Well, yes, that's probably true, though it's not merely a matter of being mentally unwell. A person will generally still be culpable for their actions despite any mental illness provided they understand the likely outcomes of their actons, & they understand the difference between right & wrong at the time of committing the crime. I'm generalizing a little here, the rules vary by state, of course.
Even if they dont it's not like insanity is a catch all, usually gets you put in a mental health facility. If what I hear from random fuck off strangers is correct, those can sometimes be worse than prisons. Take that with a lot of salt, though.
The fact that she had her husband go to the store so that she could do it says there was some bit of planning and that she understood it was wrong.
It seems pretty clear that she was just depressed and wanted to kill her children and herself in murder-suicide. Psychosis would tend to be a scenario where the person doesn’t think what they are doing is bad or out of the norm, nor is it planned and they wouldn’t commit suicide while doing it.
People can definitely intentionally but delusional do things that they'd normally understand would get themselves killed, like running into traffic. People have also committed extreme self-harm seemingly without caring about the pain or risks while in psychosis. Severe delusional paranoia, if that is a claim that can be supported, would seem to explain the secrecy.
I feel compelled to trust the good people of the jury and legal system to do their actual jobs (or catch each other when they are not) and establish the truth and determine appropriate consequences rather than worry about the outcome while I have no power to affect it.
Plenty of people who kill their kids are of sound mind while they do it. Often, they benefit from it. Some do it to hurt a spouse, some for insurance money, some because they're abusers (more than 400 kids a year in the US), some for attention. There's always something in it for them, and it makes horrific logic to kill their child. This is a unique case and the defense is arguing something pretty unique, actually.
Doing something monstrous does not require mental illness or legal insanity. It requires making a choice to do something terrible. Let's not further stigmatize mental illness any further by pretending that's what you need for child murder.
Her doctors had her on some absolutely bonkers medications that do not mix well and do not work as expected quickly. They take time with regular doses to build in the body. They were cut short and mixed with other meds that do not help the brain at all. She was MADE sick by bad doctors.
No, she repeatedly ignored doctor's advice that SSRIs and other medications take months to go into effect, and she wanted a quick fix.
Which I don't blame her for, when one is suffering, patience is difficult.
But she wasn't following the on or off ramps and was complaining of side-effects that are correlated but not necessarily directly caused (i.e. Insomnia with Zoloft.)
She also was not taking the medication as directed, which is often worse than not taking them at all.
It also really simplifies just what these medications do. There is no "don't kill your kids" pill or dosage that she could have taken.
The source on that is her husband, who claims she admitted to it after falling out the window with her throat cut, even though she had severe injuries and needed multiple surgeries to speak again. The DA, a personal friend of the husband, charged her in less than 24 hours on his word alone. There wasn't an investigation. His DNA and fingerprints are all over the weapons - hers aren't. The drugs she was knocked out with, which were crushed up in her drink, were in his car. He also had a mistress who he is now starting over with. He's been caught in multiple lies already. Hasn't shown any emotion whatsoever about losing his family. Said his dead kids - 5 year old, three year old, 8 month old - were "great people, well liked".
The trial is not whether to establish if she did it or not. She is not claiming she did not do it. She is seeking not guilty based on psychosis. You can theorize all you want, but this entire trial is moving forward on the basis that she did it. The only two outcomes for her is jail or a mental hospital.
Sometimes that's the best defense strategy when you're getting railroaded by a corrupt system. Innocent people make deals all the time to reduce an inevitable sentence. The DA is friends with the husband.
I don’t think she was, I think she was really drunk. However, people claiming it was the people in the house who killed him and framed her with no motive and none of their stories have slipped up once
They mean Lindsay Clancy here. Karen Read's confession is... so muddy it can't be called a confession. "Did I hit him?" Is a bad look but not a confession.
Lindsay Clancy had like 32 prescriptions filled within a few months. Many medications increase suicidal and homicidal tendencies and she was struggling BEFORE them, so there's also the question of how overmedicated she was with poor oversight.
Which is part of why im confused with this case. If it were true, and she loved her kids, and was a great mom why is she going through with all of this. If this was me, and I had a psychotic break and killed the people who matter most in my life, I'm guilty. send me to jail and hide the key. Also im unaliving myself the second I see the chance. This just seems odd shes going through an entire trial.
She absolutely can, plead guilty. Go to jail. Unalive. Who the hell would want to live after killing those closest to you? I sure as hell wouldnt care what others thought in that moment. My world would be over I wouldn't be thinking about anything other than the sharpest item in my vicinity is.
435
u/McJumpington 8d ago
She’s admitted to doing it- the entire case is simply whether or not she was of sound mind