Tiffanie Lucas, 33, had been preparing to try an insanity defense in her upcoming December murder trial stemming from her Novenber 8, 2023, shooting of her sons Maurice “Peanut” Baker Jr. and Jayden Howard, 6 and 9. Now she says she will plead guilty and rely on the judge to decide her fate.
Lucas fired four shots at her children in 30 seconds, killing both. First she claimed the shooting “was an accident,” then said she was “manipulated through Facebook, through the internet or through Wi-Fi […] into doing what she did.” Oooh, good excuse! With defense theories like that, the spectacularly unsympathetic mother (well, ex-mother) was facing the harsher end of Kentucky’s murder law, which makes the crime punishable by death, life without parole, or, in special cases, 20 to 50 years behind bars. This way, as one wag put it, she can beg the judge for sympathy because her two young children are dead.
Lucas had three children with two fathers, never married, has a history of drug use and had been on local child services radar for a long time. Her oldest and surviving son told reporters after the shootings, “I should have did more. If it came to me snatching the boys out of the house, I should have and I will hold that on my back for the rest of my life. For both them boys.”
Tiffanie did a great job educating her children too, as you can see.
She had no ethics alarms installed, lived her life irresponsibly, selfishly and incompetently, and in a weak moment, chose a crude and brutal course to reduce her self-inflicted burdens. Lucas represents the extreme end of what being raised in an ethically rotting culture can produce.
There is absolutely no reason for Kentucky not to execute her, but pleading guilty, admitting what she did, not blaming “social media,”and expressing genuine remorse—if she can—is her best chance at avoiding that just sentence.
Ethics Alarms 
Ugh. Those children are beautiful. I’m shelving my thoughts regarding CPS (child protective services)…for now. As much as I hate to say it, that young woman deserves to die an untimely death at the hands of the state. I guess whether or not that happens is TBD.
I hope our good friend Chris Marschner will remind us of his recommended punishment for using a firearm in the commission of a felony…ANY felony…
I don’t understand the last point. Would it have been better if she slit their throats or beat them to death with a hammer?
Joel, I have to agree with Michael R on this point. The firearm was merely the tool used to commit the horrendous act. The point I was making was that using a firearm to commit a felony irrespective of whether or not it was used to actually murder the victim was a form of terrorism that must be dealt with very harshly and without mercy.
Michael and Chris, I’m in agreement with both of you. My only point was that Ms. Lucas has changed her plea, thereby avoiding the jury trial (where every gruesome detail is played out in front of her peers) and hoping to spare herself a sentence of capital punishment. If there was a firearm law such as what Chris has suggested in past threads, the possibility would be gone.
Regardless of her methods, her actions are grotesque: a blot on a civilized society.
Please give the nine-year-old survivor a break. His proper Kentucky hillbilly syntax notwithstanding, coming from a child of his tender age, I found his statement profound, moving and prescient well beyond his years.
I don’t think the surviving child is nine years old. The mother had three children and shot the two youngest – one was 6, the other was 9 – who both died. Her third child was her oldest and was not shot. He is the one who wished he had been able to protect his brothers. I don’t know how old he is.