Brandon Beedy pleaded guilty to attempted involuntary manslaughter and could face up to eight years in prison, according to a guilty plea document filed in the case. Heinzen also pleaded guilty Friday, according to online court records, but a document detailing her plea wasn’t filed with the Clark County Clerk of Court’s office Monday.
They were originally charged with involuntary manslaughter and endangering children in the death. A call to their attorneys was not returned Monday.
They are due back in court for sentencing on Sept. 5.
Springfield police began their investigation on Jan. 12 when they were called to a home on the 1900 block of Kenton Street at around 6 p.m. for a report a baby had died.
The person reporting the incident to police found the baby unresponsive in his crib, according to the report.
The baby is described in the police report as a 35-pound male with brown hair and blue eyes. The report is listed as a dead-on-arrival, unspecified death case.
A bill of particulars filed in the cases by Clark County Assistant Prosecutor Aaron Heskett alleges the parents didn’t take care of the child’s well being.
“Brandon Beedy and Caitlyn Heinzen did create a substantial risk to the health and safety of their 21-month-old child Camden Beedy by violating their duty of care, protection or support to him and that did cause his death,” the document says. “Specifically, defendants did leave their child unattended in a crib in their home at 1991 Kenton St. where they omitted to care for him for an unjustifiable extended period of time causing him to die from dehydration.”
It’s still unclear what exactly occurred leading up to their child’s death. However, a ruling by Clark County Common Pleas Court Judge Douglas Rastatter may have provided clues to what the state is alleging.
In the filing, Rastatter partly overruled a motion by Beedy’s defense asking the court to bar evidence of drug use at trial.
“A central issue in the case is whether the defendant created a substantial risk to the health or safety of the child by violating a duty of care, protection or support which resulted in serious physical harm to the child and ultimately his death,” Rastatter wrote. “If the state intends to prove these elements of the crime by presenting evidence that the defendant was using drugs at or near the time of the child’s death, that he gave the drug use priority over caring for the child, and that the resulting impairment from the drug use rendered him incapable fo adequately caring for, protecting and supporting the child, none of the aforementioned evidentiary rules would prohibit it.”
About the Author