- cross-posted to:
- [email protected]
- [email protected]
- cross-posted to:
- [email protected]
- [email protected]
Not the first time this has happened either, here’s another similar case in Atlanta: https://abcnews.go.com/US/mother-boy-killed-hit-run-driver-probation-community/story?id=14158040
You must log in or register to comment.
Its too bad that Americans refuse to use their 2A rights to enforce normalcy and crush the crony capitalist conservatism that causes these problems
meanwhile, in Japan, they ran a TV show of toddlers running errands
the traffic light was a third of a mile away.
I’m having trouble visualizing this. Does this mean that at a walking speed of 3km/h it would take ten entire minutes to get to a cross walk? Because that’s insane.
In Sweden we have crosswalks very regularly, usually like a couple minutes of walking at most. For bus stops farther between intersections there are markers indicating that people will cross, even without a normal crossing marker. For areas which can’t have a crossing (you may need to walk around a ways to get under or over four lanes) they put up barriers to prevent walking across.
When Americans complain about everything being car-centric, this is exactly the kind of shit they’re complaining about.
My grocery store is a mile away, but I can’t legally walk there. There are no crosswalks to get to the store. If I’m going to fully obey the law as written, I must use a car just to go to the store.
No there were crosswalks, but the kids decided to “jaywalk” or cross outside a crossing, hence the reason the driver’s not being charged. Drivers should be aware yes but it’s not expected that children will dart out onto the road, frogger-style trying to cross outside crosswalks, much the reason I am afraid of my dumb dog doing it.
Jaywalking should not be a law on low speed roads. And highways rarely have crosswalks.
But if the crosswalks are unreasonably far apart then pedestrians are being encouraged by the state to engage in unsafe behavior. As I said, they could erect a small fence to prevent unsafe crossings. This is a failure of the state to serve its people.
I’m not sure how to feel about the driver not being charged, but one should drive with the expectation that unforeseen hazards will pop up at any moment, especially children. I would not be shocked to learn that he was driving one of those enormous American cars that makes it impossible to see short adults, another failure of the state. Or that the speed limit was too high. These things would make me feel the fault is more on the state than on the driver. (But it definitely isn’t on the parents.)
As for your dog, just keep it on a lead. It’s the safest thing for everyone if all dogs are secured properly while going about town.
e: Also his age. How good is the vision and reaction time of this 76-year-old man? How often are they re-testing drivers?
Jaywalking laws, like most laws, vary by State. In Illinois, for example, the pedestrian ALWAYS has the right of way. I think jaywalking can still be a local-level crime, but even if it is, the driver is always at fault for hitting a pedestrian.
@HiddenLayer555 This is a messed up era. When I was a kid from kindergarten and up I walked to school alone. It wasn’t a super long distance, about six blocks each way but it was unsupervised, and that was the norm back then. What has happened that it has become so dangerous that kids need to be bussed to school even if they’re three blocks from the school?
Car-centric society has made it damn near impossible to walk.
Those six blocks you used to walk have all had their lanes widened into stroads, one converted into a thoroughfare, and no attention was given to pedestrian infrastructure so crosswalks, sidewalks or bike paths are almost non-existent unless you’re within 2 blocks of the school.
We have literally built most of our cities, or redesigned older cities that used to be pedestrian friendly and walkable, into a wasteland of asphalt and concrete designed exclusively for personal vehicles.
@Crankenstein Obviously you don’t live in Shoreline where we spend millions on unused bike lanes where the roads narrow and potted.
If people aren’t using the bike lanes it’s usually because they’re shit bike lanes.
@ebolapie They are at least six feet wide made from concrete that is porous so water doesn’t accumulate on top.
That sounds expensive. How many roads have such bike lanes? Hypothetically, if you wanted to replace a trip to the grocery store, how useful would they be?
@ebolapie They aren’t. It’s hard carrying six bags of groceries on a bicycle and not going to waste time and energy going daily. Hypothetically it would get me within half a mile of a grocery store I don’t like, the one I do like is seven miles away.
Given the right bicycle it’s pretty easy, but that’s beside the point. The question is why don’t people use bike lanes that seem pretty nice on the surface of it, right? There has to be a reason other than “bikes suck and nobody wants to ride them,” because in some places people go everywhere on bicycles and they love it.
So what, really, is the main difference between those places and your town, if it’s not the quality of the bike lanes?
Cool story bud
Have you been to an American school recently? The elementary next to my house could be confused for a prison at first glance. It hasn’t gotten bad, if anything it’s actually safer than when we went to school. They have promoted a society of individuals ruled by fear.
if anything it’s actually safer than when we went to school
Gun violence is the #1 cause of child mortality in the US.
In the home, mostly, yep. Outside the home is statistically safer now than almost any other time. Overall crime is down to historic lows.
Ironically, at this point, and for the last 30 years in the US, owning a gun makes you more susceptible to gun violence. That may be changing, but I seriously doubt it since the cops are now public enemy #1, and have been since the mid '90s.
Oh and before you try to defend the thugs with badges, they were declaring war on the public all throughout the '80s and '90s, by using yellow journalism and Hollywood to manufacture a “war on cops,” because people were rightfully questioning qualified immunity. It didn’t exist until Harlow V Fitzgerald in 1982. It shouldn’t exist at all according to the law as written and recorded in The Congressional Record.
US cops have always been nothing more than glorified slave hunters. It seems that nothing changes in that criminal organization. The DOJ is still reporting that cops commit far more crime than all of the arraigned, but not convicted, potential criminals in the US.
Our most recent school levy addressed basically nothing but turning the schools into jails by wanting to hire a bunch of cops, install metal detectors and a bunch of other “security measures” and this is a rural small district, we have zero need for that stuff, why not propose paying teachers better, buying updated textbooks or funding after school care, something but I’m not and never will vote to turn our schools into prisons
There is a pervasive ideal in this country that has been a core part of it since the Pilgrims landed: Puritanical Ethics of “punishment is Divine, to suffer is to be Holy”
Something is wrong? Punish the wrongness until it becomes righteous. If it doesn’t work then punish harder.
It’s how this country has always solved its problems. Label the other as wicked then beat them into submission.
@AngryCommieKender In my time you didn’t hear of school shootings. They just didn’t happen. So there was less need for the draconian security. My high school was open campus, and my Jr high we were at least allowed to leave during lunch. Different world today entirely. And I don’t like it because it conditions people for 15 minute cities and other forms of tyranny.
… it conditions people for 15 minute cities and other forms of tyranny
Are you saying you think the idea of having all important services within 15 minutes is tyranny?
@ShrimpCurler I’m saying being restricted in your ability to travel is tyranny, and I KNOW you know this was my intent.
Literally nobody thinks 15 minute cities should mean you’re stuck in a 15 minute radius you dork
@Xavienth That is the way they’ve been implemented thus far. Obviously this strikes a nerve else you would not resort to ad hominem attacks.
you grew up around a lot of lead didn’t you?
Where do you think this has been implemented? I’m curious, because you’re the first person I’ve come across who was this take, and it’s novel to me.
I was confused because it’s such a bad take… That’s not what 15 minute cities are about. That’s just the dumb conspiracy theories.
@ShrimpCurler Ok you’re obvious part of the Klaus Schwab fan club, no thanks!
your intent is NOT clear.
restricted in your ability to travel is totally normal and not tyranny. Drivers licences are smart, Pilot license make sense, dang are speed limits tyranny?
15 minutes cities is just a concept that all or most of the typically important services citizens need to survive and thrive should be within a 15 minutes of where they live without REQUIRING a car. Modern car dependent culture is the tyranny if anything, and 15 minute cities idea is a response to that
@aeischeid For anyone capable of basic logic it would have been. Obviously having services readily available is not tyrannical, being unable to travel is, what other significant aspects of 15 minute cities are there? Do you really want your life controlled to this degree?
@nanook @aeischeid No one capable of basic logic thinks 15 minute cities have anything to do with restricting travel. Either you’re being disingenuous, or you’re sorely lacking in the logic you think you possess.
I have literally never seen the idea of a 15 minute city being restrictive anywhere other than the ravings of Alex Jones tier wingnuts. Everybody who actually pushes the concept just thinks you should have a grocery store, a doctor’s office, a library etc. near your house.
Edit: and don’t get it twisted, nobody is saying you should be forced to relocate either, it’s a guideline for urban planning.
Same. I vaguely remember some shooting happening my Jr. Year of HS. I wanna say Bowling Green or Paducah, KY. This was before Columbine. Columbine was my Freshman year at Transylvania University.
When I was 10 my parents never let me out unsupervised and we didn’t even live near a busy road
Which is honestly a travesty.
Kids need to be able to have freedom to play, explore, and be out and about.
Society making it dangerous and discouraging what is necessary for healthy development is not great for society.
after allowing him and his brother, 10, to walk home unaccompanied by an adult from a nearby grocery store.
Wtf, are kids 10 and 7 not old enough to walk by themselves to the grocery store now?
Meanwhile all the boomers talk about how they have such find memories of walking around unsupervised until the streetlights came on or whatever lame Facebook nostalgia meme they’re parroting
Sorry I’m not following. Are you saying the boomers experienced it and pulled up the ladder like dickheads? Or that anyone who had freedom as a child is a boomer with irresponsible parents? I’m confused.
Yeah, I remember when I was 7 I’d explore everywhere around my house for at least a few miles. There was a convenience store 2 miles out where I’d buy candy any time I’d scrounged up a few dollars of change.
What happened was terrible, but it was an accident nevertheless. Nobody should have to serve time, especially not the grieving parents.
Please see book “There are no accidents”. it was a tragedy, and the sort where blame and punishment at an individual level doesn’t bring about justice in any meaningful sense, but it was hardly an accident - to predictable to merit that label
Same, having the freedom to ride my bike wherever I could and meet and play with other kids was crucial to my social and personal development.
Those who design american neighborhoods to be so car centric definitely should.
Yeah, but that was just a few miles. These boys walked…
*Checks notes*
The Food Lion store is two blocks away from their home.
It’s fucking insane that anyone thought to charge them, let alone actually follow through with it. Multiple people have to have agreed for this to be reality. Another shit stain on humanity
The CEO of the company that built the car should serve time
I dunno does your 7 year old jump out into oncoming traffic often? Cuz this kid did.
I think you’re trying to make a pretty s***** implication. Remember that this is a situation where the parents got charged with a crime for being reckless. Are you insinuating that the parents knew that their 7 year old child was likely to jump out into the street, and that perhaps the child had a history of doing so, and that the parents nevertheless allowed the child to walk home from the store? It sounds like that’s what you’re claiming.
@fodor @pixxelkick Contrast this with the treatment of rich white parents who buy their teenage children cars and allow them to continue using them unsupervised despite evidence that they routinely speed, drive distracted, and otherwise violate traffic laws when their teenager kills someone with their weapon.
A history isn’t needed, the child is seven years old, that’s all that’s needed.
Seven year olds are not nearly old enough to wander around 4 lane busy roads unsupervised, full stop.
That’s blatant negligence, there’s no getting past that.
Seven year olds are not nearly old enough to wander around 4 lane busy roads unsupervised, full stop.
He was with his older brother, who is 10.
And if a 10 year old is perfectly capable of walking to school (literally according to everyone), a 7 year old with their 10 year old brother should also be perfectly fine walking TWO BLOCKS without the worry of being killed by a driver.
And 4 lane roads should be banned in urban centers. It’s fucking ridiculous to have a goddamn highway in an area where children and families should be able to walk home safely!
And if a 10 year old is perfectly capable of walking to school (literally according to everyone), a 7 year old with their 10 year old brother should also be perfectly fine walking TWO BLOCKS without the worry of being killed by a driver.
…No…
A 10 year old is not old enough to be responsible for a 7 year old, full stop. Most experts consider around 12 to 13 the minimum maturity for a child to be capable of being responsible for another child. 10 is definitely too young to be looking after another kid, wtf are you talking about.
I really hope you don’t have kids…
The experts say:
National Society for the Prevention of Cruelty to Children (UK)
Every child is different – but some schools advise children under 8 shouldn’t walk home without an adult or older sibling. SOURCE
Ottawa Safety Council (Walk Alone Program, Canada)
… a good guideline for starting to think about letting your child walk alone is age 10. SOURCE
American Academy of Pediatrics (USA)
Children usually are ready to walk to school without an adult when they are in fifth grade or around 10 years old. SOURCE
They also put this poster together:
Every country has the same general consensus.
I really hope you don’t have kids…
Kids and grandkids. And I was also once a kid with a younger sibling. And I see young kids walking to our local school on a regular bases.
If someone is still walking their teenager to school, they should probably stop 😮
Kids shouldn’t be raising kids.
Fuck cars, but 10 year old children shouldn’t have to be responsible for other children. They shouldn’t have any responsibilities yet.
Reread what you wrote.
A 10 year old being able to walk home is not the same as that 10 year old also being responsible for a 7 year old
This isn’t rocket science.
@pixxelkick @Showroom7561 a 10 year old should be able to be safe outdoors, c’mon…
See, for Instance, the Nederlands, kids go to school by bicycle.
I’ve seen toddlers in public transport (yes with an adult, but one for 10 kids or so), in Switzerland.
“Should be able to” doesn’t mean jack shit in terms of fault here.
The reality is, it wasnt safe. Yeah, it would be nice if it was safe.
But it wasn’t safe, and any parent that isn’t a negligent idiot would know it’s not safe, this is literally the Fuck Cars lemmy, so you should know how dangerous a 4 lane road is.
And thus you should know not to let your kids out unsupervised near one.
I don’t give a shit how safe we would like ot to be, the functional inference of "was this mother negligent or not* isn’t based off how safe we’d like it to be
It’s functional of how safe/dangerous it actually is at the time.
It’s like if a mother let’s her kids play unsupervised in a fucking hurricane and you try and argue “well there shouldn’t be a hurricane”
No one should give a shit, there very clearly, obviously, and demonstratebly was a fucking hurricane, so don’t fucking let your kids play in it. Don’t be a fucking dumb ass, supervise your children in potentially dangerous situations.
If this was some like a quiet neighborhood 1.5 lane sleepy street I’d be on the mom’s side more here.
But it was a fucking 4 lane busy road
Yes, that should be obviously negligent behavior to literally anyone with 2 braincells to rub together.
Fuck cars, but also fuck negligent parents that let their kids play near fucking traffic.
That’s why 4 lane roads should be banned
Exactly. Why are there 4 lane roads in pedestrian areas, especially so close to a school? Where is the pedestrian infrastructure so that this child could have walked safely?
I despise how people want to shift the blame to a child just walking to school and the parents who weren’t even involved instead of the driver of a multi-ton death machine for not paying attention to pedestrians.
I agree, well, at least car lanes.
Turn 2 of the lanes into bike lanes.
Tram?
They are if you teach them well
The thing is, once car-centrism is established and normalized, it’s so hard to explain to people what the real problem is. Clearly the kid did a stupid thing and ran into the road when it shouldn’t. Clearly the driver had no bad intentions.
But somehow the thought never occurs to people that kids (and adults) will always be stupid and we shouldn’t strive to make a world where nobody makes mistakes. We should strive to make a world where making mistakes doesn’t kill you.
I agree that we should strive to make the world as safe as possible, but people need to take some responsibility for not putting themselves in danger and teaching their kids how to do so as well. If it was not a car, it could have been a bus, a trolley, or a heavy bike (this is a small child we are talking about). The kid could have run off a cliff or fell into the stream and drowned.
As a first generation American, I have noticed that some American parents do not teach their kids enough about how to cross the street (shocking in such a car centric society).
Agreed. As I read this I pictured the four lane stroad they likely had to cross.
If the roads were safer for pedestrians they’d be able to walk around without dying.
EDIT: Leaving this up for clarity, but I did in fact read the wrong link from the post. The above commenter is correct. Carry on and have a good day.
Clearly the driver had no bad intentions.
I hate to break it to you, but:
Jerry Guy, the man who hit the family and never stopped, reportedly admitted drinking “a little” alcohol earlier in the day. He also admitted to being on painkillers and being partially blind in one eye.
Guy had been convicted of two previous hit and run accidents. He pleaded guilty to the hit and run that took A.J.'s life and served six months in jail.
In a world without cars this man wouldn’t have killed a child with his decisions. But this is still gross negligence, especially the multiple hit-and-run charges.
I do agree that if anything this is a great case for pushing public transit and eliminating car centrism. But to not stop/pull over, multiple times, is its own level of selfishness.
I agree that “intentions” is a very weak way to put it, but there’s nothing indicating this driver did anything wrong either. It’s horrendous that the parents got charged, but the child “went between crosswalks”, which I take to mean going diagonally at an intersection. It’s plausible that the driver was doing everything right by traffic law and didn’t have enough time to react.
(Note that the case Broadfern quoted is a different one, I guess to illustrate the point that “intentions” are beyond the point.)
deleted by creator
Like Broadfern, you clicked on the far worse Atlanta case from 2011 linked in the post body as a related case, not the 2025 NC case linked from the title.
No, that commenter is correct. I read the wrong link from the article post. My apologies
The case discussed is directly related to the child, but the driver rather than the mother. The child’s name is A.J. Newman, and his mother is Raquel Nelson.
My point is that the driver never pulled over, which is after-the-fact negligence. Accidents absolutely happen and I blame 90% of this on the infrastructure.
My own biases lead me to believe the charges leveled against a grieving mother are primarily rooted in racism and/or misogyny, and the stark difference in trials adds insult to injury.
That said, I do agree with you on your primary point. It’s an awful, largely unavoidable mix of current circumstances that boil down to car-centrism. The only way out going forward is to completely change the infrastructure to be safer, and while it will be a fight it can be done.
EDIT: My apologies, you’re right. Different link, but from the same post.
The case you’re talking about is 2011. This article is a recent case where I see no indication of Jerry Guy’s involvement. The 2011 case is way worse since Guy did have wrongdoing and the mother was with children, but that doesn’t mean the 2025 case’s driver is at fault, which is what PotatoesFall meant to saw when they mentioned intention.
Edit: i wrote this before seeing your edit lol
deleted by creator
there is no evidence of speeding or wrongdoing on the part of the driver, therefore no charges have been filed.
I feel like Atlanta law enforcement might need a refresher on what “wrongdoing” means.
I’m guessing white driver black kid.
They are being real cagey with the deets about the driver. 😒
This was in Gastonia North Carolina
Edit: just saw the 2nd link, I am an idiot
… the… the unsupervised child ran into the street
The fuck you mean?
The driver didn’t do a thing wrong, it’s a busy 4 lane road, you aren’t in the wrong if some random kid jumps onto the road in front of you.
I get that this is the FuckCars lemmy but give me a break, this is clearly a case of parents being negligent.
Don’t let your fucking seven year old child go play unsupervised on 4 lane roads, that’s not fuckin rocket science.
This was a problem before cars existed, parents in the 1600s were smart enough to not let their kids go play unsupervised under the hooves of horses too.
@pixxelkick @JSocial For most of history and in most societies today, it was and is absolutely routine for parents to let 7 and 10 year old siblings walk a few blocks together. When my mom was 7, she was responsible for walking her 5 year old brother to school and that wasn’t at all unusual in their neighborhood. The problem is the number and size of cars and stroads, not a lack of helicopter parenting.
It also was routine to beat your kids and get prescribed meth to take home, and give your kids alcohol and smokes
What sort of argument is this, times change as we learn things.
Supervising your fucking seven year old near a 4 lane road isnt helicopter parenting lol
@pixxelkick You haven’t traveled much outside the United States of AmeriCar, have you? Building stroads through neighborhoods, making it unsafe for people of any age to walk to their nearest grocery store, is the problem. Almost all other high income countries have been steadily reducing their traffic fatalities for decades while the US does the opposite. Which system represents progress?
I never said stroads were good.
You understand two things can both be a problem at once right?
Stroads are indeed awful.
Letting your 7 year old go and play near one unsupervised is also very bad too
You don’t get to just go “roads bad” and this excuses the mothers negligent behavior. Both can be bad, at the same time.
@pixxelkick There was no negligent behavior. Why have we become a culture that criminalizes every aspect of motherhood (ignoring the father’s role as an equal co-parent) from having an abortion or even a miscarriage to not keeping your children on a leash for the entire 18 years they are minors (or at least 16, at which time if you can afford to buy them a car you can let them loose to kill people) and then bitches that women don’t make enough babies?
to not keeping your children on a leash for the entire 18 years they are minors
Hyperbole.
Theres, crazy as it sounds, a reasonable middle ground between:
- letting your SEVEN YEAR OLD play UNSUPERVISED near a fucking FOUR LANE BUSY ROAD vs
- Putting a leash on your teenager
The fact you had to reach for such insane hyperbole demonstrates how out to lunch you are. Yes, the woman was 100% legally negligent, its absolutely fucking insane to try and pretend letting a SEVEN YEAR OLD play with no adults around near a fucking busy ass four lane road. Are you genuinely insane?
God I hope you don’t have kids, lol.
@pixxelkick If children can’t walk to their neighborhood grocery store safely, that’s a societal problem, not an individual one. Instead of looking for a scapegoat to punish, fix the fucking neighborhood so it doesn’t keep happening (to adults as well as children).
I mean, I guess running over a kid could be considered doing nothing wrong. I could also guess what kind of “person” you are.
… mate do you think this person did it intentionally?
Probably not. It sounds almost…involuntary.
If you’re driving down a highway and a kid jumps in front of your car and dies, yes, in every way, you’ve done nothing wrong. What was the thing the driver did wrong? Not rewrite the laws of physics?
I have watched children be bussed across a stroad rather than making it safe for kids to cross
more than one place i’ve lived at had a busy road be the ‘line’ separating bus vs walk to school. where i am now some literally get bussed across the road and then another block to the school, while some who live up to a mile away on the ‘same side’ of that road as the school get to walk.
The neighborhood I grew up in let kids walk to school but now parents pick their kids up in cars just across the street from the school instead of making them walk all the way home.
(Though some may be skirting residency requirements so I’m not too mad.)
Then again, back in my day they didn’t have padlocks on the fences.
@Semi_Hemi_Demigod @HiddenLayer555 And sadly many US residents including those employed as traffic engineers or school facilities planners and transportation officials don’t see that as unusual or inappropriate.
WhY DOn’T kiDs PLAY OUtdiDe AnymOre!!!
That’s fucked up.
That 76 year old man will live with his choice to drive at age 76 for the rest of his life.
Which, for a man in North Carolina, will on average be -4 years
He’s gonna live with the fact that some mom let her 7 year old run out into traffic… that’s not exactly his fault. He’s probably fuckin traumatized now because she was a terrible parent.
Let’s start with maybe, I dunno, not letting 7 year old kids go out and play near 4 lane busy roads or something? Maybe supervise your fucking kids though?
Driver did nothing wrong, the kid jumped into the road, the fuck is he supposed to do there.
That’s not the point, pixeldick
Cars have always been fucking death machines since their adoption, killing pedestrians at especially high rates. Since their introduction, this has always pissed people off with any real common sense.
We give up our streets entirely to them, put up with infrastructure increasingly hostile towards foot and cycle travel, scarcely enforce traffic laws, and treat driving like it’s a constitutional right.
We are long overdue for reworking our approach to transportation. Instead we’re stuck with incompetent lawmakers who are corrupted by industry bribes, and propped up by dipshits like you with your heads jammed up your asses.
All they had to do was use the fucking crosswalk. Instead the stupid kid is dead.
No one said otherwise.
Cars and roads sucking doesn’t mean the mother’s behavior is excused. Full stop.
You literally are acknowledging it’s a death trap, and surely you must then agree that a parent who let’s their children go play near the fucking death trap unsupervised is obviously being negligent.
You don’t get to go “roads are death traps, and because they’re death traps parents get off scott free if they let their children die to them”
No, in fact, it makes their behavior obviously worse because they should KNOW it was a bad idea
Interesting that you frame a parent losing their child in a tragic accident as “getting off scot free”. There’s a huge difference between a mistake and being criminally negligent. Clearly our opinions differ in this, and I find yours ghoulish.
Interesting that you frame a parent losing their child in a tragic accident as “getting off scot free”
Because when you get one of your kids fucking killed due to negligence, you shouldn’t be allowed to keep your other kids too. You have very clearly made it obvious you are not responsible enough to have any children in your care and CPS should take your kids away, and yes, you 100% should have legal action taken against you.
This has nothing to even do with cars, if parents in ANY way allow their child to die due to negligence in a way that would have been easily preventable if they had simply just fucking watched their damn kid, then they deserve to have their other kids taken away too.
That’s super basic shit in any legal system. Doesn’t matter how their kid died, they were exceedingly negligent here and fucked up super bad.
A 10 and 7 year old are not at all old enough to be allowed to wander around roads by themselves, thats extremely fucked up and indefensible. No sane parent would let their kids just wander off unsupervised in such a dangerous way.
This isn’t some quiet little 1.5 lane street in the middle of a sleepy neighborhood, it was a fucking busy ass 4 lane road, thats insane to let your kids play around that unsupervised. The woman 100% deserves to be charges with negligence.
