The Louise Woodward case
Louise Woodward traveled to the United States as an au pair girl. This concept is used in parts of the world where parents have little time for their kids.
The boy in her care was admitted to the hospital, where it died. A translation error between UK English and US English caused her to be charged. The main picture of her drawn by the prosecution was that she was an irresponsible drunken European youth when she had been visiting town properly drinking alcohol as most teenagers in Europe do once they are confirmed. We have to remember that the legal drinking age in the United States is the shocking 21. Due to a various court strategies she was convicted to 15 years minimum, however the judge overturned the verdict and she was released and deported back to the United Kingdom. Had the incident occured later, she could have ended up in the electric chair as a awful crime had resulted in a proposal to reinstate the death penalty. However her case is the main reason that this proposal fell as people found it too harsh considering the circumstances in this case. In 2007 the forensic research had caught up with the evidence in the case and she was basically exonerated. This case still stands as a harsh warning that youth visiting foreign cultures should be held back by friends and family if they are faithful to their native customs. |
Louise Woodward rejste til England som Au pair pige. Ligesom Fillippinerne er underbetalte i Danmark og bruges som billig arbejdskraft anvendes Au pair systemet også som laveste fællesnævner for at få passet sit barn af forældre der satser på deres sociale liv.
Barnet som hun skulle passe på blev kørt på hospitalet hvor at det døde. En oversættelsesfejl imellem UK Engelsk og US engelsk medførte at hun blev sigtet for at have forvoldt barnets død. Den vigtigste anklage imod hende var hendes såkaldte udsvævende Europæiske levevis. Vi må ikke glemme at alkohol nydes fra konfirmationen i Europa imens at aldersgrænsen i USA er chokerende 21 år. På grund af regler om minimum straf blev hun dømt skyldig efter regler som dikterede 15 års fængsel minimum, men dommeren ændrede anklagen så hun blev løsladt og deporteret med det samme. Ironisk nok kunne hun have fået dødsstraf, hvis forbrydelsen var sket senere, da en skærpet lovgivning var på vej, men netop hendes sag medførte at forslaget faldt. Dette er ironisk fordi at moderne retsmedicin frikendte hende for anklagerne i 2007. Alligevel bør sagen mane til eftertanke hos familier og venner til et ungt menneske der vil studere i udlandet og som forbliver tro imod deres kultur. Det er ikke alle der møder en så forstående dommer. |