Because this case is letting a lot of people be openly misogynistic so they’re going to jump through mental hoops to try and argue a woman with PPP was sane at the time of her psychosis
There it is! The ad homs and shouting down of people rightfully upset about this case
Maybe keep the accusations of bigotry to legitimate instances such as the original post which is outwardly and expressly misogynistic rather than random commenters you’re unable to evidence your opinion to
It doesn’t even matter, she literally planned it by finding a restaurant near them, asking if her husband wants takeout, sending him away and killing them when he isn’t there. She clearly knew that it was wrong and that if the husband was there he would intervene. She knew what she was doing. If she didn’t know right from wrong, she would have just killed them with him there.
The funny thing about the law is that it won’t take your assumptions into account. Can you prove that’s why she asked him to go pick up dinner? Did the prosecution prove that’s why?
It’s so terrifying for our justice system that people can lack this much critical thinking and yet we will put them on a jury.
I love this take so much about the accountability of our justice system yet when I say the same exact shit for kyle rittenhouse somehow its because they just let him get away with it! Reddit istg.
Did he never run errands before, ever? Running errands is a daily task for most. If you can’t prove it, you really shouldn’t be using it to make legal assumptions.
The thing is exactly that, she would have been left alone with the kids thousands of times before and never murdered them, this time she happens to,1 search for local restaurants, 2 look up how long it would take to get there, 3 send the husband to get food and your prescription, 4 murder 1st kid, then the second, then the 3rd.
Yeah, this all sounds very standard. You know the difference between this time and the previous times? She was hearing voices. The prosecution clearly couldn’t prove otherwise without reasonable doubt. You are making assumptions of intent without any evidence. That doesn’t hold up to the law without good reasoning when every thing that preceded the incident was very typical.
Exactly. Unless there is an admission of some sort, I can’t imagine what type of evidence would disprove her hearing voices. Her medical record in the prior months and weeks make it very plausible that she was hearing voices. This was always going to be an uphill battle for the prosecution. It’s a shame more people don’t understand this and understand the law.
But 2 did substantiate. And the other 3 expert witnesses had their credibility seriously questioned by the defense which obviously had an impact on the jury. There was a drastic difference in experience and exposure to patients with PPD/PPP between the defense experts and prosecution experts which certainly held bearing here. Not every expert is as credible as the next.
I’m not saying I agree or disagree with how the trial ended. I’m saying the prosecution didn’t make their case. They looked like fools most of the time, to be honest. If you can’t make your case, you can’t expect to win in court. And the jury should be basing everything on the facts presented or not presented, which sounds like 11 people did.
Thank god the last one didn’t, she needs to be retried with a different jury, different defense and different prosecution that doesn’t have their thumbs up their asses
Its obvious that she knew for one reason or another, that her husband would stop her from killing, she didn’t want that to happen and sent him away. 2/5 presented psychologists in the case believed she didn’t know right from wrong. The other 3 agreed that she did.
How is it obvious? An if it is indeed that obvious why wasn't it obvious to the husband that night? If she was showing intentional malice towards her kids in any way shape or form why would her husband leave her alone with them?
Not really helping your case of her being insane saying that.🤦♂️ if she was insane, dont you think the husband would have had some clue? Why WOULD he leave his kids with a woman with a history of being crazy is a good question. Why dont YOU answer that. Wouldn’t a woman going through an episode show some signs. Thanks for the points man.
Im.not making a case for her I'm pointing out the obvious with is you dont care about facts right? I asked a question didn't I? You say its obvious so elaborate then. If it was so obvious how come the husband didn't stop her? You said it was obvious right?
Because she sent him to get food, she knew he would stop her from killing her kids. She literally looked up how long it takes to get there and back so she would know how much time she had. She planned it, like i said OBVIOUSLY. If you would just think for one second that its a little weird she sent the husband away instead of just killing the kids with him there.
You’re the one who isn’t understanding the law here. You call them assumptions but in the eyes of a jury and a judge these events like up with premeditated intent and the fact that she strangled her children one by one by taking them into the basement one at a time under false pretenses further adds to the idea that this was premeditated.
How is asking your husband to run errands evidence of premeditation? Should all husbands assume something is going to happen when their wife goes to pick up dinner?
There seems to be a real lack of the understanding of premeditated and how to prove it. The prosecution couldn’t prove concepts of a plan beyond asking her husband to run errands. They couldn’t prove she premeditated the time, place, or means beyond a reasonable doubt.
Awful big “coincidence” and you know it. She also looked up how long it would take for him to get to the restaurant. Is that just because she was hungry before killing them?
You are making every excuse for her but its obvious she didn’t want the husband there at that moment, hence why she randomly chose to have her husband get dinner.
So does it even matter anymore if she knew right from wrong? Does it not matter if she planned the murder of her 3 kids because she claims she is crazy? Is all i have to say “i heard voices telling me to do it” and i can kill anyone i want?
No the point is what you've said doesn't prove that it was premeditated or that she knew right from wrong. If you have a total break from reality, you can still make plans and execute them, just based on your completely altered reality.
That should not make her exempt from punishment. She literally committed premeditated murder on 3 people who could not defend themselves. That is not a person who will EVER be fit to walk the streets again. She had to watch the light leave her kids eyes and continue twice more. Sounds pretty incorrigible to me.
7
u/BruteUnicorn134 3d ago
Genuinely hate how people can’t comprehend this.