You do remember right and I provided proof of it. There's a law based on it called "Laci and Connor's law", which I provided in a post. The law is abouit protection of unborn children, and prosecuting those who intentionally kill unborn children. Connor was killed IN UTERO. The PCers don't know any facts when they post. All they do is make unsubstantiated claims.<quoted text>
It is convenient to go back to the Laci Peterson case where Scott was convicted of killing his unborn child. If I remember right that child was in utero.
The wording in that law is as follows. Note what terms are used for the human life in utero:
"Sec. 1841. Protection of unborn children
(a)(1) Whoever engages in conduct that violates any of the provisions of law listed in subsection (b) and thereby causes the death of, or bodily injury (as defined in section 1365) to, a child, who is in utero at the time the conduct takes place, is guilty of a separate offense under this section.
(2)(A) Except as otherwise provided in this paragraph, the punishment for that separate offense is the same as the punishment provided under Federal law for that conduct had that injury or death occurred to the unborn childs mother.
(B) An offense under this section does not require proof that--
(i) the person engaging in the conduct had knowledge or should have had knowledge that the victim of the underlying offense was pregnant; or
(ii) the defendant intended to cause the death of, or bodily injury to, the unborn child.
(C) If the person engaging in the conduct thereby intentionally kills or attempts to kill the unborn child, that person shall instead of being punished under subparagraph (A), be punished as provided under sections 1111, 1112, and 1113 of this title for intentionally killing or attempting to kill a human being."
"Unborn child", "human being" and the woman who's pregnant as "the unborn child's ~mother~".