Police arrested and charged a father and son early Thursday in connection with the murder of a pregnant teenager who was about to give birth, and her boyfriend, in San Antonio last month.

Christopher Preciado, 19, was charged with capital murder while his father, 53-year-old Ramon Preciado, was charged with abuse of a corpse for allegedly helping to move the bodies of Savanah Soto, 18, and Matthew Guerra, 22, who were found shot dead in a car.

A conviction for capital murder is punishable by the death penalty or life imprisonment.

San Antonio Police Department confirmed the charges in a statement and said more charges are pending, possibly relating to the death of the unborn child.

  • MagicShel@programming.dev
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    46
    arrow-down
    8
    ·
    10 months ago

    Since the anti-abortion position is purely religious, it might be worth pointing out that the only proscribed remedy in the bible for the death of a fetus within a pregnant woman is a financial penalty, which would make the dead fetus a civil matter rather than legal. Of course the bible is strongly pro-abortion, so I doubt this will carry any weight with that crowd. Plus it is also strongly pro-slavery so it’s not really a morally relevant text anyway.

    • watson387@sopuli.xyz
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      23
      arrow-down
      2
      ·
      10 months ago

      While I agree with you, abortion doesn’t seem to play into this at all. The girl was planning on giving birth.

      • Omega@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        3
        arrow-down
        1
        ·
        10 months ago

        They’re stating that the Bible covers literally this scenario, and it demands financial compensation. The fact that this is so much worse than an elective abortion just reiterates that point. Unless someone wanted to argue that murdering a planned, viable, unborn child isn’t as bad.

        Now the Bible is way too radical for me on this. But that’s what it says.

        • MagicShel@programming.dev
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          2
          arrow-down
          7
          ·
          10 months ago

          Adding more charges because she was pregnant is definitely political and the fact that it can be mistaken for non-political is the exact danger I was highlighting here. Agree that the guy should be punished extra for killing a fetus is just a foothold for them to shift that logic to the abortion debate and turn the tables. “You agreed to punishing people for killing a fetus, which makes it a criminal act. Checkmate libs.”

          I’m suggesting people get ahead of that argument. Call for monetary compensation and when they disagree you haul out the text that underpins their entire argument.

            • MagicShel@programming.dev
              link
              fedilink
              arrow-up
              1
              arrow-down
              3
              ·
              10 months ago

              Such a law failed to go anywhere in 2001 under threat of veto by Clinton. I’m not aware of it ever being passed. Although it looks like there are some state laws on the books in some red states, so no this hasn’t always been the case. So no, I’m pretty far from fifteen since I was going off of memory until I had to double check myself after your comment.

      • MagicShel@programming.dev
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        2
        arrow-down
        1
        ·
        edit-2
        10 months ago

        My point is, the abortion debate is the pretext for saying killing the fetus is murder. If you agree additional punishment is deserved, then you are buying into the anti-abortion argument. It’s a trap.

        The biblically correct consequence for killing the fetus is that the killer can be sued by the father. Not a criminal consequence.