Woman guilty of murdering adopted girl who starved and froze to death
Ethiopian-born Hana Williams was beaten, starved and eventually left outside in the cold to die, Washington jury told
A woman has been found guilty in Washington state of starving and freezing to death her 13-year-old Ethiopian-born adopted daughter whom she was raising according to the dictates of a strict religious handbook for parents.
Hana Williams was locked outside and died of hypothermia in May 2011 after she was found unconscious shortly after midnight in temperatures hovering around 40F (4C), authorities said.
The girl’s mother, Carri Williams, was convicted of homicide by abuse and of manslaughter linked to the girl’s death, while the father, Larry Williams, was convicted of first-degree manslaughter, a representative of the Skagit county prosecutor’s office said.
Larry and Carri Williams of Sedro-Woolley – a town about halfway between Seattle and the Canadian city of Vancouver – were arrested in September 2011, more than four months after Hana died in their backyard.
Investigators said Hana had endured beatings, starvation, being forced to sleep outside and use an outdoor toilet and that she had lost a significant amount of weight since her adoption in 2008. Prosecutors said her 10-year-old brother, who also was adopted from Ethiopia, was similarly mistreated.
The parents kept the family isolated from non-relatives, home-schooled them and followed a harsh child-rearing regimen described in the Christian parenting book To Train Up a Child, investigators said, while adding that religion had been deemed not relevant to the criminal case.
During the seven-week trial Carri Williams was tearful yet defiant under cross-examination by prosecutors. Shown a photo of her children, she accused prosecutors of having “ripped apart” her family. “I did the best I could with what I knew,” she said.
In addition to the charges linked to Hana’s death, both parents were found guilty of assault of a child stemming from mistreatment of their 10-year-old son.
Both parents could face a maximum penalty of up to life in prison due to aggravating factors in the crime, although prosecutors said the judge had discretion on the duration. They are to be sentenced in October.
The case is among several in recent years that have drawn attention to the vulnerability of children from overseas adopted by US families, among them the death in January of three-year-old Russian adoptee Max Shatto. Texas authorities determined that Shatto died of self-inflicted injuries and his parents were not charged in his death, but Russian officials seized on the case as justifying a 2012 ban on adoptions by Americans.
Look at what these miserable fundie fuckwits preach.
Quotes from To Train Up A Child
When quoting from To Train Up A Child (written and published by Michael and Debi Pearl), we should be careful about paraphrasing. We are being accused of misquoting. Here are some quotes from the first edition of the book, which is found online here. I got the page numbers from quotes which are in circulation (originating from stoptherod.net) but I painstakingly checked each quote in the book to make sure that I am using direct quotes.
The Pearls recommend switching infants only a few months old on their bare skin. They describe switching their own 4 month old daughter (p.9).
At four months she was too unknowing to be punished for disobedience. But for her own good, we attempted to train her not to climb the stairs by coordinating the voice command of “No” with little spats on the bare legs. The switch was a twelve-inch long, one-eighth-inch diameter sprig from a willow tree.
On p.60 they recommend switching babies who cannot sleep and are crying, and to never allow them “to get up.”
But what of the grouch who would rather complain than sleep? Get tough. Be firm with him. Never put him down and then allow him to get up. If, after putting him down, you remember he just woke up, do not reward his complaining by allowing him to get up.For the sake of consistency in training, you must follow through. He may not be able to sleep, but he can be trained to lie there quietly. He will very quickly come to know that any time he is laid down there is no alternative but to stay put. To get up is to be on the firing line and get switched back down.
On p.79 they recommend switching a 7 month old for screaming.
A seven-month-old boy had, upon failing to get his way, stiffened clenched his fists, bared his toothless gums and called down damnation on the whole place. At a time like that, the angry expression on a baby’s face can resemble that of one instigating a riot. The young mother, wanting to do the right thing, stood there in helpless consternation, apologetically shrugged her shoulders and said, “What can I do?” My incredulous nine-year-old whipped back, “Switch him.” The mother responded, “I can’t, he’s too little.” With the wisdom of a veteran who had been on the little end of the switch, my daughter answered, “If he is old enough to pitch a fit, he is old enough to be spanked.”
On p.65 co-author Debi Pearl whips the bare leg of a 15 month old she is babysitting, 10 separate times, for not playing with something she tells him to play with.
After about ten acts of stubborn defiance, followed by ten switchings, he surrendered his will to one higher than himself. In rolling the wheel, he did what every accountable human being must do–he humbled himself before the “highest” and admitted that his interests are not paramount. After one begrudged roll, my wife turned to other chores.
On p.56 Debi Pearl trades blows with a 2 year old.
This time, her bottom came off the couch as she drew back to return the blow; and I heard a little karate like wheeze come from somewhere deep inside.
On p.59 they recommend spanking a 3 year old until he is “totally broken.”
She then administers about ten slow, patient licks on his bare legs. He cries in pain. If he continues to show defiance by jerking around and defending himself, or by expressing anger, then she will wait a moment and again lecture him and again spank him. When it is obvious he is totally broken, she will hand him the rag and very calmly say, “Johnny, clean up your mess.” He should very contritely wipe up the water.
On p.55 the Pearls say a mother should hit her child if he cries for her.
If a father is attempting to make a child eat his oats, and the child cries for his mother, then the mother should respond by spanking him for whining for her and for not eating his oats. He will then be glad to be dealing only with the father.
On p.46 the Pearls say that if a child does obey before being spanked, spank them anyway. And “if you have to sit on him to spank him, then do not hesitate. And hold him there until he is surrendered. Prove that you are bigger, tougher.” “Defeat him totally.”
Never reward delayed obedience by reversing the sentence. And, unless all else fails, don’t drag him to the place of cleansing. Part of his training is to come submissively. However, if you are just beginning to institute training on an already rebellious child, who runs from discipline and is too incoherent to listen, then use whatever force is necessary to bring him to bay. If you have to sit on him to spank him then do not hesitate. And hold him there until he is surrendered. Prove that you are bigger, tougher, more patiently enduring and are unmoved by his wailing. Defeat him totally. Accept no conditions for surrender. No compromise. You are to rule over him as a benevolent sovereign. Your word is final.
On p.80 they say
On the bare legs or bottom, switch him eight or ten licks; then, while waiting for the pain to subside, speak calm words of rebuke. If the crying turns to a true, wounded, submissive whimper, you have conquered; he has submitted his will. If the crying is still defiant, protesting and other than a response to pain, spank him again.
On p.47 they give details of what to use for a spanking instrument.
Any spanking, to effectively reinforce instruction, must cause pain, but the most pain is on the surface of bare skin where the nerves are located. A surface sting will cause sufficient pain, with no injury or bruising. Select your instrument according to the child’s size. For the under one year old, a little, ten- to twelve-inch long, willowy branch (striped of any knots that might break the skin) about one-eighth inch diameter is sufficient. Sometimes alternatives have to be sought. A one-foot ruler, or its equivalent in a paddle, is a sufficient alternative. For the larger child, a belt or larger tree branch is effective.
The Pearls recommend pulling a nursing infant’s hair (p.7)
One particularly painful experience of nursing mothers is the biting baby. My wife did not waste time finding a cure. When the baby bit, she pulled hair (an alternative has to be sought for baldheaded babies).
They recommend hosing off a child outside in order to clean him if he continues to soil himself.
So, my suggestion was that the father explain to the boy that, now that he was a man, he would no longer be washed in the house. He was too big and too stinky to be cleaned by the babywipes. From now on, he would be washed outside with a garden hose.
Also, here are 3 quotes which I feel show some questionable doctrine:
The guilt burdened soul cries out for the lashes and nails of justice. Your child cannot yet understand that the Creator has been lashed and nailed in his place. Only the rod of correction can preserve his soul until the day of moral dawning.
The parent holds in his hand (in the form of a little switch) the power to absolve the child of guilt, cleanse his soul, instruct his spirit, strengthen his resolve, and give him a fresh start through a confidence that all indebtedness is paid.
A child properly and timely spanked is healed in the soul and restored to wholeness of spirit. A child can be turned back from the road to hell through proper spankings. “Withhold not correction from the child; for if thou beatest him with the rod, he shall not die. Thou shalt beat him with the rod, and shalt deliver his soul from hell (Prov. 23:13, 14). (p. 44)
Note: I find it ironic that he recommends using plastic plumbing line for a rod and then objects when people say that he teaches people to whip children.
Now, here are some very disturbing quotes directly from their website. You are going to have to go read this yourself to really appreciate it and believe that I did not take quotes out of context.
This is from Question #9: “Please give examples of the kinds of things for which you used the rod, both as a training tool and as punishment, for children were under 12 months.”
We never used the rod to punish a child younger than 12 months.
For young children, especially during the first year, the rod is used very lightly as a training tool. You use something small and light to get the child’s attention and to reinforce your command.
One or two light licks on the bare legs or arms will cause a child to stop in his tracks and regard your commands.
A 12-inch piece of weed eater chord works well as a beginner rod. It will fit in your purse or pocket.
Later, a plumber’s supply line is a good spanking tool. You can get it at Wal-Mart or any hardware store. Ask for a plastic, ¼ inch, supply line. They come in different lengths and several colors; so you can have a designer rod to your own taste. They sell for less than $1.00.
A baby needs to be trained all day, everyday. It should be a cheerful, directing training, not a correction training.
When your 6-month-old baby grabs sister’s hair, while he still has a hand full of hair, swat his hand or arm and say “No, that hurts sister.” If he has already let go of her hair, then put his hand back on her hair, so as to engage his mind in the former action, and then carry on with the hand swatting and the command.
If your 10-month-old is pitching a fit because he wants to be picked up, then you must reinforce your command with a few stinging swats.
Wait one minute, and then tell the baby to stop crying. If he doesn’t, again swat him on his bare legs. You don’t need to undress him, turn him over, or make a big deal out of it. Just swat him where any skin is exposed. Continue to act as if you don’t notice the fit. Wait two minutes and repeat.
Most babies will keep it going for 3 or 4 times and then slide to a sitting position and sob it out. When this happens, it signals a surrender, so give him two minutes to get control and then swoop him up as if the fit never happen and give him a big hug, BUT don’t hold him in the manner he was demanding. Now remove yourself from the area so as to remove him from association with the past event.
Don’t ever hit a small child with your hand. You are too big and the baby is too small. The surface of the skin is where the most nerves are located and where it is easiest to cause pain without any damage to the child. The weight of your hand does little to sting the skin, but can cause bruising or serious damage internally. Babies need training but they do not need to be punished. Never react in anger or frustration. If you loose it, get your self under control before you attempt to discipline a child.
Here is another quote from the No Greater Joy website. This quote is from an article from 1998, Angry Child.
A proper spanking leaves children without breath to complain. If he should tell you that the spanking makes him madder, spank him again. If he is still mad…. He desperately needs an unswayable authority, a cold rock of justice. Keep in mind that if you are angry you are wasting your time trying to spank his anger away.
I could break his anger in two days. He would be too scared to get angry. On the third day he would draw into a quiet shell and obey. On the fourth day I would treat him with respect and he would respond in kind. On the fifth day the fear would go away and he would relax because he would have judged that as long as he responds correctly there is nothing to fear. On the sixth day he would like himself better and enjoy his new relationship to authority. On the seventh day I would fellowship with him in some activity that he enjoyed. On the eight day he would love me and would make a commitment to always please me because he valued my approval and fellowship. On the ninth day someone would comment that I had the most cheerful and obedient boy that they had ever seen. On the tenth day we would be the best of buddies.
(Note that the quote above was linked to Stockholm Syndrome in an article in Secular Homeschooler which makes some interesting points.)
In an article called, Training Roseanna’s Flesh, Pearl explains how and why one must control a child at all costs.
For example: a child tries to slide from your lap onto the floor. On most occasions that’s just a way of letting you know where he wants to go. Fine, but there are times when you do not want him to slide to the floor. If your little fourteen-month-old makes an attempt to dismount your lap, and you indicate that you do not want him to, and he makes a protest by jerking away or whining, then by no means can you allow him to intimidate you into compliance. For, by so doing you have allowed the authority to pass to him. You would be encouraging rebellion. YOU MUST ALWAYS BE PERCEIVED TO WIN ANY CONTEST. It is all determined by what the child thinks. If there is a seed of resistance in the child, it must never be allowed to grow. Don’t allow that spirit of rebellion to become profitable.
When the child whines and makes an issue of something that to you was otherwise irrelevant, you must then follow-through, causing the child to do what he did not want to do. This is soul training – character building – sanctification of the natural spirit in your child. This won’t make him a Christian, but it will give him a better character than most Christians possess.
If, during the course of a day, no contest arises naturally, you should arrange one. Seek opportunity to thwart the child’s will, to cause him to submit to your command. If you cause him to surrender his will to you twenty times during the course of a day, he will not disappoint you with disobedience in public. Tell him to stop, sit, don’t speak for five minutes, etc. Play the half-hour “quiet time game,” the half-hour “don’t wiggle and squirm game.” Refuse him a treat when he is wanting it badly. Give it to him only when he is joyously submitted to your timetable. You mustn’t give the appearance of being blindly arbitrary, but always maintain full control. Never allow the child to dictate your actions.
I have found an article on the No Greater Joy site where Mr. Pearl explains some of his different terminology (aka DoubleSpeak) in regard to when a child is Too Young To Spank. Here is a quote from that page discussing a 6 month old:
So we watch him, knowing his propensity to selfish compulsion. When he seizes his bowl with intentions of dumping it, swat the offending hand with a little instrument (light wooden spoon, rubber spatula, flexible tubing less than a quarter inch in diameter, or any instrument that will cause an unpleasant sting without leaving any marks).
Bertrand Russell made outstanding contribution to the philosophy of mathematics because he was a mathematician. He differed from philosophers who busied themselves with scientific matters they have not understood.
Where did religion and philosophy come from?
“[Humans] began reflecting more deeply on the meaning of life itself, and this
examination led to the frightening awareness of their mortality. To assuage these fears, humans evolved the unique ability to deny reality. [R]eligion and philosophy represent some of our best efforts to do so.”
“A wealth of evidence documents the human talent for disregarding reality. … [H]umans are the world’s ultimate risk takers, ignoring scientific facts such as the dangers of smoking and climate change”
From Scientific American; review of: “Denial: Self-Deception, False Beliefs, and the Origin of the Human Mind”, by Ajit Varki and Danny Brower.
This is not the first time that religion and philosophy are thrown into the same box. The almost uncountable many religions in this world are almost matched by the number of different philosophies. And none of either has contributed in the least to the advancement of humankind. Two examples: (1) The philosophical-minded Plato restricted the advancement of geometry for nearly 2000 years with his absurd claim that only a straightedge and a pair of compasses were permitted as the implements of construction in geometry. (2) The Roman Catholic Church put Galileo under house arrest until his death because he claimed, contrary to The Bible, that Earth was not the centre of the Universe.
“ignoring scientific facts” gevaar soos tabak rook en drank missuip, karre ry, (SA staan op 40/dag), “designer” draks, . . . nou wonder ek maar net wat sê die “wetenskap feite” – wat sit agter alles wat gebeur? Wat sê “wetenskaplike feite” is realiteit?
Van watter “scientific facts” ignoreer ons? Dit lyk vir my na ‘n paai in die skaai stelling. En speel die blaam “game” shame fooitog. . .
Johann, all the problems you mention are socially related and can be regulated by legislation. Not many people smoke these days because they are not welcome to do so in public places. Instead of smoking being seen as a status symbol, it’s a sign of addiction and lack of self respect if done to excess. You used to get people smoking three packs of cigarettes a day. Not any more. I have friends who smoke, but not more than ten or twenty a day. Those government warnings on the packs do have an effect. Alcohol and drugs are abused to escape from reality. Much as I empathise with people who feel disgruntled because they don’t have glamorous jobs like you see in the movies and don’t have top model wives or girlfriends, I still do not see the need for excessive use of alcohol and drugs. If you fly to Taipei you will be told on the plane already that if you are found with drugs in your possession you will get the death penalty. This is very wise of the Taiwanese, also the Thais and the Chinese. Because of our post-apartheid porous borders we have the scum of the earth dumping drugs in South Africa. It is very, very difficult to control the influx. All one can do is make the penalties for possession much harsher. If you are found driving under the influence of alcohol, that’s your driver’s licence gone, for good.
Bertrand Russell had a miserable youth being brought up by his bible bashing Presbyterian grandmother after both his parents died when he was barely out of diapers. Small wonder that the grew up to hate religion. He only divorced his third wife after he got fed up with her having two children by an American journalist. – talk about liberalism biting you in the arse. His father was a depressive and his son also suffered from mental illness. The English upper classes were very inbred, no wonder most of them were off their rocker.
Russell saw the evil effects of religion everywhere, in socialism, capitalism, communism, secular humanism, any organised ideology you can think of. Personally I believe fascism and socialism are very closely related and counter evolutionary. Both ideologies suppress freedom of thought and ownership of material or intellectual capital. Capitalism and a modicum of secular humanism are probably the way to go.
But all things considered, Bertrand Russell was quite a good oke for his day and age. Don’t agree with his views on Israel though.
Recently a very attractive, twice divorced, 45-year-old woman named Jane rejected my modest advances. It wasn’t like I asked her to go to bed. I asked her if she wanted to ride into town with me while I picked up a part for my truck. She replied that, while it was a tempting offer, she no longer did things alone with men.
Later I resumed our conversation in an effort to discover more about her motivations, and perhaps to find a loophole in her strategy that I could use to my advantage. No such luck. She said that she was a born-again Christian and, with God’s help, had avoided sex for the last seven years. I told her that I didn’t think God was doing her any favors. He obviously wasn’t doing me any favors either.
There are two things that I religiously avoid – discussing politics and discussing religion. I avoid them for two reasons. I first learned to avoid discussing religion as a youth in the Methodist church where my father taught Sunday school. My father may have discussed such things with other adults, but certainly not with his children. We only received lectures. I now avoid them because no one has ever change his or her opinion as a result of a serious discussion. Usually a strong and logical argument against someone’s political or religious views only serves to strengthen their beliefs, and that is the last thing I want to do – especially in Jane’s case.
Jane and I parted friends, and we exchanged a few letters during the ensuing several months. But as soon as I started being very logical and intellectual in a gentle attempt to penetrate her religious shield, she stopped writing. God, 1; me, zero.
The experience got me thinking about religion. I have good friends who are born-again Christians, and I have some good friends who are born-again atheists. In between there are a whole spectrum of friends, believers and nonbelievers, who share varying degrees of seriousness, pro or con, about God. I’ve always tried to accommodate everyone’s views while remaining neutral about the issue – that is until now. God never interfered with my activities until Jane made her appearance in my life. Now it has become personal.
My courses of action are rather limited. First, I have to decide who is blocking me. Is it Jane or is it God? If it’s Jane, I can try to win her over by pretending to be born-again. However that seems unethical, and I probably wouldn’t be able to pull it off for very long. If it’s God, I can become born-again myself and pray for what I want with Jane, but somehow that doesn’t seem appropriate nor have a high probability of success. God is no dummy. I doubt if he would give me Jane as a reward for becoming a believer. But true believers tell me that God works in mysterious ways, so perhaps I have a chance.
When I was 18, I made an offer to God. I told him that I was not going to be an active believer until I had some positive sign from him that he exists. I hope this isn’t it. If it is, he’ll have to do better.
“positive sign from him that he exists” die “dom” bokwaters het baie jare terug geskryf iets soos ” ongelowige mense vra altyd vir ‘n teken”. . .? Maar al teken wat hulle sal kry is die teken van Jona”
En wat is die teken van Jona? Ek weet nie, maar Jona het vir 3 dae in die buik van ‘n vis deurgebring en toe het hy terug gegaan na Ninevé waarvan hy weggevlug het, hy moes hulle (Nivevé) gaan vertel het dat hulle moet “bekeer”. Vir een of ander rede het hy besluit om eerder te vlug en beland in ‘n onstuimisge see wat gedreig het om die skip te sink, toe trek die mense op die skip looitjies om te bepaal wie is verantwoordelik vir die ramp wat hulle bedreig.
Jona is toe oorboord gegooi en dis waar sy 3 dae van simbolies donker nag van die siel begin het.
Ek kan nie logika gebruik om die teken te verstaan nie, want mens beweeg oor na ‘n ander dimensie waar rasionele denke vambil (fumble)