He Shook His Baby, 20 Years Later the Baby Dies, He Goes to Jail for Murder....???
Mike Wells, file photo.
FLORIDA: In 1987, Nineteen year old Mike Wells found himself the father of two-month old Christina. Christina had been crying and Mike, frustrated, shook her, then he covered her mouth to quiet her crying. The acts caused Christina severe brain damage. As a father, Mike failed Christina in a permanent, irreversible way. As a culture, “we” failed Mike in a permanent irreversible way too.
According to “The Book of Harlan,” a nineteen-year-old male or female should not have children. They are not mature enough. Culturally, we failed Mike because this should be common knowledge. Perhaps a few people are mature enough at ninteen, but there is no blanket age for when a child is mature enough, each person is different. However, most are not at age nineteen (my personal, empirical opinion).
I work at sea with men of many ages, men from 19 years old up to 60+ years old. The one trait (observed of the men between ages 19- 26) they seem to predominantly have in common is self-centered immaturity. Many of the men between ages 27-35 also have a noticeable level of “worldly immaturity;” perhaps its because they are on a boat 3000 miles from nowhere.
Has our cultural system failed Mike at many levels? As most of the population, Mike was inundated with movies about having sex, music about having sex, and the American male cultural message: “the more sex you have with "the more women," the more of a man you are.” However, such venues offered little to Mike about “oh, would ya look at that… I have a kid," or how to be a good father.
Was shaken baby syndrome even a national awareness issue in the mid 1990’s? Did Mike have access to the information or was he distracted with MTV? Regardless, Mike’s baby was crying; frustrated, he shook her and gave her brain damage.
Mike and his wife Tina both went to prison over the incident for aggravated child abuse. The baby went into protective custody and eventually was adopted by a foster family who cared for her until she died in 2006 at age twenty.
In the twenty years that have passed, Mike and Tina went on to have several more children and raised them without any incident or getting in any legal trouble themselves. Of course the “Associated Press” is quick to point out in their news-wire that Mike and Tina are indeed “white, trailer-park-trash” and always have been. While they are not as blunt as to directly say so, the point is blatantly obvious between the lines, to anyone with a pulse.
Here is the real kick in the pants to this story: Twenty years later, Christina dies from complications of her injuries. The same prosecutor comes after Mike for first-degree murder. The prosecutor himself admits, “[Mike’s] defense attorneys had raised legitimate issues that could have tied up the case in appellate courts for years and even gotten it overturned.”
ALL STOP! Back up a minute...
DId you catch that? Lets weed out a few words to the basic statement from the prosecutor.
Defense attorney's raised legitimate issues - that could have - gotten it overturned.
What legitimate issues are those? Why is no one talking about these legitimate issues?
Why did Mike throw in the towel? I don't believe a jury in Florida would have convicted him of first degree murder. What kind of game are the attorneys playing? Does the prosecution have photographs of the defense naked with a farm animal? Or did Mike finally run out of money in a system where justice is for sale to those with money?
The prosecutor dropped first degree murder charges in exchange for Mike waiving his right to appeal. Mike decided that his best option was to go prison instead of facing a jury. Again I wonder if after three years of litigation Mike is now broke and cannot afford to keep fighting. The “Associated Press” reminds us – he leaves his family alone in that “white-trash, trailer-park” they never managed to get out of. Thus, Mike goes back to prison for another fifteen years for Second Degree Murder.
So while all this is bouncing around in my mind, I hear a report on the radio. Yesterday, a homeless man, produced a knife and stabbed another homeless man, not just once, but sliced him up like Ron Popeil’s Veg-o-matic. The victim died… right away too. What’s the charge? Second Degree Murder.
REALLY? ARE YOU KIDDING ME?
I am really torn here. Thus I ask:
Is justice being served by Mike going back to prison?
When Mike gets out of prison this time, will he be a better member of society than he is now?
Will his wife and children be better off?
Can society now sleep better at night knowing Mike is in prison?
If Christina lived for twenty-years after her injuries, is it still murder?
If “we” ( myself and you the reader) have a car accident and I die twenty-years later from complications of those injuries – should you go to jail for manslaughter?
Is society getting the justice it deserves by putting Mike in jail “again” regarding his daughter?
I don't see any justice in this ruling. I am sure when he shook his daughter he had no idea he would hurt her that way. Which sounds more likely to you? Mike wrung his hands with premeditated, baby-shaking murder on his mind before grabbing Christina and shaking her? Or a young man too immature to be a father made a very big, ignorant mistake out of extreme frustration?
I do not know Mike. I no nothing about him or his personality. This is just my opinion based on what I read. As the story is given, I could see some charge or degree of manslaughter, but second degree murder... no.
Someone, tell me I am not crazy here.
More by this Author
- 1Released from Prison in Haiti, Laura Silsby: "I am so happy to be coming home, I am rejoicing and thanking God."
Left: Kim Barton, sister of Haitian prisoner Laura Silsby reacts to news her sister was released from prison. Right: Barton's daughter shares the good news. (Sorry, In today's world I believe it is irresponsible to...
Scientists recently attending a meeting of the American Association for the Advancement of Science (AAAS), predict massive world food shortages by 2050. Jason Clay, former Yale and Harvard professor and former USDA...
I am a Constitutionalist. But what does that mean really? I believe in freedom. I believe in family. I believe in compassion. I believe in less-government and I believe in God. I further believe the Constitution is a...