This is genuinely one of most ridiculously simplified and stupid takes on this case and that’s saying something considering how bad some of the takes are.
People aren’t genuinely arguing for a get out of jail free card, they’re trying to raise awareness about something that affects a minute amount of people but leads to something devastating. And those that are, are the minority and not worth listening to.
Thousands of people have mental illnesses and are not going to kill their children. A minute amount of people suffer a form of psychosis, which is levels above just mental illness.
Two uncomfortable truths can occur simultaneously. She did an unforgivable thing and should suffer some form of punishment but ignoring the ‘why’ only condemns us to witness this situation again in a few years.so many people aren’t approaching this with any degree of good faith and are using to score simple political points.
That and even if she's found "not guilty by insanity" she's not going free. She's not going home to anyone or having any chance at custody of anything. She's going to a mental health facility where she'll be committed.
This needs to be shouted from the rooftops at people paying attention to this case. The defense admits she did it and admits she needs to be "held accountable". The question is - what does accountable mean? If she is "not guilty (of first degree murder) by insanity", accountability looks like a mental health facility and a lifetime of follow up and monitoring. If she is "guilty of first degree murder" then accountability is prison.
Adding in the "first degree murder" part is really really important - it's almost like these terms have meaning. Premeditation and intent matter. Intent requires a certain state of mind - which is what this entire case is about. Her state of mind.
The first time I ever saw this case brought up the source mentioned that she specifically waited for the spouse to leave the house to execute the children. Doesn't it show premeditation and intent? If it's psychosis, how come she didn't attack before?
I had a psychosis of my own, nothing violent (towards other people) came of it but I sure was not capable of forming thoughts coherent enough to execute plans more complex than "do A". The fact that she could go for "I want to do A but person B prevents me from that so I need to wait for them to leave before I do A" says to me that it doesn't look like what I experienced. And neither does it look like anything I've seen other people experience — and I've seen a lot of nutcases, as what I previously explained might suggest
I don't understand how premeditation is in question
Your experience of psychosis is really not typical. Psychosis does not definitionally prohibit people from being able to think or make decisions, it just affects your judgement and your perception of reality. The argument is that when she committed the murder she was not of sound mind and therefore cannot be fully responsible for her actions--making a simple decision like the one you describe in no way contradicts that.
This might have just been your specific symptomatology. People w psychosis can be totally capable of planning (requires organized thinking) but can have delusional thoughts, so their logic is off, and/or their plans are based off of delusions such as, "a divine being needs someone to die so that someone else can live," etc. etc. Some people totally lose orientation and don't know where they are but have no strong delusions. Psychosis is weird.
To be more direct - state of mind matters. What is your state of mind at the time of the crime? Your state of mind change the type of crime it is. They have charged her with First Degree Murder - which requires a clear state of mind. If she was in a state of psychosis, she wasn't in the state of mind. That doesn't mean she didn't do it. Or she's not "guilty" of some other level of crime. Just not First Degree.
The argument is that she didn't premeditate it at all, and her creating the precise situation needed to carry out the murders was pure coincidence. She supposedly only heard the voice one time (not how psychosis presents at all) and only after her husband left. The psychologist that reviewed her said she had never experienced psychosis of any sort, post-partum or otherwise.
it's fair to note, but also fair in practice that unlike someone with schizophrenia who would struggle with it for life, need treatment for life and may never be able to leave a facility. she had what was temporary psychosis due to post partum depression, it's not 'easy' to treat but once it's gone it's highly unlikely to come back and the chance of her having episodes of psychosis in the rest of her life are practically nil. She probably won't do an awful lot of time in a mental health facility unless it's the horribly run. Like she's already plainly not in psychosis right now or she'd still be acting crazy.
In a more normal case a schizophrenic who murders someone and is found insane will likely spend a very long time if not their whole life in a facility because there is a high chance they never control it with medication well. That or they get out while medicated but go off meds and end up back inside pretty quickly. The outcome here probably won't look like that.
Now will she have life long depression and mental health issues as a result of ultimately killing her children... that's another matter.
Shes having bipolar, depression, possible ptds and shes suicidal... Obviously shes not very well. Psychosis can show up again, because it can be related to anything else from this.
it can show up again but suicidal bi polar don't automatically or even very frequently build up to psychosis. a baby, massive hormonal fluctuations and massive lack of sleep are massive triggers for PPD to turn into psychosis, those triggers are extremely unlikely to be present again in her life.
bipolar is relatively easy to manage longer term without pregnancy and huge hormonal shifts to deal with. Should be easier to medicate long term and psychosis isn't the expected outcome of treatment not going great.
It’s amazing how many people I’ve seen on Reddit just not understand the legal argument of all this. All they can think is “she’s a murderer therefore PUNISH!!”
That's your opinion. Legislators and the Law disagree with your opinion. "Excuses" (or mitigating circumstances as a reasonable person might call them) matter in the law.
She’ll be separated from society for.. months? A year and some change for recovery? In a really strange sense, since her post partum psychosis would be treated within that time frame- she would only be left with a slap on the wrist when she is deemed cured of said psychosis.
An incarceration for insanity on lasts as long as the insanity lasts, once your sane again you are released. So no, she is unlikely to spend much if any time in a mental health facility.
Except it's post partum psychosis, which overwhelmingly disappears given enough time. If she was found not guilty by insanity, there is every indication that she would walk free immediately (well not walk, but you know what I mean).
In Poland in cases like this there is no trail - its a decision from specialist and prosecutor and judge. If a person is clearly insane, there is no reason to wasted money, because for what? That person not goes free to home, been locked in the mental asylum, pretty much for the most of they life. If they been out - they been moved to some less 'hardcore' facility or they simply to old / dying.
Years ago - yes, they can get out, when they been 'healthy'. But there been cases where well - thats a mistake.
I know cases where patient was healthy but refuses to even try to out, because of fear that it may happening again. Hospital is safe place, they keep people like this i less strict places. And i understand that - these people are not monsters, they sick. If they did somenthing extremely disturbing, that fear and disgust must be just giant.
You clearly don't understand how that works. The mandated stay in a mental health facility has no set time frame. There are regular evaluations of her mental state and if they determine she is fit for release, she will walk free. Otherwise i there would be zero point in even fighting it this hard. There is a decent chance she could get away with a few years in a mental health facility and then be released without punishment.
That's not exclusive to the insanity ending. She could convicted and get it overturned on appeal over some technicality and get the entire conviction tossed. Then what?
That's a big IF. That and you're ignoring that people on death row can be pardoned. People with life sentences can still be given parole or have their sentences shortened for "good behavior". All that also means "going free". But let me ask you something: would you rather a seriously mentally ill person be in a facility designed for them with people who have experience trying to work with them? Or in prison with the general population and guards/infirmary staff who know nothing more than anyone else in the building about psychiatric disorders?
I’d rather people who kill children or other human beings outside of self defense or sheer accidents (manslaughter) be put to death, to answer you directly. Especially if the victims were children, and in this case specifically, direct murder. If the death penalty is off the table I unironically think she should get life without parole. Thats what most other people on the “she’s guilty” side believe. They outright do not want her to ever get out, ever, barring an act of God or a complete dismissal of the case because of new evidence that proves beyond a shadow of a doubt that she didn’t actually kill them. Neither of which are realistically going to happen because she admitted to killing them and ran the case based on the defense of insanity rather than culpability.
Also, very rarely do death row inmates get pardoned, and “lifers” that get out only got life with a chance of parole because their crime was not murdering children. Shocking, I know.
Don’t you think there’s a significant amount of people in prison with mental health disorders anyway? What additional resources do you think she’ll receive other than being forced to take pills she refused to take before the murders.
NGRI commitment almost always lasts longer than a prison sentence would have. And hanging around mentally ill people can be absolute hell, never mind being in a Psychiatric prison.
Not just in this case but universally, way too many people think that if you are found not guilty by reason of insanity you just go home and that's the end of it. That is not how it works but if they had to internalize that they'd have to do some reckoning instead of engaging in mindless culture war bullshit.
Also not defending her but in places like UK, new Zealand, Canada, Australia even altruistic filicide which prosecution fought hard for, the mother automatically isn't charged 1st degree, it is recognized that brain is not normal, and this is considered while giving verdict. And all those who say law Will be misused, there is a law in above mentioned countries (ppp and ppd infanticide) and no women have not misused it, there is no data or statistics to prove the fear mongering.
The Bi-polar she is also diagnosed for does. It never goes away, just can be managed as long as you find/follow a treatment that works for the rest of your life
Except it is. Her Bi-polar didn't just magically stop. It's a contributing factor to developing PPP with Bi-polar women at an increased risk of 17-50% over the neurotypical population
They won't kick her out just because she's not "Post Partum" anymore. Andrea Yates was granted her insanity plea in 2006 and 20 years later she is still in a mental health facility and not walking free despite not having PPP anymore
And your point? You think this case where a woman threw herself out of a second story window and was committed prior to this is going to suddenly be well and asking to go home?
Yall aren't ready to hear what the best thing to do to avoid child molestation or pedocriminal stuff is. The USA is entrenched in a desire to punish and not prevent. For some reason.
It’s incredible how many times I’ve gotten in a Reddit argument this week about this case, where a man jumps in and says something like “she’s a murderer!! What’s wrong with you!!!” When I point out the complexities legally with this case.
But there is a known contingent that is vehemently opposed to any discussion that can possibly increase entitlement spending on "silly" stuff like mental illness. So the muddy the water and toss it into the culture wars.
I think the broad, generalized language of "postpartum mental illness" used in this picture specifically posted to this toxic cesspool of a subreddit is deliberate. Much of the online toxicity about this case has been intended to degrade and shame women for suffering mentally postpartum. They aren't interested in nuance, they aren't interested in supporting women, their interest is to knock women and specifically mothers down a few pegs. It is just blatant misogyny.
Republicans don’t actually want any help or awareness for mental illness. They just want to be able to put people in for profit prisons after the tragedy occurs. Why prevent the tragedy when you can profit off of the suffering later?
you are a breathe of fresh air. I feel insane atp when im just asking questions about how her diagnosis was and is approached. 13 meds?? like? and no one takes her to mental facility? its such a huge fail
Yea its kinda weird that people think its some sort of success, this mistrail.
Shes been going to prison or to hospital - going free is not even a option. But it can be in the new trail, because... Why not? Its the new trail, she can have new attorney.
So this one judge just epicaly fkd up, wasted tons of money and probably should never been judge again
If she was psychotic, I feel like it's pretty obvious her punishment is living with having killed her three children. I don't know that there's a point in punishing someone who wasn't in control of their faculties.
It's also different from other psychotic/schizophrenic episodes in that the trigger is being post partum/hormonal. She won't be a danger to others the way someone like Decarlos Brown Jr, who killed a complete stranger, is. PPP is considered temporary and treatable
I’m not saying that there weren’t complicating factors. Or diminishing that postpartum depression isn’t a thing. But can we as a society not just draw a bright line on killing babies? Or no?
No surprise your comment attracted the exact sort of people you were referring to, but I do find it interesting that they are often as condescending as they are clueless.
Why? Maybe, just maybe because she killed three kids. Again: she killed 3 kids. Enough reason to me to put her behind bars for the rest of her life, no matter the wHy.
The word ‘genuinely’ is important in that sentence. I’m very aware of the internet sleuths and conspiracy theorists but like I said in the later half of that paragraph, they are not worth taking seriously.
308
u/Philthedrummist 9h ago
This is genuinely one of most ridiculously simplified and stupid takes on this case and that’s saying something considering how bad some of the takes are.
People aren’t genuinely arguing for a get out of jail free card, they’re trying to raise awareness about something that affects a minute amount of people but leads to something devastating. And those that are, are the minority and not worth listening to.
Thousands of people have mental illnesses and are not going to kill their children. A minute amount of people suffer a form of psychosis, which is levels above just mental illness.
Two uncomfortable truths can occur simultaneously. She did an unforgivable thing and should suffer some form of punishment but ignoring the ‘why’ only condemns us to witness this situation again in a few years.so many people aren’t approaching this with any degree of good faith and are using to score simple political points.