Double standards in "Home Alone" couple?

[Guest]

I just read about the couple in the "home alone" case who left the 10 and 5 year-olds alone--that they each pleaded no contest. But the Dad was charged with two felony child endangerment charges, and the mother with one misdemeanor accessory charge. So is a crime many times more serious if you do the same thing as a man instead of as a woman? Why does the father lose his civil rights and not the mother?

[Flower]

>I just read about the couple in the "home alone" case who

>left the 10 and 5 year-olds alone--that they each pleaded no

>contest. But the Dad was charged with two felony child

>endangerment charges, and the mother with one misdemeanor

>accessory charge. So is a crime many times more serious if

>you do the same thing as a man instead of as a woman? Why

>does the father lose his civil rights and not the mother?

 

I'm willing to bet one of 2 things--after taking statements of both of them the DA probably felt that the wife's case was more defensible--like maybe she had more jury sympathy or from a practical stated point, a jury wasn't going to take away BOTH parents no matter how inept they may be; OR, there is a plea bargain brewing and the H&W decided better to have mom at home with the kids while dad is doing whatever jail time he might get--if any. I really doubt jail is in store for either of them if this is first offense. If a plea wasn't in the making, then the DA would most likely file all he could on both of them to make a plea to a lesser charge or number of counts more likely--just my guess.

[Guest]

Thanks for your reply. It turns out that both are serving home detention with electronic tracking devices (I don't know if home detention allows a person to keep their job or not). The father has to serve 270 days, and the wife 180. The wife is actually the step-mother (the father's previous wife passed away). "We all believed that the children were with the grandmother on the day they were left alone. Had we known, we could have taken them ourselves. We have done it on other occasions, so there was no reason that we would not be doing it."

It turns out that the maternal grandma was the one who called the cops. The father is a construction plumbing foreman, and the step-mother a cosmetic dentist. Unless one deceived the other, it would seem from a logical standpoint that both would be equally culpable (and if there were deception, the deceived person would be completely innocent). The only two explanations I can think of are (1) there's a legal difference in responsibility between a parent and a step-parent, or (2) they gave the step-mom a lighter sentence so that her dental license wouldn't be revoked, but gave the father felony charges to make good press. I'm guessing that a felony conviction would result in automatic revocation of a dental license??