Do you have a dumb question that you're kind of embarrassed to ask in the main thread? Is there something you're just not sure about?
This is your opportunity to ask questions. No question too simple or too silly.
Culture war topics are accepted, and proposals for a better intro post are appreciated.

Jump in the discussion.
No email address required.
Notes -
Not a case of beer, a fucking six-pack. I hope it was at least not Bud Light.
Also quote, from that article you have linked:
These are not applicants to Mensa.
As for the different sentences, without knowing the circumstances I'll withhold judgment, though each sentence for each individual seems bizarrely light to me for what, again to me, is an unimaginable crime. Simply that the male and female got different treatment does not bother me.
Do we know that compensation was the motive here? Based on the article it's possible that they were trying to give the child up to someone who could raise the baby better than they could and that the token compensation was just that. Obviously this would be an egregiously irresponsible way to do it, but that makes belief in one's unfitness for parenthood more understandable, not less.
I don't have any knowledge of the case, and this is all speculation. But I think it would explain the actions of everyone involved, prosecutors included, better than greed does.
Well I didn't suspect greed (a 6-pack?) as much as wanton irresponsibility. If they just wished to offload the child, adoption agencies or other avenues exist.
More options
Context Copy link
More options
Context Copy link
It appears that they were charged under 'accepting payment for adoption' not child trafficking. The former is, yes, a crime, but normally addresses 1)running adoption agencies without proper licensing and 2)paperwork violations to enable fraud(relating to taxes, parental rights, custody disputes, etc). It's entirely possible it just has low sentences because they got charged with 'sketchy shit' and not 'heinousness'. As for why they were charged that way, probably because the DA thought it would be easier to prove.
More options
Context Copy link
More options
Context Copy link