# US couple guilty, girl strangled by python



## News Bot (Jul 15, 2011)

A US couple has been convicted in the death of a toddler strangled in her crib by a pet python.











*Published On:* 15-Jul-11 08:48 AM
*Source:* AAP via NEWS.com.au

*Go to Original Article*


----------



## SamNabz (Jul 15, 2011)

Whoa, they copped 35 years; and so they should!

Who covers a burmese python's enclosure with nothing but a doona? *Especially *when there is a child in the house.

Utter stupidity, they deserve every minute of every day they spend in there...


----------



## killimike (Jul 15, 2011)

Couldn't agree more Sam...


----------



## jesstesla (Jul 15, 2011)

Any idea where it says about the enclosure? None of the articles I've looked at say anything about how the python got out. The media seems to be emphasising the fact the python hadn't eaten in a month rather than it was housed inappropriately.



SamNabz said:


> Whoa, they copped 35 years; and so they should!
> 
> Who covers a burmese python's enclosure with nothing but a doona? *Especially *when there is a child in the house.
> 
> Utter stupidity, they deserve every minute of every day they spend in there...


----------



## sweetangel (Jul 15, 2011)

omg what the hell who cares that the burmese hadnt been fed for a month before.... dont we all do that anyway??!?!?! thats soooo stupid! but very irresponsible parents for letting such a large python out around children. i never let anyone hold my snakes unless i am there or give them permission. its just too risky and i dont even have anything that big or dangerous!


----------



## Sezzzzzzzzz (Jul 15, 2011)

jesstesla said:


> Any idea where it says about the enclosure? None of the articles I've looked at say anything about how the python got out. The media seems to be emphasising the fact the python hadn't eaten in a month rather than it was housed inappropriately.



Jesstesla, it was in a cardboard box with a quilt over it.


----------



## Fuscus (Jul 15, 2011)

jesstesla said:


> Any idea where it says about the enclosure? None of the articles I've looked at say anything about how the python got out.


‪Python trial attorney: Snake 'no different' than family dog‬&rlm; - YouTube


----------



## Sezzzzzzzzz (Jul 15, 2011)

Fuscus said:


> ‪Python trial attorney: Snake 'no different' than family dog‬&rlm; - YouTube


Well not quite a cardboard box! But still a quilt to cover it???


----------



## Tildy (Jul 15, 2011)

So what happens to the poor 'instrument of death' now? Thats what upsets me most about the pet industry, when dumb people buy them, dont care for them properly to ensure they are no danger to anyone then they attack and the animal gets blamed and put down. They made it sound like what the snake did was incredibly wierd and out of the ordinary. Silly people should not own any animals much less dangerous ones.


----------



## junglepython2 (Jul 15, 2011)

SamNabz said:


> Whoa, they copped 35 years; and so they should!
> 
> Who covers a burmese python's enclosure with nothing but a doona? *Especially *when there is a child in the house.
> 
> Utter stupidity, they deserve every minute of every day they spend in there...



35 yrs would be the maximum penalty they haven't been sentenced yet.


----------



## pythrulz (Jul 15, 2011)

An on going sad story of neglect both to the snake as well as to the child


----------



## Stopthatsnake (Jul 15, 2011)

Thus why my new cabinet will be a FORTRESS!


----------



## Leeloofluff (Jul 15, 2011)

I hope the snakes gets out alright, they had better not put it down...


----------



## MathewB (Jul 15, 2011)

Leeloofluff said:


> I hope the snakes gets out alright, they had better not put it down...


 I don't see why they would put the snake down, it's not as if when it tastes blood it's going to go on a killing rampage. Surely a Zoo or a private keeper would take it in


----------



## Tildy (Jul 15, 2011)

Yeah but with dogs for instance they will put one down if it has killed a person or seriously injured them irrespective of whether the dog or the person was at fault. I'm just not sure if it is the same with snakes.


----------



## longqi (Jul 16, 2011)

They were careless
They were stupid
They did a very dumb thing
They were very unlucky as a 2 metre burmese normally wouldnt go anywhere near trying to eat a child

But who deserves 35 years for an accidental death when cold blooded murderers get 10 years???


----------



## Boidae (Jul 16, 2011)

I dont think they have actually been sentenced yet, I think 35 years is just the maximum sentence that they could recieve. 
I have to disagree with what they are using for their defence, a Burmese python is not just like having a cat or dog, I mean who was the last person to be killed by their dog or cat while they were feeding it? I can think of 3 who have been killed while feeding their large constrictors. 
Burmese pythons are a serious pet, they are one of the biggest snakes in the world, they can grow to 16+ feet and weigh more than a fully grown man. But, they can, and usually will make great pets if they are looked after properly by experienced keepers, not by amateurs who keep them in a bloody fishtank. 
Its people like this who give snakes a bad name, the reptile licensing system in America needs some serious work done.


----------



## GeckPhotographer (Jul 16, 2011)

Hey longpi, as I understand it you often have very large pythons that are outside of their enclosures and can move about within an area as they wish? Of course I am not calling you irresponsible, the circumstances are worlds apart. But surely you do this because you know from experience these are placid snakes, they are not going to attack anyone unless in feeding mode, etc. If the people who have been found guilty had that same mindset from so much experience, I would find it only the neglect in that one should never take that risk with a child about and that one should control when the snake is able to be out (i.e. have proper enclosures) that is really different. This is what I think the defense are arguing and I am rather happy to agree that with that what these people did was stupid as all hell but not as bad as it is being painted as. Just my opinion.


----------



## Royziee (Jul 16, 2011)

Longpi and other trained staff will be attending to all the reptiles which the guests are exposed to. They aren't asleep in the other room like these parents were as their young child was exposed to the python.

He was calling them careless / stupid because the python wasn't properly locked away at night time and had access to where the child was sleeping


----------



## Travisty (Jul 16, 2011)

I remember when this first happened and I recall that the bloke stabbed the snake a few times and killed it while trying to get it off the child.


----------



## longqi (Jul 16, 2011)

This was just a very unfortunate accident that could have been easily avoided

The only reason it has become headline material is because of new laws in the USA about keeping the big 5 snakes
This was just a baby burmese
The parents were careless and will have nightmares about this forever

But how many babies get killed each year by a cat smothering them??
Or a pet dog rips a kids throat out one day??
Or a 3 year kid kills a new born baby through being jealous of attention??

In those cases it is put down as accidental death and forgotten about by the media
Yet that same media wants to crucify these parents

If they had owned some illegal fighting dog or other illegal 'fluffy' pet that killed the kid nothing would have been mentioned and no trial would be happening

I am not supporting what they did in any way shape manner or form
But this type of hypocrisy/double standard by law makers and media is very wrong


----------



## SamNabz (Jul 16, 2011)

What hypocrisy?

longqi, the difference between reptiles and a domestic cat or dog is that they (cats/dogs) free roam the house/yard etc. where as reptiles are to be in escape proof enclosures by law.

Once again people (mainly you) keep comparing reptiles etc. to your every day pet. There is a HUGE difference as you can teach a dog/cat right and/or wrong, whereas on the other hand reptiles do what they want when they want. It's not like you can rub your snakes nose in it's poo to let it know it's done something wrong.

For them to put a big dangerous animal in a fish tank with no lid, allowing it to get out any time it pleases, they are looking for trouble and are 110% to blame.

I hope they do get 35 years...


----------



## longqi (Jul 16, 2011)

If someone has a savage guard dog that is in an enclosure and one day it escapes that enclosure because they forgot to shut the gate and kills their kid no charges will ever be laid against the parents

That type of incident happens regularly all over the world

Because this was one of the big 5 snakes is the only reason reason charges were laid

That is the hypocrisy I mean

Accidental reptile deaths will increase as more and more people get into this wonderful adventure
That is unavoidable especially as more and more are keeping vens
But google deaths by cat or dog
Then google deaths by pet snake

I totally agree that they were careless
This was only a 2 metre snake???
Thats smaller than most carpets grow
Ever seen a 2 metre carpet capable of eating a two year old child???
If they were inexperienced keepers they would have had no knowledge or experience in just how powerful a snake can be or to fear for their childs safety

A bank robber walks into a bank and shoots a teller
He gets 10 years
Yet you want them to get 35 years for an accident???
..


----------



## SamNabz (Jul 16, 2011)

Firstly, I never said anything about it eating the child. A 2 metre snake is a *huge* snake in a 2 year olds eyes...

Secondly, they are now starting to charge people whose dogs attack other animals/humans etc. (see below). Also just recently my sister and her husband were fined $2,800 because one of their dogs got out (left door open after taking the bins out at night) and wandered into a yard 2 streets away. Did not attack anything/anyone, yet they had to pay. Their house was also inspected by police and council to insure they were kept in a secure enough place.

Man faces possible 19 year sentence for dog attack

The system/law is a joke at most times like your bank robber example, but sadly that's the world we live in.

I stand by my comments. They are the only ones to blame in this situation as a reptile can not be trusted and shouldn't have free range of the house; especially with a young child in the house... Any jail time they get is much deserved.


----------



## Morelia4life (Jul 16, 2011)

First of all, this wouldn't have happened if we did have laws over here for things like this. We do have some laws now, such as in Florida you have to have a permit to get a large constrictor and in most states you have to be at least 18 to buy a venomous snake. The couple that had the snake just had the burm in a fish tank with no lid and the burm hadn't ate for a period of time. The snake got out and just did what comes natural too them... hunt and eat. The victim just happened to be a baby human instead of a rodent. There are kids all the time on the news over here that get attacked by cats, dogs, and other mammals. Not too long ago, a baby was on the news because a pet ferret got out of the cage and chewed off some of the babies fingers while the mother was in the shower or something like that. Not too long before that, a pit bull killed a baby while the mother was in the shower or something. 

The point is, if you have dangerous animals in the house around young kids, why leave them alone with dogs, cats, rats, birds, or whatever?? The snake is not responsible for killing that child. The parents are. It is a tragic story that just makes us reptile keepers over here in the U.S.A. look even worse to the rest of the world. Not all of us are stupid or irresponsible. Hell, I only have a pair of Spotted pythons.... I doubt they will be getting out and killing children.... Not all of us like giant snakes over here either. The largest snake that I ever plan on owning will be a BHP. 
Just my opinion.


----------



## SamNabz (Jul 16, 2011)

Morelia4life said:


> The point is, if you have dangerous animals in the house around young kids, why leave them alone with dogs, cats, rats, birds, or whatever?? The snake is not responsible for killing that child. The parents are.



Exactly right M4L


----------



## GeckPhotographer (Jul 16, 2011)

SamNabz you are talking of these dogs as trainable and it being accidental when they get out and hurt someone. However you are in fact forgetting humans are and have been a natural prey item of wolves (AND DOGS ARE WOLVES 100%) for over 1 million years, it is in fact relatively recent for wolves to be less of a worry to humans which is the result of a change in human 'lifestyle' over many thousands of years. (I clarify that by humans I am referring in this case to the genus homo not to our species.). On the other hand humans have never been a natural prey item for large snakes. I am not saying there are not the natural deaths every now and again, but snakes hunt rodents not specifically humans. So you are saying when an animal that has over a million years of instinct but which has a few tens of thousands of years being trained turns around and bites someone that is not to be expected. But when an animal that has no natural urge to hunt a human unless very hungry or in vary rare cases does the same well they should have seen that coming. That makes absolutely no sense at all. I am not defending the parents. Leaving a snake unattended around the house and able to escape its enclosure as tame as it has ever appeared is wrong. The hunger it had probably caused it to go after a child, but all of us on this forum would know that it's not unusual for a snake not to be fed for more than months. 

I also have strong doubts about your claiming snakes less trainable than dogs. Snakes are extremely intelligent creatures. You probably couldn't train one to catch a frisby but heaps of people train there snakes to respond to all kinds of things and be more calm around humans. The difference between that we can never be sure what a snake is going to do is based off that they have not been selectively domesticated for tens of thousands of years. 

I say again I am not defending the parents they were highly highly irresponsible. But unlike apparently everyone else I do see there point they had about as much reason to expect a snake that had by all experience seemed fine around this child to turn around and attemp to eat it as anyone would have reason for there cat, dog or mammal that has also been proven by experience to do the same.


----------



## SamNabz (Jul 16, 2011)

GeckPhotographer said:


> The hunger it had probably caused it to go after a child, but all of us on this forum would know that it's not unusual for a snake not to be fed for more than months.



This doesn't mean the snakes aren't hungry now does it..?



> I also have strong doubts about your claiming snakes less trainable than dogs. Snakes are extremely intelligent creatures. You probably couldn't train one to catch a frisby but heaps of people train there snakes to respond to all kinds of things and be more calm around humans. The difference between that we can never be sure what a snake is going to do is based off that they have not been selectively domesticated for tens of thousands of years.



I'm sorry, but this makes no sense. How can you even remotely compare something like training a dog to training a snake? What a ridiculous claim.

Please give me an example of an intelligent snake. What makes an intelligent snake..? Also, I love how you mentioned the frisby thing; dogs can and are trained to do amazing things, what can a 'trained' snake do?


----------



## longqi (Jul 16, 2011)

This is getting way off topic but Sam we train our reptiles in different ways to respond to various stimuli
They accept and understand that training and respond accordingly
We have a baby 2 metre Albino Burmese here that kisses customers on request
When it is lifted in a certain way it knows to kiss the customer and does so without fail
I am NOT suggesting this is an emotional response
Just saying that certain things can easily be taught to most reptiles

The real deal is watching Malay Indonesian or Thai Demonstrators playing with Naga Naga or King Cobras and watching them milk the same snake afterwards
They can only do this because they were raised as children with these snakes and know every nuance of the snakes behaviour and responses

I agree that comparing them to dogs is ridiculous as cats have masters so will obey any command
Comparing them to cats is not so ridiculous as cats have slaves and often just ignore the puny humans talking to them much like most snakes do


----------



## GeckPhotographer (Jul 16, 2011)

> This doesn't mean the snakes aren't hungry now does it..?



Didn't say it didn't in fact I said it was probably the cause.


> I'm sorry, but this makes no sense. How can you even remotely compare something like training a dog to training a snake? What a ridiculous claim.
> 
> Please give me an example of an intelligent snake. What makes an intelligent snake..? Also, I love how you mentioned the frisby thing; dogs can and are trained to do amazing things, what can a 'trained' snake do?



As longpi points out many people train snakes, in fact without realising it probably every keeper trains there snake. Every single snake on this planet that is in its proper mental and physical condition is an intelligent snake, they are able to make comparisons between stimuli from their keeper or interactions in the wild, they are then able to use these to in the same or similar situation respond to stimuli in a particular way. That they don't do some of the amazing things dogs do has nothing to do with their intelligence, I point the frisby thing out, a snake could never catch one because of body structure. You seem to be saying that if a trained animal cannot do 'amazing' things that makes it unintelligent. The amazing things dogs do is more parts ability than training or intelligence. I am simply saying that saying that the ability to train something has nothing to do with how 'radical' its actions can be, i.e. it doing the unexpected. It is not a ridiculous claim at all. While the actions of both cannot be compared their intelligence can and while a snake might not have the higher mental funciton of a dog it is most certainly intelligent enough to be 'trained' to level enough to respond to various stimuli from a keeper. 



> I agree that comparing them to dogs is ridiculous as cats have masters so will obey any command
> Comparing them to cats is not so ridiculous as cats have slaves and often just ignore the puny humans talking to them much like most snakes do



This comes down to exactly what I am saying in that cats like snakes have been domesticated and selectively bred for human 'wants' for a lot less time than dogs. Give it a few tens of thousands of years, kill or the cats that bite, scratch, etc, start selectively training etc, you could get a cat acting doglike. It has nothing to do with intelligence it has to do with these 'not being as evolved/changed by human interaction' as dogs.


----------



## SamNabz (Jul 17, 2011)

Mate nothing you have said makes sense. We selectively breed snakes purely to produce better looking snakes.

When's the last time you heard a breeder say: "I'm breeding my python this year because it is so docile I think it will produce a clutch of tame intelligent snakes that will respond well to its keeper(s)"?

So being healthy and in good condition makes something intelligent? Gee, I guess anyone that doesn't have a mental condition/illness is a genius then.

Learn something new every day, thanks for that...


----------



## damian83 (Jul 17, 2011)

longqi said:


> If someone has a savage guard dog that is in an enclosure and one day it escapes that enclosure because they forgot to shut the gate and kills their kid no charges will ever be laid against the parents
> 
> That type of incident happens regularly all over the world
> 
> ...



i agree on a sentence ,but losing a child from stupidity is a life sentence.... 35 years is a bit wrong i agree, i have just had a friend who had their dog decapitated in their back yard yesterday, a malicious act that the person wont see a prison over yet an animal killing a person is to me something the legal systems need to adjust......


----------



## GeckPhotographer (Jul 17, 2011)

> Mate nothing you have said makes sense. We selectively breed snakes purely to produce better looking snakes.
> 
> When's the last time you heard a breeder say: "I'm breeding my python this year because it is so docile I think it will produce a clutch of tame intelligent snakes that will respond well to its keeper(s)"?



They do not I am saying if they did like we have done with dogs for tens of thousands of years. I am saying you cannot compare the twos intelligence based off there actions as their domestication is not equal. 



> So being healthy and in good condition makes something intelligent? Gee, I guess anyone that doesn't have a mental condition/illness is a genius then.
> 
> Learn something new every day, thanks for that...



No I am saying all snakes are intrinsically quite intelligent (although maybe Ramphotyphlops and some of the burrowers much less and of course there is variability with brain size, so a cobra or retic.... or burmese would be more intelligent than a Green Tree Snake or something.), I am however making the exception that if the snake is mentally deficient is some way or in bad health its intelligence I cannot vouch on.

All I am saying is that this is an animal which does have the ability to be 'trained' to be calm and placid around people. An animal that does not naturally attack people for food. And in that regard that if through experience an animal has been in all ways obvious proven to be calm and placid around people including the baby then there is no way I would regard it different to any dog which has also been proven such. Both have equal ability under such conditions. Your arguments of intelligence are implying that an animal is not intelligent unless humans have selectively bred it to respond to our needs over tens of thousands of years, which is ridiculous.


----------

