re: #119 subsailor68

So, in my possibly incorrect understanding, the main issue is - did she, or did she not - smother the infant? If she did, Virginia law says she smothered an infant who was defined as “alive”, and the fact that the investigator is incorrect on the law is irrelevant. She should be charged.

Am I missing something?

Honestly, I am not sure. The issue SHOULD be whether they have evidence to charge her.

The kindest explanation, as regards Mr. Tracy Emerson, is that there is evidence, and that he honestly believes, for some reason, that the law will not let him bring charges.

The least charming is that he knows there is no evidence, and that the law would not prevent him bringing charges if there were, but that he is blatantly lying in order to advance a political agenda that has nothing to do with the case.