Father Charged in Electrocution of 11-Month-Old Son From Defective Clock

In Denver, Colorado, a father, Ernesto Talavera-Nunez, is charged with the death of his 11-month-old son who touched exposed electrical wires on an alarm clock that he had repaired. He could now face 16 years for a class-three child abuse felony.

The boy ultimately suffered burns and died of cardiac arrest.

Frankly, I have been critical of some criminal charges for parents who are lose children in acts of negligence, click here. For an otherwise loving but careless parent, there is no punishment that will equal the loss of the child. In this case, however, the clearly stupid act of leaving an exposed electrical wire deserves some criminal punishment.

For the full story, click here and here.

28 thoughts on “Father Charged in Electrocution of 11-Month-Old Son From Defective Clock”

  1. Ahh, so that’s what it sounds like? That stuff we’re always hearing from Bush?

    What a rich and fascinating language they have.

  2. Cro Magnum,
    You are correct that the intelligent left understand that the language spoken here is English. I am guessing that the term “American language” is what Bush tries to speak when his handlers let him speak without any electronic devices to assist him.

  3. Sorry Martha, the formatting on that dictionary effort got all messed up… or as you would call it, succeeded.

  4. martha h:

    That’s not what he meant and you know it. The only possible conclusion is that the “weeding” came at the expense of an innocent 11 month year old who suffered the consequences, and that position is embarrassingly low even for you.

  5. You guys should consider publishing a dictionary or a translation reference book or something.

    Here. Let me get you started.

    English language “american language”
    ————— —————

    Getting our assess kicked “Victory”

    5 more years of bloody war “Major combat
    operations are


  6. The “american language”? That’s what you neoconservatives are speaking?

    Well hell, that explains a lot. No wonder no one else can understand you guys.

    The rest of us are speaking English.

  7. Dundar, I would guess you mean that Mother Nature use to have its way of weeding out the stupid among us, but Mother Nature stopped doing it because Mother Nature was afraid of getting sued so now we have all these stupid people having kids.


    Dundar, you have to clarify your remarks for the liberals here. they have a real hard time understanding the american language since they only listen to keith olbermann and co.

  8. Funny, I said the same thing as palindrome, but no one agreed with me.

  9. I would agree with Michael Spindell that being stupid is not a crime. At least it shouldn’t be a crime. Prof. Turley is right that it was very negligent to leave exposed wires, but I don’t know if it reaches the level of criminality and especially not a felony.

  10. I agree that on the written facts alone I am at a loss as to why this guy was charged. Stupidity yes, criminal no, barring any unmentioned facts like there was some reason to believe he was a sadist, or wanted to kill the child. Palindrome’s point was on target. Too often the wealth or ethnicity of the parent is a huge factor in how they’re viewed by child welfare.

  11. So what about the white woman (in Denver) who let her six year old wander off and drown in a pond that was visible from her apartment. Why was the hispanic man charged and not her? Any “weeding” going on here dundar?

  12. This is clearly a racially motivated case. Look at the guys face. He’s scary, huh? Mean looking, ethnic. I’m sure we all know that if this was a lilly white looking white collar businessman, everyone would be consoling him now on what a “terrible accident” this was.

    And that was after all, all it was.


    But today, if you’re ethnic, and “street looking”, anything that happens to your kids is now called “child abuse”.

    Was the dad negligent? Perhaps.

    Poors more like it.

    He had to fix his alarm clock probably because he couldn’t afford a new one. And its a tragedy that his kid accidently touched it.

    But it is NOT child abuse.

  13. I’m sorry, but the presumption that parents must be immaculate or suffer the pains of imprisonment is not what the founders had in mind.

  14. The facts are thin here. While I agree with the idea behind criminal negligence, I don’t know if the acts here rise to that level. Certainly a very sad situation. It makes me feel justified in my paranoia over the safety of my kids.

  15. JT, I doubt that “Dunbar” (I’ll refrain from using the obvious and more appropriate name) will comply with your request. He has made no effort at any time to be circumspect or in any way respectful in the time I’ve been posting here. I’ve lost count of the highly offensive remarks he has made in the past, this is just his newest one. Of course I agree that this is one of the worst he’s made, but I seriously doubt it will be his last.

  16. Dundar:

    I agree with Mespo. Your last comment appears to make a highly offensive comment with racial overtones. Even without the racial overtones, it is highly offensive. I will assume that no racial animus is intended, but I ask that you be more circumspect in your comments on this blog.


  17. dundar:

    I can’t tell is your comment is offensive or so vaporous as to be incomprehensible. “Weeding” as in people?

  18. Nature use to have a way of doing weeding but under the fear of lawsuits Nature is now hesitant to weed.

Comments are closed.