If she had been convicted of Reckless Endangerment, Criminally negligent homicide–Well those things could easily been proven in this case. But neither of those crimes together equals depraved indifference murder.

You could have even gotten her on that had she been in the house, and let her boyfriend sexually assault her daughter.

Was she a terrible parent, and not a very good person? No doubt. But they can’t put you in prison for that. Apparently the BOYFRIEND killed the girl.

I’m not saying she didn’t deserve to do some time, that she was a factor in what happened, but if a man strangles and rapes your kid and she dies, and you didn’t kill her, you should not be charged with murder.

This”Clark doesn’t have the balls to prosecute” shit, though probably considered moral outrage by some, is still not the law. Injustice happens when good people let their outrage and morality, not the proper application of the law, take charge.

I do not agree that it is beyond speculative to think that a parent of a young child that died of a drug overdose was negligent or suspicious of child endangerment. I think the question of where she got the coke needs to be asked and perhaps some charges should follow. That said, I highly doubt that’s going to happen at this point. I think they just want this over and behind them.

Murder in the second degree, a Class A-I felony, is committed when, under circumstances evincing a depraved indifference to human life:

a person recklessly engages in conduct which creates a grave risk of death to another person, and thereby causes the death of another person.
a person at least 18 years of age recklessly engages in conduct which creates a grave risk of serious physical injury or death to another person less than 11 years old and thereby causes the death of such person.

NY Penal Law §125.25.

The state must prove that the defendant:(1) recklessly engaged in conduct (2) which created a grave risk of death to another person (3) thereby causing the death of another person (4) under circumstances evincing a depraved indifference to human life. Depraved indifference murder involves a killing in which defendant does not have conscious objective to cause death but instead is recklessly indifferent, depravedly so, to whether death occurs.

Examples:

Evidence that defendant pulled out a gun and fired it five times in direction of fleeing men, including victim, who defendant did not seem to know, after approaching the men and having brief conversation with one of them, was sufficient to support finding of depraved indifference required for conviction of second-degree murder.

Evidence was sufficient to support conviction of depraved indifference murder; after argument with victim over which team would play the next basketball game, defendant left community center and returned ten minutes later with a gun, which, after an argument, went off, resulting in victim’s death, from which jury could have found that defendant held gun close to victim and then pulled the trigger and concluded that shooting was instantaneous and impulsive, meant to perhaps disable or frighten the victim.

Evidence was sufficient to support conviction for depraved indifference murder; six eyewitnesses testified that defendant fired his gun directly into a crowd of people, and one of those shots killed a person.

In other words, the defendant didn’t have the intent to kill any person or people; he engaged in conduct that was so reckless and indifferent to the potential harm, and his act resulted in another’s death.

No one knows how the girl got the coke, so it is beyond speculative to even suspect her of child endangerment, much less depraved indifference murder.

And I figure “depraved indifference” probably means something different in legal speak than common speak. That’s why I’m asking.

Furthermore, the cocaine thing just came up so you wouldn’t have read it in previous articles. The question should now be where a 13 year old girl got enough cocaine to kill herself. If nothing else, I would think the mother would be guilty of gross negligence or something connected to this death considering she was responsible for this minor. And whoever supplied the cocaine would be guilty of worse.

Now, Lynn must prove her daughter was NOT a bad kid. Maybe I’m wrong but Donahue had sex with her daughter. DNA proved this already. In my minds eye he must have been the person who also gave Crystal the cocaine than raped her otherwise you’d have to say she was already a bad kid. All her friends said she was a good girl, responsible and intelligent.

Donahue can be charged with lying to the grand jury and perjury in the court case that convicted Lynn of killing her daughter. If I were Clark I’d try to save face too and now go after him with these charges, but he won’t.