Rank: Super forum user 
|
"Quote"
The jury last week convicted 24-year-old Jessica Tata of Texas of the murder of 16-month-old Elias Castillo. She was sentenced yesterday to 80 years – eligible for parole in 30 years [and charges relating to the deaths of the other three children] in prison over the death of Elias via a fire at her home childcare centre in February 2011 which ragically killed four toddlers and injured three.
Under Texas state law a citizen can be tried for murder if they committed an offence that led to the death of an individual.
Ms Tata had left the children in her care unattended while she went to a nearby convenience store. Investigators said that the deadly blaze started because a pan of oil had been left cooking in the house as well. The same jury that convicted her were given a choice of sentencing anywhere between five years and life in prison.
The trial raises interesting questions about how Ms Tata was even allowed to operate a day care centre from her home without adequate fire safety or staffing procedures.
The Associated Press, writing here on the Seattle Times website, describe Jessica Tata’s dream to run a day care centre but that she was soon “in over her head” with too many children to care for.
I’m no expert on the regulatory framework in Texas, but it is clear that there has been a failure to identify the risk in this particular case.
I can only speculate on whether Ms Tata had all of the required paperwork to be in business in the first place and one would not be surprised if she had none.- If this were the case then, the only solution is better education.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Rank: Super forum user
|
Actually the US has a poor H&S record possibly the worst of any of the developed economies. Prosecution by the OHSA for H&S violations are rare (see SHP article about this at- http://www.shponline.co....fety-systems-workin-usa- which explains why) What seems to have happened here is that a young poor woman tried to set herself up in business as a child minder and like a lot of businesses in the entrepreneur friendly US she did not require any form of registration, licence or anything. Risk assessment per se is not part of US legal requirements. So there was a tragic accident – see http://abcnews.go.com/US...re-17761592#.UK-IDmdbKDM and the local prosecutors (not the feds) decided to throw the book at her. This is what they do; they try to cover for a lack of proper regulation by sacrificing the occasional poor sod. The (state) prosecutors are elected officials and so like to show off to the voters by bring the most serious charges they can in this case felony murder (a charge of manslaughter would have made more sense). A wealthier, well connected client would be able to take this to higher court and get this challenged on constitutional grounds but I suspect the poor woman will just be left to rot.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Rank: Super forum user 
|
A Kurdziel wrote:This is what they do; they try to cover for a lack of proper regulation by sacrificing the occasional poor sod.
... and the UK is going the same way. I'm not actually fundamentally opposed to FFI, but what I do think is wrong is the move by HSE away from providing advice and assistance into a body that is purely about enforcement and penalties. The change in approach towards penalties for breach rather than information and education to avoid breaches in the first place is not a good development, in my view. (I know it's not the HSE deciding to do this - it's politics - we have a government intent on rule by what looks good in the pages of the Daily Mail, in my view. 'String em up' looks good.)
|
|
|
|
|
|
Rank: Forum user
|
achrn
The rot started before FFI when Fire and Rescue stepped back from advice to enforcement and penalties.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Rank: Super forum user 
|
I had an interesting email from the writer of a US blog group just last week, concerning a publication of mine that discussed en passant the scale of OSHA fines in the US. The key issues of this political pressure group/blog was that the magnitude of penalties handed down for just about anything and everything that is safety and health is going down, year by year, and President by President. The accuracy of the data they present cannot be confirmed, but it does seem to show some trends even though data presentation is 'managed' to make the point. http://complianceandsafe...ha-under-u-s-presidents/
|
|
|
|
|
|
Rank: Super forum user
|
Like a lot of political blogs, those figures tell part of a story.
What would be interesting (in terms of penalties) would be a comparison of annual penalties as a proportion of OSHA budget. This would show how the priorities of OSHA's work varied between regulation, enforcement, education, etc, potentially as a result of executive branch priorities. Bush Sr's time might be seen as the golden age of setting examples through fines.
It all tends to show that fines have INCREASED though, over time, not decreased, but it's all so subjective. External factors like recessions etc have more effect than just contributing to inflation figures.
|
|
|
|
|
|
You cannot post new topics in this forum.
You cannot reply to topics in this forum.
You cannot delete your posts in this forum.
You cannot edit your posts in this forum.
You cannot create polls in this forum.
You cannot vote in polls in this forum.