Definitely killed her kids. Allegedly insane enough to not be able to be found guilty (which would still wind up with her locked up). And it was the state’s burden to prove beyond a reasonable doubt that she was sane enough to be found guilty. That’s what the jury needed to deliberate and come to a consensus on, but didn’t quite.
Admits to killing her kids. Argues she was not legally responsible for her actions by reason of inanity. As is typical, the insanity was super temporary and she should be free and we should just be ok with letting her go to parks and teach kids if she wants becuase she’s not guilty.
The only reasonable result here is she is removed from normal society. If she’s criminally responsible doesn’t strike me as relevant.
Not being found guilty for it doesn’t mean it didn’t happen.
If you’re at a carnival where one of the games is throwing axes at a board. And somehow a child suddenly teleported in front of the board after throwing the axe, you might not be guilty for it. But you still killed the kid.
Allegedly killed her kids
Definitely killed her kids. Allegedly insane enough to not be able to be found guilty (which would still wind up with her locked up). And it was the state’s burden to prove beyond a reasonable doubt that she was sane enough to be found guilty. That’s what the jury needed to deliberate and come to a consensus on, but didn’t quite.
Admits to killing her kids. Argues she was not legally responsible for her actions by reason of inanity. As is typical, the insanity was super temporary and she should be free and we should just be ok with letting her go to parks and teach kids if she wants becuase she’s not guilty.
The only reasonable result here is she is removed from normal society. If she’s criminally responsible doesn’t strike me as relevant.
She admitted to it, the question is whether she is criminally responsible or if her postpartum psychosis constitutes mitigating circumstances.
She may have lied when she ‘admitted it’. She hasn’t been found guilty in a court of law. It’s still only ‘allegedly’.
She admitted it in court.
Not being found guilty for it doesn’t mean it didn’t happen.
If you’re at a carnival where one of the games is throwing axes at a board. And somehow a child suddenly teleported in front of the board after throwing the axe, you might not be guilty for it. But you still killed the kid.
Lmao, why wouldn’t anyone admit something that will destroy their life?
Because there is undeniable evidence and you’re lawyer tells you the only way out of this is to claim you were neglected.