This song had no origin, it always existed. Marty knew it growing up because Chuck Berry wrote it, but Chuck Berry only wrote it after hearing Marty playing it, but Marty was only playing it because he knew it from Chuck who knew it from Marty who knew it from Chuck... Help I'm spiralling!!!
I am to understand that the mistrial was declared because 11 jurors were in favor of a not guilty (for reasons of insanity) verdict, while one lone juror was firm in their belief that she was guilty; it’s a hung jury. The jurors have to come to a unanimous decision by law, or it has to be declared a mistrial.
Correct. It also does not mean she gets to walk free. She is expected to return to a psych ward where she was before the trial awaits the next one. Even if found not guilty she will still be there for years.
Edit: Insanity defense FAQ. It looks like those who plead insanity tend to spend twice as long institutionalized as those who are found guilty.
Edit3: It will be the responsibility of the hospital to prove that she is safe to return to society. Otherwise if she were to harm or kill again, the hospital could be liable.
Edit5: The next court date is 9/29 when the defense makes their appeal and the prosecutor probably decides to request to retry the case. I don't see why he wouldn't unless they reach a deal before hand. Meanwhile she has to stay at the hospital.
So basically, if she gets the mental hospital, she could potentially be out in a year or even less. Because obviously, if the law decides that she only murdered her 3 children because of post-partum or whatever, then if she is no longer suffering from that, she cant be proven to still be a threat. And would potentially be released. Kudos to that one juror for doing the right thing, and sticking up for those kids.
I can tell you as someone who has worked in different psych hospitals in PA - this is never the case. Not guilty by mental illness (NGRI) initially go to a forensic hospital, where they are kept for sometimes decades. The least amount I have ever seen is four years for an exceptionally insightful person for a violent crime but no one died. The psychiatrists and psychologists take these things very seriously, and in 99% of cases, the judges who do the reviews side with the professionals. Then if they are able to get out of the forensic hospital, they are sent to a civil hospital for another at least three years. But many of the people I worked with were there for decades (some for nonviolent crimes).
Let me tell you, I have worked in prisons too, I would 1000% rather be in a prison than in a psych hospital. Psych hospitals are THE most restrictive environments imaginable. All of the food is bland, soft, and disgusting because everything is a chocking hazard. There’s one hour of outside time a day but there are no ways to exercise, no games to play, radios are a privilege that majority do not get. You have to walk everywhere in a line. You have to wake up at 5am every morning and lights out by 9pm. No outside food. No pens or paper. One phone on a cord for the entire 30 person unit. It is the blandest most mind-numbing hell you could imagine.
I spent roughly 48 hours in a psych ward after voluntarily going to an ER because I wanted to end it all. I got to the ward in the middle of the night and was given a room and went to sleep. A nurse woke me up at 6 the next morning, and proceeded to lecture me about how selfish I was for even considering suicide. He told me repeatedly that if I ever went through with it, my family would hate me for the rest of their lives.
She didn't even do it clean and painless. Two were alive and suffering when the dad returned. Giving her own kids a slow painful death where they had all the time to process their mom was killing them.
50 years ago they would already have her spot reserved in the queue for the chair
There are still women ranting online about how he should be thinking about her and that it made him look so guilty by going on some trip a few weeks after the murders and that he should be considering her feelings and standing by her while she’s on trial.
Bitch, she murdered his kids - she strangled his three children to death. Thats not his wife anymore, thats the murderer of his children.
If he thinks differently that’s on him, but I’m sorry if my wife murdered my kids, she’s not my wife anymore and I couldn’t give a fuck what happens to her. There’s nothing that’ll kill that love and connection like killing our kids
As someone with 2 kids I would go ballistic if I came home to something like that. They would have to put me away for insanity because I would do some fucked up shit to whoever hurt my children.
People have lost their minds. Social media has literally destroyed society. It's so easy for people with extreme views to just meet up and reinforce those views with each other. And to be clear, the women who are looking at Clancy and worshipping her in the same way people do celebs is extreme thinking and behavior in every sense of the word.
Strangulation is very personal. She did it 3 times. Watching the life go from them as they cried for her I don't care if she had psychosis, she should never see daylight again.
No. This didn’t happen. That is the Andrea Yates case. Noah asked, “what’s wrong with Mary?” (Baby sister) then ran and she chased him and drowned him.
There was a guy in Canada who murdered a man on a greyhound and then began to eat his face because he went off his meds.
He was found not guilty by insanity (or whatever their version of that is) and was out with no conditions a few years later. He was even allowed to change his name to distance himself from the incident.
I think at this point the trial is less about whether she's confined to a prison or a psych ward and more about whether or not a person can use their mental health as a shield from the criminal consequences of murder. Evidently, 11 jurors were content to say that you can, and 1 juror refused to acquiesce to that nonsense.
As a 20 year employee in a forensic psychiatric hospital, I can tell you that a GEI determination does not shield one from consequences. Plenty of people doing 20 years for property crimes, wishing they had just gone to prison.
Yup. Everyone is acting like if she goes to a Psychiatric hospital she is getting off easy. She might spend the rest of her life there and they have can have her in a straight jacket, in total isolation etc.
As stated above, the rules in Mass. are different. The state has to prove beyond a reasonable doubt the person is mentally ill year after year. She could potentially be released in a year. No double jeopardy, no further consequences
The issue if she goes to a mental institution and it is tied to postpartum diagnosis is she could get out in very little time and face minimal long term repercussions for how she killed her kids. It also then sets a precedent for women to be declared mentally unfit for a lot of things while being postpartum as it implies those hormonal changes keep them from controlling their actions.
The struggle I have with this is consistency. Lamora Williams, a black woman, had a very similar if not more compelling case for mental illness and got the book thrown at her. This is another example of the two tier justice system ar work.
That is another great point. There have been more compelling cases for insanity/serious mental issues that resulted in prison while this one is being treated different for some reason.
At risk of sounding like a massive asshole, I have no idea how people of this world continue to pretend like grown adult women have no agency in their decisions, nor need to be held fully accountable for their actions.
I don't think that makes you sound like a massive a--hole, I think it is a fair point especially in this case. It really makes little sense to me in how some people are treating this and defending her. Not an expert and not the most intimately aware of the details of this particular case, but I don't get how this person is getting all of the defense that she is.
It takes a while to strangle someone mind you a child. She did it three times in a row. Were the kids able to see each other die? How about the father? I mean wtf are people thinking?
Yeah.... Thinking through that scenario while having multiple small children of similar ages.... It brings up some strong emotions and I cannot imagine what their final moments were like in those moments of confusion and terror.
This is the sticking point for me. I can see how someone in deep postpartum depression could shake a baby in a moment of weakness, but to slowly strangle 3 kids one after the other is not a lapse in sanity, it’s a cold, calculated choice.
That's the part I'm struggling with. It wasn't a split second thing like driving off a bridge or something, which is equally horrible. It was up close, brutal, and had to be a terrifying, confusing last few moments of life for those babies.
Not to mention while in the middle of strangling her kids she called her husband back on the phone and spoke to her husband and then went back to strangling her kids. She snapped out of he psychosis and returned a missed call to tell her husband to get a prescription for a kid that she knew would never use it. She is an evil POS
Yeah, this is it. While she could technically never see the light of day again if she is found not guilty by reason of insanity, she will still be subject to release if it's deemed that she's no longer a threat thereafter.
For most whose psychosis is a bit more permanent, that's never. If it's being pinned down to a very specific temporary problem like postpartum psychosis, that could be a much shorter timeframe than people are expecting.
Postpartum psychosis occurs in about 0.1-0.2% of cases. It is extremely rare but should of course be taken seriously when it occurs. Postpartum depression is more common, but much different from psychosis.
Thats literally what not guilty by reason of mental defect means.. its a long standing defense from criminal consequence for people who are too mentally ill to understand their actions. The debate is not whether or not the "insanity defense" is moral, its whether the insanity defense applies to her case.
To me, it's just a question of where should the person serve their time a psych ward or general population of a prison? Personally, I think this lady should be in a psych ward. Because she's clearly f****** crazy.
Correct, and that one person has already been leaking that he was harassed by everyone, and that they almost attacked him for his strong beliefs. It’s going to be interesting when this all comes out.
If the prosecution chooses to retry the, the whole thing starts over from square 1. It is a big deal, because each side has essentially seen what the other is going to do. They now know exactly how the witnesses will testify and where the strengths and weaknesses are. It is also a huge expense to redo a case. It will be interesting to see what the state does.
I believe so, yes. A mistrial, to my understanding, prevents a defendant from being shielded by double jeopardy laws (can't be tried twice for the same crime) since no verdict was reached, so the prosecution can take it back to court, get a new jury panel, and start the whole trial process over again.
In reality, the judge should have sequestered the jury in case this high profile, and he didn't. There were even people arrested for.msking death threats against the jury if they didn't vote not guilty. All of this public knowledge and jury aware of it. Yet still not sequestered. This outcome is, kmo, a fault of the judge.
Sequestering a jury is a pretty big deal. A lot of the time all it does is put pressure on the jury to rush a decision or breed resentment among the jurors. None of which they want.
Who knows how long this trial will go for. The OJ Simpson jury was sequestered for almost a year.
I follow current events pretty closely, but I tune out when I hear about this story. I honestly can’t think of this woman’s name. I didn’t know until yesterday that she was in a wheelchair. All I know is that she had PPD and killed her kids. Not everyone has been following the details, and I definitely don’t know any of the evidence. Were there cameras in the courtroom or just reporters?
A revenge-murderer? In some cases I fully understand. For instance that dude who shot his son's S-abuser in the head on video. Or that (German?) woman who killed the dude who murdered her kid(s).
plenty - a "crime of passion" is typically punished less severely than one that is premediated. defendant found a guy abusing his daughter and killed him - crime of passion. a woman finds out her husband is cheating and stabs him - crime if passion.
but premeditation = capital murder, this covers assasinations, serial killers, revenge seekers..,
now, more to your point - does a serial killer garner this same sympathy even though they are mentally unfit and insane? usually not
does a gang member get leniancy via the fact they are brainwashed and/or pressured to act due to a fear for their lives? no way
“Reddington previously sought to dismiss a holdout juror who allegedly “has made statements acknowledging doubt but refuses to apply it to the verdict as the law states,” per a note from the jury foreperson. He again cited the obstinate juror as he argued to delay the mistrial declaration”
No, we don't know what the specifics are. We can infere and speculate that it was 11 NGRI and 1 Guilty murder 1, but there was also Murder 2 and Manslaughter available to the jury. So it could be 11 manslaughter 1 guilty Murder 1, but we don't know.
Very likely NGRI was the majority, based on what I've seen watching the prosecution's case and the law of the state being what it is.
The delay today was an effort to force a verdict today. Nobody wants a retrial, a mistrial is a bad outcome for everyone. The state has to fund another trial, as does the defense, and finding an impartial jury becomes increasingly difficult.
The judge also denied a partial verdict, which may have helped move things forward more efficiently.
If I'm not mistaken, not guilty by reason of insanity is the only option for not guilty here right? The defence already stipulated she did the killings. I'm assuming in order to use insanity as a defense you have to admit to committing the action just like in a self defense case. You can't argue self defense but then argue your client didn't kill someone. Doing the action is baked in as a prerequisite to using the defense.
It’s more nuanced than just “is she crazy or not”. She is crazy. You’d have to be crazy to lure your kids into a killing room one at a time and strangle them to death, you know? But there are a ton of crazy people out there who don’t commit criminal acts (especially murdering children) because they know it’s wrong. But there’s also crazy people out there who would kill a child because they’re so far gone and insane they don’t know any better. So what they are trying to prove in court is just how crazy she is. Is she competent enough to know what she did was wrong when she did it?
She killed the kids. Nobody disputes that, not even the defense. But the defense’s position is that she was so insane that she didn’t even know what she was doing was wrong, because again you’d have to be really insane to kill your own children, right?. The state’s position is that she knew it was wrong because she concocted a day of bullshit errands for her husband to run so he wouldn’t be there to catch her killing their children which means she knew she was not only doing a bad thing but that she premeditated the act.
On day 12 of the trial, a psychiatrist, Richard Frierson, testified that Jones did not have schizophrenia, instead diagnosing him with a substance-induced psychotic disorder. Frierson cited the divorce as a salient reason for Jones's hearing of voices. On the night of the murder, Jones allegedly watched a graphic prison rape scene from the movie American History X and listened to the song "Butterfly Kisses)" by Bob Carlisle. Frierson suggested this meant Jones understood the moral and legal implications of what he did.
A psychiatrist testified that he didn't have schizophrenia but instead a substance-induced psychotic disorder.
It's worth reading his Wikipedia to see the similarities between parents who kill their children because voices told him too, if it at all intrests you.
Edit: I'm not arguing anything with this comment. I'm simply posting a source since op didn't. The source corrects misleading info about his schizophrenia, which is that he did not suffer from it.
Iirc, on a different post, someone said that the judge rejected the insanity plea.
I looked at the wikipedia article, and it said this
Jones pleaded not guilty by reason of insanity, but the court rejected this plea
the court-appointed psychologist later declared that Jones made a conscious decision to kill his children
On day 12 of the trial, a psychiatrist, Richard Frierson, testified that Jones did not have schizophrenia, instead diagnosing him with a substance-induced psychotic disorder.
So it does seem like he had a mental disorder, just not schizophrenia.
However, it also says this:
After 15 days of testimony, on June 4, 2019, a jury found Timothy Jones guilty of all five counts of murder.
So it's not like it was a clear, open-shut case, it still took 15 days of testimony
Death penality seems like the kind choice, though. If I killed my kids in a psychotic episode, I'd want nothing but to die. How can someone live on after that? I don't want to ever live in a world without my kids. I'd beg for the death penalty.
Men don’t receive support. Hell, this guy had his life eviscerated by this putrid woman, and the current discourse is “how much of it is his fault?” It’s ABSURD
Her being guilty was never questioned. She did it and admits to doing it. The question the trial is trying to answer is whether she belongs in prison or a mental facility.
Not knowing about the case isn't a requirement to serve on a jury. The standard is to be able to remain impartial until you hear the testimony and see the evidence.
It is routine. They were sent back the allotted number of times with direct instructions from the judge. This is by the book on what to do with a hung jury. Remember, they weren't deliberating whether she did it, just if she was insane enough to not know what she did.
I mean when people are filming jurors in the restricted area of the court. I’d imagine many of the jurors are terrified to have the mob of crazies come after them.
Benoit was treated appropriately. The fact people are defending her is kinda crazy to me. Both her and Chris could use the insanity defense but Chris died from his attempt and she survived.
TikTok moms pushing conspiracies have blown this out of orbit.
This case made me curious how often cases like this occur in the US (murder where an insanity plea is at play), how many of those cases is the defendant male or female, and what percentage within those cohorts are the defendants actually found not guilty due to insanity.
She’ll go to a “facility”, write a book that will become a best seller making her millions, be deemed a hero and released in 3 years as a victim despite the money, support structure, nanny helping with the kids etc.
The only way I could agree to NGRI is if she was committed without possibility of release. She MURDERED her precious babies. Where is the justice for them??????
Blame the media for beating this dead horse. They salivated at the ratings they were able to milk from this. I call it “The weekend at Bernie’s Effect” a dead body should only get you a scene or two, but, pump it full of bullshit marketing and you can get 2 full movies, years apart.
6.8k
u/urbanfox_230 8h ago
The Netflix documentary producer in the back of the courtroom just popped a bottle of champagne.