posted December 15, 2006 01:59 AM         

Alayiah Turman was only 17 months old, born March 29, 2005. Spellman beat her to death, prosecutors say.

In an alleged confession read at his preliminary hearing yesterday, Spellman, 25, said he was playing one of Tom Clancy's "Ghost Recon" games - a violent combat epic - in a front bedroom of his family's Brewerytown home that Thursday morning, Sept. 7. He had taken Alayiah into the room so her mother, Mia Turman, could rest.

"She pulled the cord and the whole game console fell over," Spellman said in his statement, read by Homicide Detective John Cummings. "I thought it was broken. I popped her in the face. I picked her up and tossed her in a chair."

Later that day - at 12:37 p.m. - Alayiah was pronounced dead at Temple University Hospital.

Spellman, also known as Anwar Salahuddin, was held for trial by order of Municipal Court Judge Gerard A. Kosinski on charges of murder, endangering the welfare of a child, and related offenses.

Alayiah's slaying was one of several child deaths examined by The Inquirer in an October article on the city Department of Human Services and its oversight of child-abuse and neglect cases.

DHS visited Spellman's rowhouse on the 1500 block of North 29th Street twice in August - each time seeing only the baby's mother, Mia Turman, 21, and Alayiah, inside. Turman told the agency that no one else lived there.

In September, Cheryl Ransom-Garner, then DHS commissioner, told The Inquirer that a social worker had reported the child looked happy and had no bruises. But Turman's mother, Marvine Turman, told The Inquirer that she had seen bruises on the child.

Yesterday's hearing focused on the injuries Alayiah suffered on the day she died.

In his statement, Spellman said that after he tossed his daughter in a chair, he put her on a bed. He then went to tell Turman, who was eight months pregnant and sleeping in a different bedroom, that he was going to a store to get "something to smoke and something to eat."

When he returned, Spellman said, Keith Walker - identified after the hearing by Spellman's supporters as a tenant in the house - told him that Alayiah "fell and had blood on her nose."

Spellman called 911 while Walker tried to resuscitate her.

Mia Turman testified yesterday, her voice at times nervous, as Spellman stared at her. Turman and Alayiah had moved into Spellman's house about a month before the child's death.

Turman testified that Spellman woke her about noon Sept. 7 and that, when she saw Alayiah, the baby's nose was bleeding, "the side of her face was bruised," and "she wasn't breathing."

Under cross-examination by Spellman's lawyer, Bobby Hoof, Turman agreed that Spellman had told her Alayiah had fallen off a bed and had been found lying on a barbell.

Edwin Lieberman, the city assistant medical examiner who performed Alayiah's autopsy, testified that in addition to bruises around her head, Alayiah suffered "tremendous injury" inside her head "caused by at minimum three separate blows" to the right side, top and back of her skull.

Alayiah's skull was fractured to the point that a piece of bone had fallen out, he said.

When asked by Assistant District Attorney Yvonne Ruiz what could have caused Alayiah's internal head injuries, Lieberman testified that a fist could have caused them or her head could have struck a smooth surface, such as a tabletop, wall or floor.

Under cross-examination, Lieberman dismissed Hoof's suggestions. "A simple fall as you are suggesting from a bed would not cause a skull fracture," he said. Nor, he said, would falling on a weight.

After the hearing, Turman, surrounded by relatives, let off her anger toward Spellman, who she said showed no remorse.

"My baby don't deserve that," she said.
********************************************

thoughts..?

dumb **** psycho...

posted December 15, 2006 03:13 AM         

Makes me question why some are even allowed to produce or be around children at all.

How can a person be so addicted and consummed by a material object [in this case the XBox] as to place priority to a human life?

This man obviously had anger issues and lacked the skills and tools necessary to control himself or his angry outbursts.

Did anyone question this mother as to why she endangered this child? Allowing an abusive person around your child is in fact endangering.

I imagine every parent alive has felt a little bit out of control at some point or another during their child rearing years...
But, come on!!!

This is ****ing extreme!

Sick stuff

{{{Please anyone reading this}}}

If you or anyone you know have anger issues take a moment of time to research and attend some anger managment classes these are often offered for FREE at places such as "Project Dove", National Mental Health Clinics, Local Health Department, WIC offices, etc. or check out some online classes:
http://www.fhu.com/free-anger-management-classes.html
http://www.angermanagementseminar.com/book/index.html
http://www.angermanagementeducation.com/index.html
http://personcentered.com

Though I found this artical quite disturbing I thank you for posting it, perhaps someone will recognize themselves or another who is in need of assistance before we read their name in headlines, and will act to receive the help they need.

posted December 15, 2006 05:59 AM         

This sick ******* seems like a throwback to that. They do exist unfortunately and the irresponsibility we seem to be training into the current generations of children both in the US and the UK makes me think instances like this while still extreme, will increase.

Disregard for life is more prevalent in Third World countries where children are the victims of war and greed and power more ofthen than not.

Makes you wonder about the species as a whole. But in Western society you really have to be an animal to go that far.

I don't know about the US, but over here other prisoners would be itching for a chance to kill him if it arose and he would be isolated and abused every second.

The Devil has a spot reserved especially for him.

posted December 15, 2006 06:11 AM         

Whats more, these sort of who-ha's give people like Jack Tompson another non-viable excuse to go on a verbal rampage as to why Video Games are a threat to society .

posted December 15, 2006 06:33 AM         

They are a symptom, not the disease.

But you do have to reflect on the imbalance of what is turning people on these days.

If it ain't sex, violence or money it doesn't appeal to the masses one iota. I do believe we are becoming colder to each other, and in the UK the breakdown of things like community spirit and caring for others is frightening.

I wouldn't say this guy was typical of anything other than a nuthouse but you wonder about the triggers that are out there.

posted December 15, 2006 07:11 AM         

It'll give a reason for stupid people to start bitching about video games....

If they actually look at the statistics...increase in video games = decrease in crime rate...

My theory:since we have an outlet for the evil side(stealing cars,killing people,driving anyway you want to,beating up random people etc)..through video games..it'll actually satisfy us and we wont commit crimes...

P.S:disregard for life can happen anyhere...you you have bad guys and good guys everywhere...by saying you have to be an animal to do this in the west...what are you implying? colonization,slavery,dropping the atomic bomb,the iraq war,hitler..are all from the west..and this guy is from the U.S...

posted December 15, 2006 07:26 AM         

In the West people are more educated. In the West we have greater access to information. In the West we have a more robust civilisation with more capability as an individual to live the life we want to.

In other words, we have more choice and more freedom.

There are limitations to this of course, but the influences on us and the influence we possess or can cultivate are clearly evident whatever position you find yourself in at birth.

A man choosing to act this way with no provocation or motivation other than his own would indeed have to be more of an animal than say someone in a Third World country where warfare had twisted the morality and a sense of survival over-rode most basic ethical considerations.

edit: I have to stress that this doesn't make either right, but one would need more of a stretch than the other.

Is that better for you?

Oh, and your "theory" holds up quite beautifully wouldn't you say? Do me a favour....it's like training for some!

posted December 15, 2006 07:36 AM         

yes,thats why the invade other countrys,colonize them,steal their resources,open fire at poor unsuspecting people.....

A more robust civilzation...haha...the third world has had civilization for longer than the west have...long before the west were even humans...

more choice,more freedom? the east has that too...
and how many wars go on in the east...most of them have been started by the west...

so..the west like killing people...according to the facts and the number of wars.....gawd! dude...seriously.. gene pool can produce nuts where ever...

And "training for it"...yes..everybody who plays with video games are mindless killers in the training..

this is as lame as heavy metal = satanism..

posted December 15, 2006 08:03 AM         

Name me a nation on Earth that hasn't attempted this. Its a human condition, and the species ain't perfect yet. We had the largest Empire the world has seen only a hundred years ago! Which has proven to be a bit of an embarrasment. It's a relative condition.

"the third world has had civilization for longer than the west have...long before the west were even humans..."

It's the quality of civilisation I refer to and very obvious I would have said. It’s not a comparison with say Eastern philosophy or mystic arts, which if you actually investigated the vast majority of the population in the East don’t have time for. It’s taken as a stereo-typical representation - think Karate Kid movies.

"and how many wars go on in the east...most of them have been started by the west..."

Study your history. The West and specifically the US has power at present, ,mostly because of a much further devleloped level of civilisation (are you following me here?)but wherever there was power there is war to follow. Anywhere.

My point is about choice and the quality and quantity of options put before an individual when he chooses to act in this manner and from this account show no remorse for his actions.

That's the point.

Also, on the training thing, I have to say that I said "some" and not because of the games, they are just handy, and glamourise crime etc. Come on you know and I know it, I grew up with them myself, the culture of bling and gangs has changed the way things are. But it's not down to any one thing.

It's a sociological problem, and it is a much starker comparison in the UK where its been adopted and modified as elsewhere. Society changed much more abruptly and we are struggling as a nation to cope with the crime and attitudes and disrespect that come from this new way of thinking amongst the young.

The balance is difficult because when is it OK to censor things that people use recreationally and against what criteria? Thats because the games aren't the problem.

I already said that.

posted December 15, 2006 08:21 AM         

further developed through domination.murdering,killing.

The west has produced the biggest animal ever.adolf hitler....
clearly you have no idea about what your talking about...poor soul...
world war one was started by asians and the africans,and the west some how got accidentaly dragged in? and the wars that happen in africa and asia..were a gift given by colonizing forces..through the various policys they adopted....

So how did america and the other nations gain power? through merciless colonialism...on peacefull nations..you should study your history...

And white supremacy..it is soo humane...even animals dont get to that level...thats is excusable cause we're not perfect yet..wow...have you even been to any other nation.....

Eastern philosophy now how did that come about....cuase thats the way they live...that was a tough one..I'm sorry,but you sound like an ignorant racist.or maybe you've lived in eastern countrys for a life time that you can comment about them..

Define quality...of civilization...it changes from place to place,each place is not the same...you cant expect the same everywhere..so if isnt like you civilization,it's not civilization....

And cmon...crime has always been "cool",the rap thing has made it worse,but still my point is...if a guy is a nut,he will be one,he doesnt need anything like videogames..
some thing as cute as tom and jerry could trigger of a reaction,so blaming video games for it stupid...

posted December 15, 2006 08:48 AM         

I'll side-step that neatly thanks, and take my responsibility for starting it.

I never said at any point that the video game was responsible for that man's actions. I was referring to Xodian's question about video games in general, which I have some sympathy with actually. Knee-jerk reactions and all that. I'm just sensitive to the wider issues connected to those arguments.

The rest is not worth discussing further with you as I see what direction we are headed in and I have no problem with you personally.

posted December 15, 2006 08:52 AM         

dude I have no problem with you too..

I just thought racism and all that stuff died down in the 1940s....

If you want to make this personal..

completely sick untrue skewed statements does make me wanna say something...not argumenative...a very frank person...who speaks his mind....and stands up for what he believes...I dont run away from arguments..

centre of controversy..not me..your statements....I really didnt expect that kind of stuff from you..

posted December 15, 2006 09:13 AM         

quote:

---

Disregard for life is more prevalent in Third World countries where children are the victims of war and greed and power more ofthen than not.

---

Que?

I think you might want to refrain on that statement considering that disregard for life is just as bad in any of the Western countries. Don't you ever watch the news? I just turned it on to find another murder related to Domestic Violence where the man beat his girlfriend to death. And I'm sure we've heard of the many cases where one spouse kills the other for insurance bonds that they put on them. What's that? Isn't that what you guys call......GREED?? Also, a total disregard for life.....in the Western World?? You don't say!

In fact It was the Western Countries themselves who colonized and DRAINED the resources out of the Third World Countries...which is partly why they are Third World countries to begin with. And why was this? Out of the greed that you just accused us of. So it goes both ways...even in your so-called "civilized world".

posted December 15, 2006 09:45 AM         

quote:

---

In the West people are more educated. In the West we have greater access to information. In the West we have a more robust civilisation with more capability as an individual to live the life we want to.

---

Definitely not true. Because if it really was, how do you suppose we overthrew you guys in the first place? Dumb luck?

All in all, that was very racist in my opinion, to assume that you are of a more "civilized" kind. And also very hypocritical considering that some of the most twisted leaders this world has come to known, as Hot Ice pointed out, came from the Western World. Two World Wars were started by European Powers...two of them.

posted December 15, 2006 12:14 PM         

Hot Ice if I offended I apologise.

My point of view is that every human being is equal and that we all susceptible to whatever society we find ourselves in. We shape ourselves to our environment.

My use of both "Third World" and "civilisation" was incorrect and misleading. I am referring to the choices a man has from his circumstances pure and simple, unencumbered by influence or force.

A man in America is much less likely to change character under duress because of the situational elements and position he is in. I feel he has more personal freedom to choose his actions. That is where I am coming from. The countries involved and the nationalities or races of the people involved are irrelevant to my argument.

For instance, if on Mars there was a thriving civilisation of African descendants that financially and technologically and politically dominated the planet purely through social circumstance and history then I would consider a member of that society to have more freedom to choose what his actions are. Any society who achieves such a position cannot do so through peace and trade alone, that is obvious.

It does not take away from the fact that any member of the human race is capable of evil things, and in fact is probably too broad a point in all honesty and not accurate enough.

I was considering such stories as that of the "midnight commuters" here on this forum recently, plus other instances my African (white & black) tell me about from their home countries. Genocides, rapes, and many other atrocities. However, I could easily have mentioned Eastern Europe or Asia or the Middle East. We tend to see less genocide in the West. Lots of other problems, and individual crimes, but usually with much more of an element of individual choice in them than in war-torn or poverty stricken regions. Again, this may be too broad, but is only by way of an explanation of my thinking, not a justification of my point.

I have been about quite a bit Hot Ice and to many countries with many friends of different nationalities.

Dulce - Where you got the idea I was saying Third World countries are greedy I don't know, but the fact that I was unclear in my explanation of the comparison I was making means implication was understood where it was never intended.

Hot Ice - I already understand all men are equal. When you throw the word "racism" about with such wild abandon it is just about the most personal attack you can make, and it was made first.

My reaction was inappropriate and I admit that. My apology stands.

One more thing, I am Persian myself, so "white supremacy" hardly applies.

Let me know if I'm still unclear please.

posted December 15, 2006 12:15 PM         

quote:

---

I think you might want to refrain on that statement considering that disregard for life is just as bad in any of the Western countries. Don't you ever watch the news? I just turned it on to find another murder related to Domestic Violence where the man beat his girlfriend to death. And I'm sure we've heard of the many cases where one spouse kills the other for insurance bonds that they put on them. What's that? Isn't that what you guys call......GREED?? Also, a total disregard for life.....in the Western World?? You don't say!

---

Dulce, I think what Swerve said is true. When there's less consequence for being violent, then it's only logical that violence and abuse - "Disregard for life" - would be more dominant.

posted December 15, 2006 12:20 PM         

Now why couldn't I have just said that?

posted December 15, 2006 01:03 PM         

quote:

---

Genocides, rapes, and many other atrocities.

---

Again some, if not most, of these were incited by Western Powers for their own political gain. Takes for instance the Genocide in Rwanda by the two tribes....completely the fault of the British. It was they who pitted them against eachother during colonial times and invented the myth that they were different and that they were enemies. So who's uncivilized now?

quote:

---

Where you got the idea I was saying Third World countries are greedy I don't know, but the fact that I was unclear in my explanation of the comparison I was making means implication was understood where it was never intended.

---

That is what I gathered from this statement below me. Please re-interpret it for me if I am wrong.....

quote:

---

Disregard for life is more prevalent in Third World countries where children are the victims of war and greed and power more ofthen than not.

---

For them to be victims of those things, wouldn't that mean that the people and/or those in power are greedy themselves?

quote:

---

Dulce, I think what Swerve said is true. When there's less consequence for being violent, then it's only logical that violence and abuse - "Disregard for life" - would be more dominant.

I think Swerve's big point is that places with a good legal framework have less issues with uncivilized behavior, because there's always ongoing pressure to keep the citizens safe.

---

And who says that all of us do not have civil laws to govern ourselves? What are we, wild savages? I think not. Don't know about you but where I'm from, murder is a crime that is punished.

Whatever, believe what you want about people in the Eastern/ "Third World". I don't feel like arguing all day....not really in the mood. Just know that it isn't always the case and whatever happens there can sometimes be just as bad here.

posted December 15, 2006 01:27 PM         

quote:

---

And who says that all of us do not have civil laws to govern ourselves? What are we, wild savages? I think not. Don't know about you but where I'm from, murder is a crime that is punished.

---

I'm from California. What the heck are you trying to say? You're not communicating very well.

posted December 15, 2006 02:10 PM         

Yeah we went through Civil War, a violent one at that, but hasn't the U.S. been through this?

posted December 15, 2006 02:21 PM         

Well my opinion of this world is:

It will always be screwed over because there will always be, corrupt government officials, war, murderers, and rapists.

This world is a sick place. Trust no one but yourself.