Hartford woman sentanced to 11 years for starving autistic 17 year old to death.
34 replies, posted
http://www.courant.com/breaking-news/hc-br-matthew-tirado-mother-sentenced-in-autistic-boys-death-20180605-story.html
http://www.courant.com/news/connecticut/hc-news-stunning-lapses-by-dcf-in-matthew-tirado-starvation-death-1212-story.html
At the time of his death he weighed 84 pounds.
Hartford detectives found photographs on Katiria Tirado’s phone showing that she had screwed cabinets shut and locked the refrigerator. They reported that she controlled whatever food the boy could eat. They also found text messages Tirado sent in which she acknowledges she was starving the boy. In one message to her sister, she wrote: “See how I gotta have my fridge.” She then said: “but he can’t get in it any longer because you need a screwdriver.” In December 2016, weeks before Matthew died, police found that Tirado had searched the internet for “autism underweight,” “autism and weight loss” and “what is it like to have anorexia and autism.”
DCF dropped the ball on this one as well. They effectively ignored six (yes six) reports from his school about abuse, and systematically failed to follow proper protocols.
“In December 2016 ... after nine months of not being allowed to see Matthew or verify his whereabouts, DCF submitted a written recommendation to the juvenile court requesting that the court terminate the case and end protective supervision early."
"Eagan reported that the DCF paperwork “did not spell out what efforts had been ... made to find the children and ensure their safety.”
The state’s principal child-protection department and Matthew’s court-appointed lawyer never sought orders from a judge that would have: kept the case open until Matthew and her sister were found and deemed safe; permitted “visitation of Matthew’s sister in school”; or sought “commitment of either child to state custody — despite grounds for such orders,” Eagan reported.
DCF asked to close its case without asserting whether taking that action was in the best interest of Matthew and his sister — as is required by law, Eagan wrote.
The child advocate’s report notes that the hearing to close the DCF case lasted 42 seconds.
And their defense basically amounts to "well his case file was so fucking big we didn't read it."
11 years seems a bit short imo.
They should force her to fast the entire 11 years.
Fuck off it was basically murder. 11 years is fuckin bullshit
Statistically, if it was a male who commited this crime, he would probably would have gotten Life.
I stated a fact, why she got off so easy when she should have gotten so much longer.
Are you going to share these facts and statistics with the class, or are you just pulling it out of your ass?
Father who starved daughter gets 10 years in prison (Hint: this chick was sentenced for 11)
I've been searching for more singular 'Mother starves child and gets a certain amount of time" but I can't since it seems usually its a pair of parents starving their kids. So here's a few sources of pairs starving their kids:
District parents sentenced to 12 years in prison for starving death of 7-week-old infant
Couple sentenced for starving kids who ate paint off walls to survive (This one is interesting, they were sentenced roughly the same amount of years, but the woman was sentenced about a year less. Maybe you're on to something?)
Pastor Receives 99 Year Sentence For Starving A Toddler To Rid A Demon (This pastor was a woman! Recieved one hell of a sentence, I thought she'd be a man!)
Dallas mother gets life for starving baby who was too weak to cry when he died (interesting fact, this one and last one were both in Dallas. Perhaps location has something to do with sentencing?)
That's four right now, I don't feel like I need more to prove you wrong since I have evidence of men being put away for same amount of time, as well as women being put away for even more time.
You're stupid, gender has nothing to do with this. She should've been put away for longer, sure. But she didn't get off easy because she was a woman. I'd think?
Try not to drag stupid bias into the news. That shit's dumb.
If you're going to bitch about sentencing, bitch about why people in DCF aren't being indited for negligence and/or fraudulently giving statements/doing paperwork.
I didn't drag anything anywhere, you decided to take it as far as an arguement when there was absolutely no reason too. Anyone can sift through many articles and pick ones that support their side. I made a simple statement based on statistics, you decided to take it further than just a statement.
I live in CT. My therapist has mentioned how DCF is fucking terrible to work with since they rarely seem to break children away from abusive families. She deals with a lot of children in the system and it's heart breaking for her to see kids that need a better environment rather than their heavily drug addicted and neglectful parents, but DCF is always eager to give kids back to parents who haven't cleaned up their act at all.
Just because they're flesh and blood doesn't mean children should be given back to abusive and neglectful parents because they want their property back. Too many broken couples think children are supposed to fix their issues and cling to the idea of a nuclear family when they are the shittiest parents possible and the child will grow up damaged and maladjusted because of it.
This is kind of a personal issue for me because one of my cousins got custody of her little kids back after she got out of jail (for a combination of drug possession and assault) and proceeded to fuck their lives up by being a drugged up, neglectful and abusive parent. Since then one became a father when he was 14 with his 15 year old girlfriend, and the other who's now 26 (a year older than me) and has cystic fibrosis is an alcoholic and refusing treatment for his CF because he wants to live fast and die young. She never should have gotten custody back but she fought tooth and nail for it just because she felt like she deserved them. The father of the two kids OD'd before her prison sentence and she refused to get clean. Every so often she tries to weasel her way back into our lives because she needs money and it's sickening how transparent she is. Some people just shouldn't be parents, but it's something that you can't really prevent.
What statistics?
11 years? She should get life, you don't just starve someone by accident. Bullshit.
This whole situation is just fucked. It seems that:
-the mother is mentally handicapped and it's obvious he should not have been in her care from the start. Even his father stated this and he seems like a bag of shit
-the son, Matthew, was the result of the rape of his mother by a man two decades her senior
-social services completely failed to check in a timely manner despite knowing that the household was dangerous and that Matthew was living in abusive conditions.
I just can't guys. This kid deserved so much better. It seems like a prime example of how hurt just makes more hurt
And he more or less blew those 'statistics' right out of the water, so I'm not sure you're making a point here
Statistics show the opposite, I also have statistics that say what ever my opinion is. You can't say otherwise or I'll just say you sifted through articles and picked the ones that support your side. I don't need proof cause you are just going to try and prove me wrong with your "facts"
And then there was silence.
Fine, here is a research paper written from someone attending Michigan law school.
https://papers.ssrn.com/sol3/papers.cfm?abstract_id=2144002
While I agree you shouldn't be dragging your bias into this, that's a interesting paper.
Personally I dislike it when someone comes into the topic and says something along the lines of "x would have being treated more harshly if it was b", both feminists and mens rights advocates do this and all it does is muddy the conversation.
I'm not saying you're wrong in the sense "Women don't get lighter sentences". Because they do, I personally believe women get lighter sentences and I said this in my post.
Here's my problem: on this specific crime, sentencing varies heavily and men and women recieve very different sentences. With some receiving more, and some receiving less. I won't doubt that her being a woman probably affected the sentencing 1% at the very least. But I will doubt that her being a woman didnt result in a 11 year sentence. (Especially since I have evidence of a man receiving less time)
This is like if a white guy committed a robbery really poorly, tried to escape, got his pants caught on a fence, then got found by a cop while he was trying to pull his pants back up. It's a funny story that has nothing to do with race, but then you come in and say "If he was black, statisically the cops would've shot him."
Yeah? I guess you're right, maybe? What does that have to do with anything? This is an article where an abusive parent and incompetent child protective services lead to a child dying. This parent received a light sentence (that's not necessarily a crazy sentence that's never happened, because a dude's received 10 years for starving his kid). You can definitely say that this woman deserves a harsher sentence, or that DCF requires an overhaul, or that this whole situation is shit. But her being a woman really has very little to do with this topic.
There is a noticeable phenomenon that good looking people and women often get lighter sentences but it varies heavily on the crime. If the logic behind the observation is that latent sexism pushes people to be more indulgent towards women, then surely that same sexism means they would be extra harsh regarding a woman that fails to be a mother.
That's not necessarily true. Looking at other similar cases it's extremely unlikely that her gender played any significant role in her sentencing in this case. However, I don't think there's really any foundation for the claim that abusive or neglectful mothers are seen as being any worse than abusive or neglectful fathers, and in fact the opposite is most likely the case considering the justice system's history.
It's well known that the sentencing disparity between men and women is larger than the sentencing disparity between whites and blacks.
Can we shut up about the gender talk and realize how they found a dead kid who was literally a fucking stick?
It's not Facepunch.
It's just that one guy who posted, everyone else is just proving him wrong.
Yet they continued the damn conversation instead of letting it die off.
Oh sure they totally proved me wrong. ¯\_(ツ)_/¯ Totally no one else who agreed.
Shut up.
Someone just said the paper was interesting,
even that person agreed that you're just dragging gender issues into something completely unrelated.
Sorry, you need to Log In to post a reply to this thread.
