Richmond day-care driver convicted in child’s death

Richmond day-care driver convicted in child’s death

RICHMOND POLICE DEPARTMENT

Keishawn L. Whitfield, 23, faces 15 years in prison for the death of a 13-month-old old child left in a van used by a Richmond day care center.

» 24 Comments | Post a Comment

A driver for a Richmond day-care center faces 15 years in prison after being convicted in the death of a 13-month-old boy who was left in a van used by the center on a hot July day.

Keishawn L. Whitfield was convicted yesterday by Richmond Circuit Judge Beverly W. Snukals after a trial that lasted nearly three hours. Whitfield, 24, is to be sentenced Jan. 8, when he could get up to 10 years for involuntary manslaughter and five years for felony child neglect.

Whitfield was the first of two defendants to be tried for the July 6 death of Andrew Johnson. Valerot Whitlow, Whitfield's mother and the owner of the Yellow Brick Road Day Care and Learning Center, faces a single count of felony child neglect.

Whitlow surrendered her state day-care license and closed her facility on Fourth Avenue in the Highland Park neighborhood shortly after the child's death.

Whitfield had been the center's driver for nearly five years, and testimony yesterday indicated he had taken a number of training courses related to his job.

Defense attorney John W. Luxton urged the judge to clear Whitfield on both charges, saying his client's failure to remember the child was in the van for more than six hours was a tragic error but didn't rise to the level of criminal behavior.

"He didn't exercise reasonable care," Luxton said. "But was he grossly negligent?"

The judge sided with prosecutors Mary E. Langer and Julie E. McConnell, who said Whitfield failed to satisfy the duties of his sole job -- to safely drive and deliver children to and from the center.

"I think this case is more than ordinary negligence," Snukals said. "You have an individual here who had a more heightened duty, a more heightened training and a special role."

Whitfield did not take the stand but sat attentively at the defense table during testimony from a group that included Victoria Griffith-Matko, a Richmond police detective who interviewed him extensively after the death.

According to Griffith-Matko, Andrew was the first child Whitfield picked up on his second run on the morning of July 6. Andrew was already strapped into a portable child safety seat, and Whitfield placed it on the bench seat immediately behind his driver's seat and used the seat belt to fasten the safety seat to the bench seat.

It was Andrew's usual spot, and he would typically spend the ride talking to Whitfield and playfully kicking the back of his seat and tugging at his hair.

Whitfield picked up six other children before going to the center and unloading them. He recalled that one of the last things he did before leaving the center was take Andrew's black diaper bag into the building.

From there, Whitfield drove to his family's house in the 2700 block of Garland Avenue, a short distance from the center, and turned off the ringer on his cell phone and went to bed.

Whitfield told Griffith-Matko that when he woke up shortly before 4 p.m. and checked his cell phone, there were five messages from his mother.

It was then that he discovered Andrew was still in the van, strapped into his safety seat, which was still strapped onto the bench seat.

Testimony indicated the air temperature that day was 84 degrees and that the temperature inside the van reasonably could have been expected to go about 40 degrees higher.

Andrew's body temperature was 106 shortly after he was found unresponsive. Whitfield began efforts to revive him, and emergency crews continued those efforts, to no avail.

Griffith-Matko said that when she arrived at the house, Whitfield was in an ambulance, being treated for hand cuts he suffered when he punched a glass door in frustration after rescue workers arrived and took over attempts to revive the child.

Whitfield offered to take a drug test, but Griffith-Matko said police determined that was unnecessary.

Langer noted that there was a log on the bus and another one inside the center for Whitfield to record the number and identity of van passengers, but Whitfield used neither. He elected instead to keep count of the children in his head.

"He clearly is aware -- or at least should have been aware -- of the dire consequences," Langer said. "He completely abandoned Andrew. Andrew has no ability to defend himself. He's an infant strapped in a car seat. And he just sits there -- getting hotter and hotter until he dies."



Contact Joe Macenka at (804) 649-6804 or .

Advertisement

 

Advertisement

Reader Reactions

Flag Comment Posted by RichmondDave on November 09, 2009 at 9:12 pm

Notyou, you really scare me if you really are a lawyer.  You think that if a judge said, I sentenced a similiar case to 10 years prison yesterday, you would say you are right, sentence my client the same in this instance?

You really can’t see the difference between the two cases?  I’d hate to have you represent me.

Your distortion of my example of the dog which was presented to Frank, only because he is too stupid to comprehend the the difference between a parent and an employee, is as outragous as Frank’s inanity.  He was implying that the minister got off easy because he was white.  You really believe that, too?  WOW!!!

Are you Frank under a different ID?

Flag Comment Posted by tman70043 on November 09, 2009 at 11:06 am

gman66,

With your comments, I sure hope you dont have a job that deals with peoples lives or healthcare.

BECAUSE ITS HIS JOB, he is to be held accountable. NOT because its his job, he can make mistakes. What a weird way of thinking. Stressful driving job??? awwww, yes he can be this neglectful because the poor guys job is stressful.aww.. LOL.

How bout we apply your thinking to docs, military, judges, nurses, cops, etc etc. Think about that world. You wouldnt want to live it I can bet.

Flag Comment Posted by Notyou on November 08, 2009 at 4:25 pm

I think Frank is right.  As the Judge said, Mr. Whitfield had a hightened duty under the law because he was a caregiver.  As many parents know, and I know as an attorney (but not a parent), parents have a higher duty of care to their children as well.  In fact, parents have a duty to act to help their children, whereas normally an individual does not have a duty to act to help another person.  So legally I think the point Frank is making is more in line with the law.

RichmondDave I think your dog analogy is flawed.  You’re right that you cannot kill someone else’s dog without justification (i.e. self-defense of yourself or others).  But Frank can’t kill his dog willy-nilly.  Euthanized by a vet?  Yes.  Dragging it behind a truck?  No.  If you think I’m wrong, ask Mike Vick.  He owned every dog he killed.

Flag Comment Posted by Frank on November 07, 2009 at 6:59 pm

Of course you don’t want to debate the point anymore RichmondDave. You’ve backed yourself into a corner w/ the statement that a judge should sentence “ ....the parent less severely than the employee (due to the parent already suffering unforgivable guilt for causing the death of one’s own child). “

Does this compassion extend to the parent who leaves a loaded firearm in easy reach of a child? How about a child killed in a car wreck because the parent didn’t put the child in a car seat? Or left the baby in a bathtub?

We’re talking about a difference between 15 years in prison for the employee and not a single day for the parent. Both deserve prison time. If 15 years is appropriate for Mr Whitfield, then surely at least SOME time is appropriate for the pastor.

Flag Comment Posted by RichmondDave on November 07, 2009 at 3:30 pm

You are amazing Frank…  You really cannot grasp the difference between these two cases and the judge’s sentencing between these two cases?

Last post to you Frank, not worth the time to debate your inane theory.  I’ve already made it quite clear why the judge would sentence the parent less severely than the employee (due to the parent already suffering unforgivable guilt for causing the death of one’s own child).

If you cannot understand the suffering a parent would go through at causing the loss of a child then you are hopeless.

You appear thoughtless and uncaring in these posts and I just hope for your family and friends sake that you don’t really have these feelings and beliefs.

It is difficult enough for a parent to put a child into day care as it is.  To learn that you child died due to gross negligence of one of the employees is heartrending.  The fact that you cannot distinguish between a parent and a day care worker is beyond belief.

Can you see the difference between and green light and a red light on a traffic signal?

Flag Comment Posted by Randy on November 07, 2009 at 3:12 pm

This was a terrible event done by otherwise good people. Neither one deserves to go to jail for ten years only to be physically abused and come out harden criminals. They were poor small business that made a terrible mistake. People doing bad things on purpose get less time. This is the wrong way to deal with this.

Flag Comment Posted by Frank on November 07, 2009 at 3:03 pm

“There are laws regulating day care facilities and there are punishments when those laws are not followed.“

Well RichmondDave, I finally get your point.

You believe that there are different laws in play…...one for an employee whose negligence causes the death of a child & one for a parent. Excuse me, but involuntary manslaughter is the same, parent or employee. The charge was the same; why should the outcome be so grossly different between Mr Whitfield & the pastor in Hanover?

I don’t recall reading here that anyone suggested that the parents should “ shrug it off and say oh well, he (Mr Whitfield) didn’t really mean it… “. However, that is practically what the judge said in the case of the pastor in Hanover. But that’s ok because it was a parent whose negligence caused the death of a child, right?

Flag Comment Posted by RichmondDave on November 07, 2009 at 2:38 pm

I used the example of a dog, because can’t seem to grasp the difference between the two different situations you mentioned, one of a parent and the other of an employee.

There are laws regulating day care facilities and there are punishments when those laws are not followed.

Maybe the parent should have gotten a more severe punishment, but that was up to the judge to make that decision.  Just as it was up to the judge in this instance.

Whitfield was being paid to drive the children and it was his responsibility to ensure the safety of those children.  He is now paying for his gross negligence.

Do you expect me to believe if that was your son that died, that you would just shrug it off and say oh well, he didn’t really mean it… or would you expect a punishment for gross neglience that led to the death of your child?

Flag Comment Posted by MR M on November 07, 2009 at 1:49 pm

This article is about children being left in vehicles not dogs .

Flag Comment Posted by southerngirl on November 07, 2009 at 1:44 pm

The article states that they had logs but Mr. Whitfield did not use them but instead chose to keep track in his head. Why didn’t he simply take the extra step to use that log instead of going off of memory? If he had done so this child would still be alive today.

MR M - I don’t believe that posters on here are more enlightened to berate the individuals just for the h*ll of it. I think that people are outraged by this and feel that him being an employee of a daycare center he should have been more responsible. I have not seen where anyone has said that Mr. Whitfield’s punishment should be more severe simply because he is black. If there are posts that specifically state that please show us where!! I don’t care what color skin he has. It seems that the only ones who are bringing race into the mix are you and Frank. Both Mr. Whitfield and his mother had a responsibility to those children that they were caring for and should have been more responsible with their actions with Mr. Whitfield double checking the van before he pulled out of the daycare center,using the logs that they have to check in/out the children, and immediately when they could not locate the child and could not get in touch with Mr. Whitfield. She knew that her son drove the van and transported the children and she also knew that he was going back home to go to sleep. She also had a responsibility as the owner to take the appropriate steps to locate the child and from what this article states she did no such thing. As for the white pastor who was convicted of a misdemeanor and received a $100.00 fine should have received more punishment but that is what Hanover courts chose to do with him. I again do not think that it was right BUT Mr. Whitfield was a daycare employee and NOT the parent of the child. In the courts whether we like it or not or agree with it or not they sometimes see it as the parent(s) are suffering for their lack of judgement.

Post a Comment(Requires free registration)

  • Please avoid offensive, vulgar, or hateful language.
  • Respect others.
  • Use the "Flag Comment" link when necessary.
  • See the Terms and Conditions for details.
Click here to post a comment.

Advertisement

Advertisement

Online Features
Blogs
DataCenter
Videos
Weekend
 

Advertisement