The Antelope Valley Times

Your community. Your issues. Your news.

Palmdale babysitter found guilty of killing baby

by •

Victim Aiden Lopez. (Image via gofundme.com]

LANCASTER – A babysitter was convicted Tuesday of second-degree murder and other charges stemming from the death of a nearly 5-month-old boy who was left in her care last year.

Brittany Ann Ingrassi, 31, of Palmdale was found guilty of one count each of second- degree murder, assault on a child causing death, assault on a child becoming comatose and child abuse, according to the Los Angeles County District Attorney’s Office.

Jurors also found true allegations that Ingrassi personally inflicted great bodily injury on the baby, identified on the felony complaint as Aiden L., and that he was under the age of 5.

Ingrassi faces 25 years to life in state prison, with sentencing set for June 2 at the Lancaster courthouse.

Ingrassi’s attorney, Nancy Mazza, contended that the injuries were caused by a French bulldog owned by the baby’s family.

“We firmly believe the injuries came from the dog,” she said. “I respect the jury’s verdict, but we will appeal.”

Aiden was left under Ingrassi’s care the morning of March 22, 2016. The infant’s mother returned home that evening and was met by Ingrassi outside the Lancaster residence and made aware that the baby was not breathing, according to court testimony.

The boy’s mother called 911, and her son — who had suffered skull fractures and a traumatic brain injury — was taken to a local hospital, where he died four days later, according to the District Attorney’s Office.

According to evidence presented at the trial, Ingrassi was unhappy being a babysitter and was under the influence of alcohol while caring for the victim.

The case was prosecuted by Deputy District Attorneys Keri Knittel and Catherine Mariano. The case was investigated by the Los Angeles County Sheriff’s Department.

[City News Service contributed to this report.]

Previous related stories:

Babysitter pleads not guilty in baby’s death

Murder charge filed against babysitter accused of injuring baby in Lancaster

Infant dies after head trauma, babysitter in custody

–

Filed Under: Crime/ Safety

98 comments for "Palmdale babysitter found guilty of killing baby"

  1. Why didn’t she call 911? Because she was guilty. She handed off the problem to the mother after trying to cover it up. She deserves life.

  2. She could have called 911 but she didn’t because she was guilty. Too bad she avoided the death penalty, I hope she never gets out and enjoys those shit meals I pay for.

  4. Rot in Hell! Killing a defenseless little baby is the worst. Hope all the people trying to justify what you did rot with you!

    • Ah, the whipped up blind rage to make somebody pay raises its ugly head once again. It is this inability to maintain rational thought that no doubt has led to the willingness to allow yet another life to be thrown away. I say again: Nobody babysits kids for years, and this particular baby for months, keeps a log of feedings and naps for the parents, has a bazillion pictures of the baby in her own arms, sends pictures and videos to the parents, never even been arrested, much less convicted, for anything in her whole life, and then suddenly she turns into an ax murderer?!?. She murders a kid, apparently somewhat violently, because why exactly? And there has been some attempt to discuss this situation rationally, which I applaud, and have said so. One of those non-hysterical contributions to the exchange seemed to dismiss the lack of motive as no big deal because motive is not a legal requirement. Shouldn’t there at least be some discussion of the lack of motive. We are willing to convict as an ax murderer a babysitter and not even want to know and have answered the question, why? This strikes me as blood lust. It is as if to say, “Oh boy, we get to convict, cause we don’t need a motive.”

      • Yes. The JURY did get to convict, and no they did not need a motive. If you don’t like the law, fight to get it changed. But don’t pretend that we would be better off ignoring the rule of law and establishing a system where decisions made in a court have to be explained to the satisfaction of every anonymous commenter on the internet just to satisfy their morbid need to know ‘what happened.’

        • So, we do not know a motive and come to find out, we also do not know how it happened. But that is OK. We don’t know and we don’t care. She done it. Hate to disagree, but I do not characterize a curiosity about a probable wrongful conviction as “morbid.” What is morbid is the rampant blood lust going on here. We do not know how or why, but we know she done it. Positively dreadful.

          • How do you come up with “probable wrongful conviction”? Wikipedia lists 164 murder convictions under California. I didn’t bother to check a time frame on it, I’m just willing to bet that you don’t have any details about any of them, and acknowledge freely that I don’t. That hardly makes them “probably wrong.” Juries are, by and large, accepted as having done their job. Unless you have some reason to think this jury did not I don’t see where you have any support for your position.

        • Ummm… Namecalling? Seriously? Are you still in the second grade? Yeeeesh

  6. I hate to open a can of worms or burst anyone’s biases, but maybe the dog did play a role in this tragedy. A few days ago a family dog killed a six month old child in Las Vegas. No one criminally charged with anything in that case. Can’t believe it? Check the links. Oh and look, while mom went to the bathroom…..

    https://www.reviewjournal.com/local/local-las-vegas/baby-dies-after-dog-attack-in-northwest-las-vegas/
    http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-4487830/Baby-dies-attacked-dog-Las-Vegas.html
    http://www.oxygen.com/blogs/pitbull-kills-6-month-old-baby
    https://lasvegassun.com/news/2017/may/08/las-vegas-police-infant-dies-after-being-attacked/

    • So if I link an article from a paper in Africa regarding a child trampled to death by a zebra stampede, does that mean that maybe a zebra stampede did play a role in this tragedy?

      • I see no need to make light of a serious tragedy. I could be wrong but I do not believe there were any Zebras involved with this case. But there was a family dog.

        • There was also a babysitter who was drunk and found guilty of murder. Why don’t you google babysitters who murder. Much more relevant than pulling up articles of dog attacks involving pit bulls rather than a french bulldog. There was no screwup in Lancaster…just alot of people in denial over the truth. Luckily the jury was not fooled by the lying boyfriend and ridiculous “experts”. They actually looked at the evidence.

          • With that evidence that was looked at, why don’t we know how this happened? Or why she did it? How can one be in “denial” when it is not known how this happened? What is there to deny? Doesn’t matter now, she will go away for a very long time. About the breed of the dog. Dogs bite. All breeds. Some breeds bite more than others. Some breeds bite more forcefully than others. To be sure, pit bulls are the worst. But that most certainly does not mean that other breeds do not bite. Even cutesy breeds. Even Bulldogs, no matter the nationality. Do not let the cute factor blind you to the fact that all breeds can, at times, bite. The above links are more about the culprit dog being the loved “family dog” than exactly what breed of dog. One of the above links also notes that the caregiver was in the bathroom when the attack occurred, as the defense claimed in the Lancaster case from the beginning. Dogs are also opportunists. All breeds.

  8. Wow, talk about a mob mentality on this comment section. How about we discuss specifics of this case in a civil manner and try to figure out exactly what in the heck happened? Nobody babysits kids for years, and this particular baby for months, keeps a log of feedings and naps for the parents, has a bazillion pictures of the baby in her own arms, sends pictures and videos to the parents, never even been arrested, much less convicted, for anything in her whole life, and then suddenly she turns into an ax murderer?!?. She murders a kid, apparently somewhat violently, because why exactly? I am heartbroken for the boy Aiden, but something just doesn’t add up here.

    • “How about we discuss specifics of this case in a civil manner and try to figure out exactly what in the heck happened?”

      The way our legal system works is that this is done in a courtroom with a jury. No one here is in any position to do this, as we do not have access to these “specifics of the case.”

      The choices here are simple. You can:

      a) express contempt for our system, based on how the jury’s verdict ‘doesn’t add up’ according to the partial information you have gleaned from the news.

      b) figure that the system is working in it’s usual way, and that having reached a verdict some appropriate sentence will be meted out.

      c) be outraged that our system of justice does not include deaths in some sort of medieval torture chamber to sate your blood lust.

      I like choice b, myself.

      • A) Contempt? no, skepticism perhaps, curiosity definitely. Regarding “partial information gleaned from the news,” the mob certainly thinks it knows it all.

        B) When “the system is working in it’s usual way,” Innocent people are convicted many times. While suspected to be true for years, the advent of DNA testing has proven this over and over in recent years that indeed, innocent people have been convicted and sentenced. Unfortunately also, these determinations of actual innocence have occurred after having served decades of “some appropriate sentence meted out.”

        C) Not sure how to address that one

        • I’m guessing that when you say “the mob” you are referring to the people who have clearly opted for choice C, so you actually did address that one.

    • Sure, discussing the specifics of the case is a good thing. It was troubling that she had zero record prior to this of ever harming a child under her care. However, there were many timeline issues that were discovered that were critical findings here.

      We know she had time to put the baby’s bloody clothes and bloody crib sheet through the washer and then put them in the dryer, since that is where the clothes were found and there was blood found on the rim of the washer and inside the lip of the dryer (so she put them in there). She also re-made the crib bed putting the quilt down and all the toys arranged neatly just without the crib sheet. We know that to be true because of the photographs taken of the apartment that night while the apartment was under control of the deputies. She also deleted her entire phone sometime prior to 6 PM (when 911 was called). We also know that no blood was found on baby Aiden when the mother arrived home (her 911 call and the EMT testimony) and one of his socks he was wearing that day was in the bathtub and blood was found in the bathroom. So she had some time to clean everything up.

      Several doctors testified that the baby would be instantly rendered unconscious upon receipt of the two skull fractures.

      So if the dog did injure the baby (which I do not believe), she had an unconscious bloody baby on her hands and INSTEAD of getting help, she spent at least 25 minutes cleaning up everything. (The shortest cycle on the washer was 25 minutes).

      The dog expert testimony was not great because she found “bite marks” in areas that BOTH the defense and prosecution pathologists testified were not injuries and were areas of lividity. That threw all of her testimony into question.

      So if the dog didn’t do it, the only conclusion is Brittany did. And her actions to not call 911 or run get help (since her phone was “locked out”) was pretty damning evidence against her.

      • OK, a serious, knowledgeable civil discussion, thank you very much. The internet can be a great tool. A question remains, why and how exactly did she do this? The damning actions (or inaction) you are describing occurred after Aiden was injured. Why would she harm Aiden so seriously? I am having trouble with the idea that she was unhappy with her work as a babysitter as a motive for murder. Who among us has not been unhappy with their work at one time or another?

        • Unfortunately we will probably never know. It is hard to imagine being so frustrated with the parents that she could do something so awful. Maybe the alcohol was the big factor in her actions. Since she measured .1 over 6 hours after the event, she was probably very drunk at the time.

          • Oh, and per the law, motive was not required to be proven for the jury to be able to convict on 2nd degree murder. Just that she acted willfully and with disregard for human life. Not calling 911 for an unconscious baby was certainly willful disregard for his life.

          • .10 BAC 6 hours later is damning and so is not getting help. Not getting help is a separate action (or rather inaction) from the act that caused the injuries. Which act constitutes murder? The first one, the second one, either one, or does there have to be both? One reason I ask is that the first act may not have been willful, and the second act (again inaction) may be from just not recognizing how bad Aiden was really hurt in a timely fashion.

            Perhaps a little off topic but related, regarding having snapped, their is a book called “Why We Snap: Understanding the Rage Circuit In Your Brain” by a neurobiologist named Fields that is an interesting read.

          • A key line that distinguishes murder from manslaughter is “Implied malice refers to conduct that reflects an “abandoned and malignant heart.””

            Drunk drivers get charged with manslaughter because the (admittedly questionable) “they made the decision to drive while already impaired, not with malice.” A babysitter that GETS drunk while babysitting made that decision before getting impaired, which is a different level of irresponsibility and can be considered as implied malice…as far as legal precedent goes. Similar reasoning would probably be applied to someone who caused a fatal accident after drinking on the job, where someone who showed up for work drunk would more likely be charged with manslaughter.

          • It is interesting to note that the law draws a distinction between coming to work under the influence and becoming under the influence while at work, with the latter leading to murder charges, if I understand you correctly. The idea that this was some kind of accident with alcohol a contributing cause is then not different from the idea of murder. This would explain the lack of serious motive. Alcohol (among other things) may also have contributed to the irrationality of not getting help in a timely fashion. While she is not necessarily the proverbial ax murderer, the law would see her just as guilty as if she were. I must say this to the parents and family of Aiden who may be reading this exchange. I know all of this discussion is just an intellectual exercise, and that it will do absolutely nothing for your loss of Aiden. Please accept my unlimited condolences for your horrendous loss.

          • Agreed absolutely on the intellectual exercise and condolences. No one should ever have to suffer the loss of a child.

            Back at the distinctions about alcohol…it is a two edged sword. The actual distinction between manslaughter and murder is “malice.” BEING drunk tends to make a judge or jury lean towards impaired judgement causing the problem rather than malice, but GETTING drunk under some conditions is often considered an indication of malice.

            Of course there’s also the usual biases. It is easier to paint an older person as malicious rather than misguided. There is almost always a racial bias in a jury so it is easier to get them to believe malice in a black or Hispanic defendant. And there is almost always gender bias. People just don’t tend to see women as being malicious as readily as they see it in men, though that reverses when children are involved. A man might get away with being called negligent where a woman in the exact same circumstances will be looked at with ‘no woman can neglect a child that way, she must have meant it’ in the context.

            In any event the distinction between murder and manslaughter is pretty hazy, and the difference in sentencing isn’t all that huge either because both have pretty wide ranges. I’m sort of surprised this case didn’t end in a plea deal for a manslaughter charge.

          • WOW No9 you convicted someone:
            1) By not knowing exactly what happened the d.a needs to prove that sounds like they didn’t 2) Having it “hard to imagine”, you shouldn’t have to imagine what happened if the d.a proved there case 3) Maybe the alcohol was a factor, sounds like it wasn’t a factor but the d,a tried to make it one because that’s all they had.

            EVERTHING YOU JUST SAID IS ALL REASONABLE DOUBT! YOU USED KEY WORDS LIKE “NEVER KNOW” “HARD TO IMAGINE” & “MAYBE” AND YOU WERE A JURY MEMBER DONT YOU KNOW WHAT RESONALBE DOUBT IS? DID ANY OF THE OTHERS KNOW? YOU MAY THINK SHE PERHAPS, POSSIBLY, PROBABLY, GULITY LIKELY & GULITY HIGHLY LIKEY BUT THEY ALL POINT TO NOT GULITY!

            You and the fellow jury members sound to be very inadequate to be passing judgement and not knowing this info.

            “Unfortunately we will probably never know” “It is hard to imagine being so frustrated with the parents that she could do something so awful.” “Maybe the alcohol was the big factor in her actions.” Reasonable Doubt!

        • It could even be called ACCIDENT. Really no way of knowing. As No9 points out, motive is not really an issue anyway.

          • If it was an accident, then there isn’t really a motive and If it was an accident, is that murder?

          • If a drunken babysitter drops a kid on their head, then opts for trying to hide it rather than seeking what could be life saving medical treatment, yeah, it is murder…even if the dropping the kid on their head is purely unintended.

            Not saying that’s what happened, just answering the question.

      • Thank you!!! I don’t get how people are still blaming the dog, rather than the sitter, unless the dog knows how to use the wash machine

    • People who are defending this prescious angel Aiden, obviously these are the family members of the CONVICTED KILLER. If I were them id keep my mouth shut and let these family members who are probably reading this grieve in peace. Shows what type of people they are. No regard for human life or sympathy for the deceased and grieving family. Focus on handling your frustration for a conviction in more productive ways then to attack and try to justify actions.

    • Yes, that is completely true, i believe the father knows something, she was doing the parents a favor taking care of the baby, so why is the mothers family out for blood? Because they are protecting her thats why!! She was not a good mother and didn’t care for that baby so when this horrible accident happened, they saw an opportunity to get the focus off her, just saying!

  9. Beverly defender, the dog did not kill the baby! Stop pushing your implausible ad delusional excuses off on others. Nobody is that ignorant to buy that crock.
    The autopsy would clearly show injuries from monster Beverly’s own hands, which are not dog bites. There are hundreds of other telltale signs that show Beverly’s culpability, that some with low intelligence just can’t grasp.
    Poor little baby- his death should never have happened.
    I do agree that it was poor judgement leaving such a young baby with an alcoholic babysitter who begrudged watching the adorable little baby that many would love to babysit for free. Little cutie pie never had a chance…RIP

  10. Brittany is and has always been a loving women. The parents truly trusted her so who has the poor judgement? Especially since there was never any issues with her watching the baby over that period of time. The paper said she made some comments about being unhappy then she would have quit were these comments even made the same day this happened. We have all said a few things about others that doesn’t mean we’re going to kill a person. The parents even said it was safer not to have there dog with the baby and sitter so that should go to tell you that they knew something was up with there own dog and potential put there own child in danger. There are different levels of dog bites just look it up!(there doesn’t need to be punctures so dont let your eyes fool you) A dog jumping on a baby would easily cause injury to a baby. I don’t know how thats not common sense to you people (as someone above mentioned that the mass of the dog would be greater from its way down from a jump) Was there one injury that was linked to Brittany any finger marks? Which would have been easily found. A dog expert even came in the paper said only one of two in the county.Nobody is going to put there career on the line for nobody if they didn’t see it. Brittany had no reason to hurt this child she had everything going for herself that also makes no sense. If alcohol played such a factor then I hope none of you ever drink around your kids which I’m sure you all do.Just because the injuries say on paper they are non-accidental that doesn’t mean a dog can’t have done this. I hope her appeal goes thought and for that former coworker you are disgusting, if she was such a lier then why would she even talk to the police? That doesn’t sound like a lier to me. At the end of the day a baby passed we were not there but the dog was and after hearing most of this unwrap just having a dog that the owner’s knew was potinioaly dangerous would and should have been doubt who knows there dog better then yhe owners. The jury allowed emotion to come into play which isn’t allowed in a trial. I hope they have some conviction in them for the rest of there lifes for buying into the true liers that they bought into. I feel for all parties involved especially the baby But a lot of this doesn’t add up and from what I was told the people didn’t even proof there case 100% changing up there story idk how many times but the weak minded and emotional jury bought into lies. Someone that has been following this will reach out to Brittany’s family to help her. We see it all the time innocent people being set free because bad jury calls and the court system is always wanting someone to pay because they act they could do no wrong! The A.v is full of hypocrites for those of you that point a single finger my the Lord point twice as many at you !!!

    • Thank you, thank you, thank you!! one more thought, what kind of mother leaves her child with someone who is drunk? I’m sure she would have noticed something wrong with the sitter or maybe even smelled alcohol….idk something isn’t right here!

    • Reply to Eric,

      You wrote: “If alcohol played such a factor then I hope none of you ever drink around your kids which I’m sure you all do.”

      Speaking for myself, no way have I or would I have, imbibed around my child. Then again, I don’t drink alcohol. I have too many responsibilities with my standby /on call work hours to even think about drinking, let alone getting drunk.
      I’m quite sure that decent parents DO NOT drink to the point of oblivion with levels high enough to be a danger to their children, especially with young babies. What would happen if a parent needed to take their child to an E.R., or pick a sick child up from school…but the parent is incapable because they’re drunk.

      You missed the whole point of why drunks shouldn’t be drunk while parenting, caring for/babysitting, any young child- especially an infant that young who is 100% defenseless, needs sober vigilant responsible parenting, period!

      Young children, especially babies, face the risk of significant harm while in the “care” of drugged and/or alcohol impaired caregivers.

      • Speak for myself well who was in Possession of Alcohol O’ Yeah the parents. Wasn’t it the parents apartment if I’m not mistaken? So the parents drink while they are in care of there own kid isn’t at a double standard? Why would the parents have alcohol in there home if they didn’t drink? You may not have time to drink so you say but the parents did or they wouldn’t of had alcohol in there home? So if this happened on the parents watch would they be facing murder I doubt it? I didn’t miss a point if she was a drunk How couldn’t the parents not know that since they have known here for a number of years poor judgement by the parents again? Doesn’t that make the parents negligent I believe so? So drugged/alcohol parents don’t put here own babys at any risk or in harms way but only baby sitters do? With all of your comments about this alcohol stuff please answer all of these questions for me so I can continue to see how incompetent you are? Kimberly oh yeah you don’t drink but have found time to try and cheat on your BF with married men

  11. I hope she rots in prison. Poor little angel was under her care and she killed him. It’s crazy how animals will take better care of children than some people!

  12. She waited outdoors to tell mom kid not breathing ? So it just so happened right before the mom got there?? No …. real babysitters panic n call 911 … fake story would have chedcked dogs mouth for human blood DNA or dog DNA on kids head .. cheap story worth3 pennies … rot bi***h. Sorry just saying what’s deserved.

  13. Repeating myself multiple timea different ways. Maybe something will click firm believer

  14. Firm Believer. WOW! CLASSY! She shouldve used her judgement a d placed the baby in a safe place. If this was your child, im a 100% sure you would sing a different tune had ot been your helpless infant. A Babysitter sits not neglects then.

  15. Everyone forgets that dogs play with toys, stuffed animals, balls and such, this dog did just that, unfortunately as well we all forget how fragile a preemie is, which this baby was. Someone out there knows the truth, and if they had any conscience and loved their child the would come forth, it is them that will answer to God one day, as all of us will!! Brittney is forgiven and will never be condemned because her God will see justice done!!!

    • Well sorry to burst your bubble, but the dog was innocent, I sat thru the trial, so just letting u know, yes , people like this deserve the consequences of murder…..

    • And for the record, he was NOT a preemie, he was 4 months old …and the dog is 22 lbs not 27, and the trauma was inflicted, not accidental… Brittney gets what is deserved for Aiden and his family, RIP little angel, your murderer will now rot in jail and hell…

    • She should’ve put the baby in place where the dog had no access, like a crib or swing, if it was” SOOOO DANGEROUS AND JEALOUS”…let the parents grieve in peace. Im sure you would be singing a different tune, had it been your child.

    • Then she shouldve placed the baby somewhere where the dog had no access if it was so dangerous and jealous of the child. Let the parents grieve in peace. Im sure if this was your infant, you would be singing a differe t tune.

    • Fellow believer, whoever you are by the way. You are as delusional as the convicted party. Seek mental help, may benefit.

      • She shouldve placed the child where the dog had no access to him if it was such a threat. Let the parents grieve. Im 100% you would sing a different tune if this was your infant. Either way there was neglect involved.

      • Also, she shouldve placed the baby where the dog had no access, if it was such a concern. Let the family grieve in peace. Im sure if this was your child, you’d be singing a different tune.

      • She shouldve placed the baby somewhere where the dog had no access if the dog was so jealous or over playful with the tiny baby. Let the parents and family of the child grieve in peace. If this was your infant im 100% sure, you would be singing a different tune.

    • Not buying it. Even a first year med student can identify a dog bite, let alone a medical examiner with as much experience as any that LA county would hire. Credit to the lawyer for coming up with an alternative, as is their job, but that one only an idiot would buy into.

  16. Brittany deserves the sentence of life in Prison! Having known her through work & dealing with her daily nonsense & lies it is not surprising that she could commit such a horrific crime against a defenseless baby! I hope she gets beat in prison just as she beat that beautiful child! Shame on her!!
    Too the parents on both sides, my condolences.

    • B careful how you wish bad on others because what comes around goes around, you have family too!!

  17. It’s a terrible thing for everybody involved.Making nasty comments doesn’t help the situation.both family’s are going to suffer because of this.

  18. Everybody involved has suffered…stop the nasty comments.People say things online that they would never say to a persons face.

  19. First, French Bulldogs are not aggressive dogs, nor are they large. They are about 27 lbs., they (Forensic Pathologists) also stated that their were no bite marks or dog caused trauma on the baby, so are no one is going to believe her story, unless the frenchie was body slamming the infant. Her Attorneys brilliant idea was a waste of taxpayer money, or just an idea to lay a path for an appeal. Spare the family of an apology, not because you mean it, but because you did it. This will never take away their pain, wipe their tears, or bring back that innocent baby.

    • Nobody said he was aggresive, Aiden was only 10lbs, pretty small for a 4 month old, secondly the dog was 27 lbs, when a dog jumps on my way too if something with the force of gravity causes that weight to be much more !!!

        • I didn’t think you read the paper, or follow the trial, clearly the dogs weight was mentioned several times(22lbs) and she told her boyfriend to Google stuff to try to cover it up!!!! Enough to say she is guilty, and always will be!!!!so get Your Fellow Believing ass to get your facts straight!!!!

      • So fellow believer, were you the one who took her panicky phone calls the day Aiden was murdered, didn’t think so….. otherwise, you would know she was guilty from the beginning, she changed her story several times, blaming the dog and the parents, but not herself….hmmmm

        • She never testified, so how could her story change? What about the mother, telling the 911 dispatcher her dog did it several times..hhmm….right back at you!

          • She shouldnt placed the baby in a safe place where the dog could not access the baby.

          • She never called 911, she waited until mother came to pick Aiden up, are you this blind?????

    • In a previous article in the AV Press, the dog expert did testify that their were puncture wound that coincided with that of this bull dog. What’s going on here? He said she said and who believe what? The truth shall set her free.

      • Thank you!! Yes, when that person who knows what really happened because it happened before comes forth because of guilt, the truth WILL set her free! @

        • WOW blaming the parents…classy! Maybe ahe shouldve placed the child where the dog had no access to him if this was such a HUGE CONCERN. Let the family of the infant grieve in peace. Im sure you would be singing a different tune, had it been your infant baby.

  20. Being a liberal I believe that someday she could be a useful member of society,, if just given one more chance.

  21. Wow really a French bulldog. We saw that French bulldog as he came a local shelter. No signs nor shades of evidence the dog did anything to the baby. Shame on this attorney for even thinking this lameness and shameful excuse. She deserves to be in jail forever.

    • It’s the attorney’s job to try to get his client set free and this attorney will do anything. Why blame the attorney, he is just doing his job. If you were in the same shoe, wouldn’t you want your attorney to pull out all the stops to get you free?

  22. I am sure the prosecution knows the difference between injuries caused at the hand of a human, and those cause at the jaws of a Bulldog. Prayers for the family, so very sad.

  23. I am so thankful that she got convicted. If there is a God in Heaven, she’ll die a painful yet “accidental” death while in General Population☺️

    • Again be careful throwing those kind of words around, what comes around goes around. You have family too…

      • You don’t sound like a real believer. If so you wouldn’t be suggesting harm or bad things to other people’s​ family.

    • For real we don’t need to pay for trash I hope she gets everything she deserves

  26. Injuries from the dog, still sticking with the B’s, wow, that’s great , let me guess , did u guys get dental imprints to match the dog or any dna evidence, yeah right, bet u feel stupid being an attorney for a liar and a baby murderer, she is a liar, addict, and has no [removed] soul…..I love it , I know people that sat in on that case, she lied and kept changing her story, plus her research on baby SIDS and head injuries in children was enough to convince me she did it….what a [removed] lunatic, fits in perfectly right in Satan’s chair….maybe if she had the balls to tell the truth from the beginning, she would have had a better outcome, and maybe Aiden would have too, RIP little man…..sorry [removed] like this on Earth exists….

    • Yes, the evidence showed bite marks but again he (the dog) was not being intentional to hurt the baby. He was playing!!
      This was a horrific accident in which all you who think you are qualified to pass judgment are talking about, since the parents were long time friends with her, maybe they should be looked at as to why they would trust her ( since supposedly she drinks alot) with the care of the child, so much family yet they had to go outside of family for a sitter….all those “supporters” should have been looking out for their own, alot of people at the trial, yet nobody available to watch the baby, why did the family go to the house and clean up…the place must have been filthy, saving face that’s what I think…what else are they hiding?

      • No, you are just illusional as much as Brittney, and still think somehow it was the dog, which was proven to not be)God had a surprise for her I am sure, he got special reservations in Hell for her to burn eternally, just what she needs and deserves for murdering intentionally!!!

        • She was tested for blood alcohol at 12:30AM after being in police custody since just after 6PM. She had a blood alcohol level of .10 at that point.

          • Dear confused, people are aware that she was tested for alcohol level because either A, the followed the trial , or B , they attended the trial, or even C , they knew the family personally…hope this helps you understand