woman throwing a child's remains in a dumpster. After investigation, it was cleared as a miscarriage. What would you prefer? We turn a blind eye to people disposing of bodies? Cops refuse to investigate such reports? It sounds like everything worked as intended here. Of course it's unfortunate for the innocent woman involved, but this is clearly not a witchhunt.
- JohnBooty 1y ago
  This line of discussion inevitably boils down to what one's definition of a human life is and whether a fetus at a particular stage of development meets that definition. Let's not have that discussion here on HN. It's not going to be fruitful.