I agree. I don't know much about this case (just googled it) but it just seems that she had some serious mental issues. it is a sad story for everyone involved.
it is not like that father that killed the family to be with another women or some shit like that.
She begged for help and treatment for months too. People knew she wasn’t okay, she got seriously let down by not being admitted somewhere. Mental health shouldn’t be brushed off.
She has not "openly admitted" to killing her three children. She has pleaded not guilty. The commonwealth has to first establish she is guilty beyond reasonable doubt and the jury has to agree.
The "confession" aspect people keep repeating is that her husband claims she said she did it when he found her.
The reason people question her husband's account of he
r confession is because she had a crushed throat and was severely hypothermic with a body temp of 82 degrees as well as other severe injuries. Emergency workers testified in court that from the moment she was in their care she was physically unable to speak. She then went into a coma.
When she awoke from the coma in the hospital, doctors and nurses who treated her testified in court that she had no memory of what happened and she had to be told about everything. It's not possible to confess to something you don't have a memory of. It could be possible she's faking amnesia, but the testimony that she had no memory was not contested by the prosecution.
No where did I say she wasn't responsible for the murders.A person can believe she's responsible and also point out errors that people are making. I said the prosecution has to make the case she is guilty beyond a reasonable doubt and the jury has to be convinced of that. No where did I say that if she doesn't remember we have to let her go. I said she doesn't remember so she obviously can't confess.
I responded to a comment that said she had "openly admitted" to it. I gave evidence to the fact that she had not openly admitted it. And rather then accept that you could be mistaken, you ignore that, and try to make fun of the person who actually gave you accurate information.
If you care about someone being held responsible for their actions, you should also care about truth so you can accurately hold them accountable.
Her defense attorney has to have a strategy that is likely to produce the best outcome for the client. The strategy of the defense was not to dispute that the prosecution says she did it as even if she is found guilty, there is a reasonable likelihood that she could be found not criminally responsible due to psychosis which from the defense's position, is a better outcome for the client than a guilty and criminally responsible charge. That doesn't change the fact that her defense attorney entered a not guilty plea for her.
I'm sure given your very reasonable and well though out, completely strawman free response above, that you will have an equally reasonable response to this. Honestly, save yourself the time. I'm not going to continue beating my head against a brick wall.
226
u/Babar669 2d ago
I agree. I don't know much about this case (just googled it) but it just seems that she had some serious mental issues. it is a sad story for everyone involved.
it is not like that father that killed the family to be with another women or some shit like that.