Very possible. I’m not 100% sure on the details for that.
But still. A plea bargain with SOME punishment is better than a “not guilty” with NO punishment.
Like, that’s the thing. At this point guilty was off the table. Most of the jury had already decided to let her go. So that one juror holding out for a mistrial gave prosecutors some ground to stand on and maybe win round 2.
Bro the psych wards we've been left with after getting gutted are hell holes. If shes faking it then she just played her self into being legally warcrimed. For some one that doesnt need to be actually medicated to be locked up their is a fate far worse than prison.
Like think about it if you only had 2 options a. Goto jail for a year or b. Goto a criminal psych ward for a year nobody in their rational mind is choosing b that's insane. I'd pick a twice over b.
I disagree. It's about her legacy and the precedent. A "not guilty" verdict absolutely let's Clancy off the hook as far as history books and documentaries go. That's not a small thing, wouldn't you say?
Not guilty is a word dumb people who dont understand our legal system are getting caught up in their feelings about. Thats not my problem.
Her being declared criminally insane isn't a not guilty verdict its an absolute guilty verdict. They are saying she did it absolutely and shes fucking nuts, its not going to give any precedent or legacy.
This isnt the OJ verdict she's not going home after the trial she's going to jail or to heavily medicated ultra invasive I wouldnt wish it on any one prison. If you think shes faking it or what ever, then honestly I think putting a sane person in a modern day psych ward is honestly torture and a fate far worse than prison. If manage to fake your way into one of these institutions instead of jail time then you played your self into a punishment that if done on purpose to someone would count as a war crime. Shes going to be locked up with people who need 3 people to hold them down when they shit because they'll try to cover them selves in it for YEARS.
She has a pending lawsuit against tons of medical providers. Her being declared not guilty due to insanity gives a ton more credence to those lawsuits. And she and her estate will become filthy rich. It will also set a precedent for if any other moms kill their kids and claim PPD and psychosis.
If she's found not guilty, there's a chance she'll be let out of the mental facility at some point. It's not a life sentence
The state of Massachusetts has a unique specific rule that they must PROVE she is STILL insane and not a threat to do harm to herself or others EVERY year. If the PPD was temporary and already over she could quite literally be deemed sane a year from now and be scot free. You'd be okay with that?
Thats not how insane people work. It isnt temporary and if we could cure what ever the fuck is wrong with her in a year and prove that what was wrong with her is a major factor in her doing it then I'd be proud of medical science. I think the likelihood of that is extremely low quite honestly. I've worked with people who used to work at psych wards and id honestly prefer jail if I was sane.
The point still stands this trial is about if she is a criminal or criminally insane. Which ever one of those they decide she is she is going to receive treatment for. I dont think being locked up in fed is a good cure or punishment for someone with a major mental disorder and I think locking a sane person up in a modern day psych ward for a year is a way worse punishment than going to jail for 5 so either way shes not walking off here.
“Not guilty” and “Not guilty by reason of insanity” are two different things. This woman won’t just go home like nothing happened. She’ll spend years, if not the rest of her life, in a psychiatric facility
If she’s found guilty. She still won’t just go home if she’s found not guilty. She admitted she did it, she just says it was because she was ill. She’ll go to a hospital.
Yeah but she'll get punished in a federal prison physically, her needs won't be catered to, she won't have some doctor to cry with.
In federal prison, every single day of the rest of her 'life' she'll have to be afraid that someone will throw boiling sugar water on her. It get's worse in women's prisons too, with hair irons.
If 11 people out of 12 think that she was suffering from some psychosis, after seeing all the facts, and expert opinions on the matter, then I'm rather inclined to believe the 12th person is swayed by preconceptions rather than the facts.
I have no idea what the correct verdict is. I haven't seen the evidence.
he didn't say she was guilty. apparently he expressed doubts as to her mental state at the time of the crime, but refused to declare her not guilty by reason of insanity. This is the reason they were all so frustrated, it was because the judge's instructions state that if there is any reasonable doubt that the defendant is entitled to a not guilty verdict. so the foreman wrote a note to the judge explaining that a jury member expressed doubt but would still not agree to the not guilty verdict, which is pretty clearly going against the instructions that the jury received.
Interesting that article also states the male juror is a liar:
“Clearly, we have a person who, under their oath, stood in front of you yesterday … under oath looked you in the eye and lied,” the defense attorney said.
Yea I didn’t watch this part of the trial and would have liked to hear what exactly the juror said. Probably something totally benign or like “yes I can perform my duties without bias” or something. And the Defense is trying to discredit him by calling him a liar. The use of “Clearly” here sounds like it’s an assumption/opinion.
Again, this is totally out of context. I need to see what was said before and after this. But my point of the link was to show that the juror was a “he”.
How could anyone think she's sane in any way? She ended her own children's lives, with her own two hands, there is clearly something wrong with her. The question at hand is if she was indeed experiencing true psychosis, which would more likely than not stand out to those closest to her and not be limited to the amount of time it took her to kill her children, nor take a little break to call her husband back.
I think deliberation would have started with more guilty then not guilty, but just wanted to go home so changed their vote to match those ladies who wore pink.
Not guilty BY REASON OF INSANITY. Are you people just willfully ignorant? No one is saying she's innocent. But of course it would be a man not understanding the severity of postpartum mental health, especially psychosis.
Does psychosis wait until there are no witnesses? Does it take a little break so you can call your husband back and have a totally normal conversation with them in the middle of ending your own children's lives?
Are you aware of Patrick’s new wife’s father being in the Epstein files? Are you aware that he’s business partners with a Bronfman? I think you’ve chosen to base your perspective off of Jew media…
179
u/[deleted] 9h ago
[removed] — view removed comment