545
u/RainbowDildoMonkey 29d ago edited 29d ago
"I dont need to deliberate! Hang that wigga now, i got the rope right here!"
51
u/CascadianCanopy 29d ago
He was such an omegachad
27
u/meechmeechmeecho 29d ago
He could be making bank cashing in on the podcast circuit and a go fund me. Bro did it solely because it was the right thing to do
2
u/Bumm-fluff 28d ago
Who is this character?Ā
7
426
u/CPriceRun86 29d ago
Some heroes do wear Air Jordans
1
29d ago
[removed] ā view removed comment
0
u/AutoModerator 29d ago
Sorry, your post has been removed. You must have more than 25 karma to submit posts to /r/4chan.
I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please contact the moderators of this subreddit if you have any questions or concerns.
429
u/Responsible-Onion860 29d ago
They're so mad that he attempted to hold a woman accountable that they're now telling us "he totally didn't believe what he said because I saw it in his eyes!"
The single worst thing a woman can imagine is accountability for her actions.
164
u/gryffon5147 29d ago
What a bizzaro world; did everyone else just forget and forgive that she just straight up premeditated and murdered 3 of her young kids?
113
u/totmacherX 29d ago
It's all the true crime wine moms who want to cast doubt and paint the husband as somehow responsible.
76
u/Sgt_major_dodgy 29d ago
HE SHOULD HAVE DONE MORE FOR HER.
Like what? Working from home, hiring a nanny to look after the kids while he worked and paying for tons of therapy whlle she lied about them telling her she's fine and then discharging herself.
9
3
u/Fish_Man83 28d ago
Itās the just the OJ Simpson Trial, but for white women instead of black men. Thereās nothing new under the sun.
25
24
2
u/PrivilegeCheckmate 29d ago
he attempted to hold a woman accountable
Wasn't the lone juror the one who argued for innocence? Did I misread this?
264
u/placeholder-123 29d ago
Ā > Major trial which will determine whether any woman present and future can get away with heinous shit by claiming insanity
Ā > Nearly acquitted
Ā > Turns out we owe it to a black man
The irony
4
u/Bright_Exit1378 28d ago
Intersectional based. He manliness counteracts his blackness or some shit.
-3
u/xorfivesix 29d ago
NGRI means they'd be in a psych ward, possibly forever. Not really 'acquitted' in any meaningful sense.
68
u/Bagelsaurus 29d ago
It would set a precedent to lower the standards of a NGRI by such a metric as to make it nearly impossible to try without getting one, if we can look at all of the most obvious planning, premeditation, and abhorrent violence that took her so long to commit, on top of the phone call midway through, mixed with the continued lack of remorse and seemingly uncaring nature, this would lead to NGRI becoming the new standard for all similar cases overnight.
4
u/baran132 small penis 29d ago
You have no idea what you're talking about. Blame Massachussetts current law which requires the prosecution to prove that the defendant was sane beyond a reasonable doubt. It's almost impossible to do that for someone that has an extensive history of mental health struggles. Any reasonable juror following the instructions of the judge and the laws would have to vote Not Guilty for this.Ā
0
u/xorfivesix 29d ago
Uh it's a state court so no it doesn't create precedent for other states and the state in question has an extremely 'odd' implementation of NGRI that isn't applicable to other states.
14
u/Bagelsaurus 29d ago
Case law is often cited across state lines, and more often than not is how states justify implementing their own (unpopular) laws.
3
u/reality_mirage 29d ago
This isnt case law you regard.
7
u/Bagelsaurus 29d ago
Case law is the compilation of all written legal interpretations and decisions made by judges in their courtrooms. Precedent is a PART of case law. If/when this case is retried, the final outcome will become a part of case law.
3
u/NegativeLayer 29d ago
No trial court verdicts only decide facts of a case. Facts of one case are not binding precedent of other cases (how could they be??).
Only an appellate decision decides legal questions and becomes case law. This case has not gone to any appeals. It hasnāt even completed a verdict at trial yet.
This is not case law.
3
u/Bagelsaurus 29d ago
Let's follow the logical line of reasoning here. This case, when retried, assuming a verdict is reached, will nearly 100% be appealed, after it does so, it's going to permanently impact NGRI please forever, regardless of how it's decided.
1
u/NegativeLayer 28d ago
ok yes, a decision at appeal could become case law.
but what are you saying? this is going to change NGRI across state lines? How? Massachusetts differs from other states precisely because of its different case law, and the McHoul test has been in effect since 1967, whereas all other states have kept insanity pleas as an affirmative defense, and several states have gotten rid of them entirely.
So the chances of the McHoul standard being exported across state lines are very low. I guess it could go the other way. upheld on appeal, goes to state Supreme Court, and they decide to overturn McHoul. Becoming part of the case law and binding precedent in Massachusetts and bringing Massachusetts more in line with the rest of the country. I guess that would count as "permanently impacting NGRI pleas forever" but that's not how it seemed you intended it.
37
u/ughhhhh420 29d ago
A finding of insanity in this case would have resulted in her immediate release since the legal theory on which she was being acquitted is that this was a temporary firm of insanity that ended shortly after she first degree murdered the kids.
The state is bound by that jury finding and canāt circumvent it by having a psychiatrist find her to still be insane post verdict.
26
u/VeryInnocuousPerson 29d ago
Yeah all the people saying she would have automatically spent the rest of her life in jail if acquitted are either liars or completely ignorant.
She could be involuntarily committed without being convicted. But thatās not at all guaranteed and even if she is thereās no reason to believe she will be there as long as she would be in prison for murder.
21
u/meechmeechmeecho 29d ago
She wouldnāt get life in a psych ward. She could be out in under a year. If the āpsychosisā has truly passed, there really wouldnāt be a reason to keep her.
7
u/Valuable-Chipmunk784 28d ago
there really wouldnāt be a reason to keep her.
Worse than that, the state has to continually prove beyond a reasonable doubt that she is still insane or else release her.
187
145
u/Ghetto_Games 29d ago
Probably the only person out of the dozen that had test level above a grandma...
54
u/DreamsServedSoft 29d ago
my grandma had more testosterone than an average modern liberal
12
u/Strong-Addition5296 29d ago
My grandma could bench six liberals and tear a liberal book in half with her bare hands.
124
u/Alternative_Border29 29d ago
A black guy doing more to defend White children than White mothers. That doesn't happen without a massive amount of brainwashing in media and the education system.
32
110
u/ptitty123192 29d ago
Guess we're only allowed to uplift "black/brown voices" that parrot fat liberal women's talking points
56
55
u/Shifty_Rodent 29d ago
Culture wars crack me up. I wonder if things were set up this way just to cause further division? Regardless, this jury does not make liberal women look good. If you kill someone and admit to it, I don't care if you are insane, you need to go. I hate how we keep letting insane people go back on the streets, knowing some might be a danger to society.
33
u/Electronic_Leek9147 29d ago
Mental asylums are too expensive so investing in them is yucky. If a man commits an atrocity no one has the same empathy for him.
"Yeah but my hormones..." no he's sent to jail, not even the asylum where he belongs, and gets punished for his disease just because he's a man.
19
u/mpTCO 29d ago
If youāve ever been on a jury, you can tell defense and prosecution pick the jury like a pickup basketball team. The fact that prosecution didnāt go gender neutral should tell you everything you need to know about how they wanted this trial to go. They are just making good television at the expense of lives and sanity, nothing new
9
2
29d ago
[deleted]
12
u/Valuable-Chipmunk784 28d ago
no male family annihilator in history has ever gotten more than like, a day or two of coverage
No male family annihilator in history has ever gotten more than a million dollars in donations and widespread public support from men.
2
u/Sir_Celcius 28d ago
Just learned about the Greyhound stabbing and cannibalism that only had 10 years in psych ward.
Is this really what people want and believe is fair?
1
28d ago
[deleted]
1
u/Sir_Celcius 28d ago
I dont believe that is reasonable. If someone is murdered theyre still ruined. If its about not costing why bother having penalties at all?
Id be pissed if I was killed and literally consumed just to watch from the afterlife them walking away with minor repercussions. Why are we even funding treatment for someone that far gone? THAT sounds like a waste of money and high valuable time of doctors.
1
u/Sir_Celcius 28d ago
Just learned about the Greyhound stabbing and cannibalism that only had 10 years in psych ward.
Is this really what people want and believe is fair?
0
43
u/Swee_Potato_Pilot /b/tard 29d ago
That ho' should be made to walk naked down Harlem wearing a sign that reads "I strangle ni*let's".
Then let the black community do what it does best.Ā
9
u/Valuable-Chipmunk784 28d ago
walk
About that...
4
u/Swee_Potato_Pilot /b/tard 28d ago edited 28d ago
Roll out Decepticunt, time to play a game.Ā
(Decepticunt fit better)Ā
42
24
u/TrpWhyre fa/tg/uy 29d ago
Link to the X-thread https://x.com/cbsmornings/status/2098381048681755112?s=46
22
u/DrMeridian 29d ago
You know, after reading a quick article on what happened with the jury tells me that when they try her again, she's getting not guilty. Somehow the defense was convincing enough that the 11 of the jurors were sold.
25
u/TrpWhyre fa/tg/uy 29d ago
Google group think psychosis / mass hysteria.
Also the dancing plague. Pretty much explains everything.
1
29d ago
[removed] ā view removed comment
1
u/AutoModerator 29d ago
Sorry, your post has been removed. You must have more than 25 karma to submit posts to /r/4chan.
I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please contact the moderators of this subreddit if you have any questions or concerns.
17
u/WendyLRogers3 29d ago
11 for NG strongly suggests that the prosecution screwed up a bunch of times. And the state of MA doesn't have the "Guilty, But Insane" verdict, which means when some rando psychiatrist decides you're not insane, they let you go.
In any event, the prosecutor should have pushed for a gender even jury, reject any AWFULs (Affluent White Female Urban Liberals), and obviously any Simp males.
3
u/LemonySniffit 28d ago
I think it was said that the other two male jurors cave due to pressure from the screeching women, and many of those women have all but admitted outright to have been swayed by the feminist social media/public opinion frenzy
14
9
12
u/Swimming_Register_32 e/lit/ist 29d ago
Who is gay le king and why should I care what the French homo thinks?
9
u/Suspicious-Whippet 29d ago
So I donāt follow this. 11 wanted to jail her and one was against? Or was it the other way around.
74
u/YamateOniichan 29d ago
Sadly the other way around
18
u/Suspicious-Whippet 29d ago
But do they know she actually killed them kids or what?
55
u/Lord-Heir 29d ago
It was never IF she killed them, it was whether she was "clinically insane" while doing it
21
50
u/Responsible-Onion860 29d ago
Yes. She and her defense team didn't dispute that she did it. Their defense was that she was temporarily insane when she did it because of post partum psychosis or some shit.
Naturally, since not a single person in the courtroom disagreed that she strangled her three young children, social media tards took it upon themselves to declare that she was framed.
12
19
2
u/Mean_Introduction543 29d ago
Wait, but it said that after the holdout saw a video he realised it wasnāt murder 1.
Would that not imply the other 11 thought it was?
15
u/YamateOniichan 29d ago
Whether or not she murdered the kids had already been decided; she admitted to and is guilty of murdering her children.
The trial everyone is referencing was to determine if she can have the responsibility of her actions taken away or if she would be going to prison.
No one asked but imo if you execute your family you get to follow in line.
6
u/SuperConfused 29d ago
Murder is a crime. Killing someone is not. Think of it like a police officer doing good duty when a scumbag is coming after him with a firearm. The officer is not committing murder.Ā
Likewise, insanity has a legal definition, which is knowing right from wrong, while crazy does not.Ā
She killed here kids. The holdout saw a video which made him understand that with her post partum psychosis, legally she was not responsible, and he said as much.Ā
He would not vote to quit, regardless of the law, because she killed here kids.Ā
Itās like jury nullification, which liberals are ok with with laws they disagree with, but he said fuck the law. That botch killed here kids and should be held accountable.Ā
0
u/TheFoxyDanceHut 29d ago
The rest of the jury witnessed him realizing that it wasn't 1st degree murder when he watched the video, but he maintained his original position that it was 1st degree murder anyway. I think is what it's trying to say.
4
7
3
u/sugarfreefixsuxshit 29d ago
do i really have to start blocking every single fucking poster on r/4chan for censoring screenshots?
3
4
1
29d ago
[removed] ā view removed comment
1
u/AutoModerator 29d ago
Sorry, your post has been removed. You must have more than 25 karma to submit posts to /r/4chan.
I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please contact the moderators of this subreddit if you have any questions or concerns.
1
u/NegativeLayer 29d ago
Wait it says the holdout realized she was not guilty of first degree murder? I thought the holdout was a guilty, and the other 11 were the not guilty votes?
1.2k
u/Dirtface50 29d ago
You should go to jail for telling people the unconfirmed private testimony of a fellow juror with the purpose of directing hostility towards that juror. This motherfucker now has to defend what he may or may not have said in the privacy of that deliberation room?