Hello all,
I received notice of this story out of California through my Google alerts
and couldn't believe what I was reading. I am no-mail right now but I
didn't see anything on this story in the LACTNET archives, so here it is:
http://www.pe.com/breakingnews/local/stories/PE_News_Local_D_crane27.a140c.html
Nurse sentenced to prison in breast-feeding case
02:31 PM PDT on Tuesday, April 26, 2005
By JOHN WELSH / The Press-Enterprise
Nurse sentenced
Who: Ingrid Ann Crane, former Riverside County Regional Medical Center nurse
What: Convicted of one count of lewd act with an infant for breast-feeding a
baby while on duty
Sentencing: Three years in state prison.
Source: Riverside County Superior Court
RIVERSIDE - A judge sentenced a former emergency-room nurse to three years
in state prison Tuesday for breast-feeding another woman's child while she
was on duty. Ingrid Ann Crane breast-fed the infant at the Riverside County
Regional Medical Center in March 2004. Co-workers, who called the act
"unsanitary and disgusting," filed a complaint with the state Board of
Registered Nursing, according to a probation deputy's report.
Crane, 49, of Hesperia, pleaded guilty to one count of a lewd act with a
infant. Riverside County Superior Court Judge Helios J. Hernandez denied
probation and sentenced Crane to the maximum three-year sentence. He
questioned whether the woman's remorse was genuine.
Crane, a Dutch national, could be deported after she serves her sentence.
She initially faced three felony counts of lewd acts and told a probation
deputy she breast-fed a friend's child in the 1980s.
Crane "violated the most vulnerable people of our society--not just the
infants but the parents of the victims," Deputy District Attorney Michelle
Paradise said outside the courtroom.
The prosecutor said Crane seemed to know what to say based on years of
attending various drug- and gambling-addiction programs.
"She's recycling the words she knows she's supposed to say because she's
been in these programs for decades," Paradise said. "There's no real remorse
there."
The parents of the victims did not attend Tuesday's sentencing. One of the
mothers did speak with a probation deputy and said she believes the
defendant "is sincerely remorseful for her conduct." That woman caught Crane
suckling her child and the nurse told her she was "just trying to pacify her
baby," the probation deputy wrote.
Another mother accused Crane of breast-feeding her child during an
Alcoholics Anonymous meeting in Hesperia. She told the probation deputy
Crane "interfered with a natural loving bond of mother and baby to satisfy
her own sick sexual needs."
It is the "most bizarre case I've ever encountered," said Julie Lowrey, a
17-year law enforcement officer assigned to investigate Crane's behavior.
Reach John Welsh at (951) 368-9474 or [log in to unmask]
My comments:
Words fail me. It is difficult to describe how horrible this is and in how
many ways. Three years hard time and a criminal record FOR BREASTFEEDING A
BABY?!!! This woman, this act, so dangerous she/it must be confined --
locked up tight -- where no one can be further harmed....The charge is
"lewdness with a child under 14"....The description of all this as
"unsanitary and disgusting", "bizarre", apparently for the purpose of
satisfying "her own sick sexual needs"... my mind is reeling.
Look again at the news story - the scorn heaped upon this woman by all -
judge, prosecutor, the probation deputy, the law enforcement officer, her
co-workers, and of course the mothers of the babies. Where then are the
comments from Ms. Crane's lawyer, from breastfeeding advocates, from someone
who knew something about cross-nursing, or from Ms. Crane herself? What did
the doctor's report on Ms. Crane say? The county court website refers to
it; the reporter might have asked about it. Apparently he did not. Ms.
Crane's side of the story is invisible.
Will no one speak for this woman? Will we allow her to be shamed so? I
looked for letters to the editor in response to the story but found none.
Information on sending one to this paper can be found at the bottom of this
page: http://www.pe.com/localnews/opinion/. (It's late now; my letter will
be sent tomorrow.)
Oddly, I thought, I could find no other mention of this woman or her story
on the web. Her lawyer is:
Bruce Arneson
14285 Amargosa Rd #100
Victorville, CA 92392
Phone Number (760) 843-7404
Fax Number (760) 843-7704
I left him a message (politely) asking for an email address he could be
contacted through. I said that breastfeeding and women's advocates would
likely want to lend support, would wonder if there would be an appeal of her
sentence, and might like to send words of support to Ms. Crane.
This is not just about someone who failed to ask permission to breastfeed
another's baby. The comments, especially that Ms. Crane had done something
"unsanitary and disgusting", show so much revulsion, not just about what she
did, but about the act of breastfeeding itself.
The California Penal Code sections under which she was indicted are
considered "non-consensual sexual offences". Right up there with rape. A
lewd act with a child under 14 is defined so:
288. (a) Any person who willfully and lewdly commits any lewd or
lascivious act, including any of the acts constituting other crimes
provided for in Part 1, upon or with the body, or any part or member
thereof, of a child who is under the age of 14 years, with the intent
of arousing, appealing to, or gratifying the lust, passions, or
sexual desires of that person or the child, is guilty of a felony and
shall be punished by imprisonment in the state prison for three,
six, or eight years.
More appallingly, if that is possible, she was also charged with
"continuous sexual abuse" per this section:
288.5. (a) Any person who either resides in the same home with the
minor child or has recurring access to the child, who over a period
of time, not less than three months in duration, engages in three or
more acts of substantial sexual conduct with a child under the age of
14 years at the time of the commission of the offense, as defined in
subdivision (b) of Section 1203.066, or three or more acts of lewd
or lascivious conduct under Section 288, with a child under the age
of 14 years at the time of the commission of the offense is guilty of
the offense of continuous sexual abuse of a child and shall be
punished by imprisonment in the state prison for a term of 6, 12, or
16 years.
This charge was dropped, as she had pled guilty to the lesser charge of lewd
acts.
California caselaw does not directly define what "lewd" means (although it
does define "lewd acts"). The dictionary definitions of "lewd" and
"obscene" are:
Lewd:
- preoccupied with sex and sexual desire; lustful.
- obscene; indecent.
Obscene:
- designed to incite to indecency or lust
- suggestive of or tending to moral looseness
Is this what was really going on?
Although it is often fruitless to ask the question, "What were they
thinking?" and expect a rational answer when the answers lie in deep
emotional realms, still I will briefly ask: What *were* they thinking? Did
they really think Ms. Crane was becoming sexually stimulated while
breastfeeding? Was there any evidence that she was, or hoped to be? Did
they ask themselves at any point, "how plausible is this?" or "Are there
alternative explanations that make sense?"
Note that she might have been charged with false imprisonment instead,
defined in California as "the unlawful violation of the personal liberty of
another". Why was she not? Why was a sexual offense chosen?
End of Part 1 - please see Part 2.
(I had to divide this message into two parts because it was a few lines too
long for the list.)
***********************************************
To temporarily stop your subscription: set lactnet nomail
To start it again: set lactnet mail (or digest)
To unsubscribe: unsubscribe lactnet
All commands go to [log in to unmask]
The LACTNET mailing list is powered by L-Soft's renowned
LISTSERV(R) list management software together with L-Soft's LSMTP(R)
mailer for lightning fast mail delivery. For more information, go to:
http://www.lsoft.com/LISTSERV-powered.html
|
