r/BlackPeopleTwitter • u/MGLLN • 21h ago

Could probably hear the “FOH!!” from space

Enable HLS to view with audio, or disable this notification

12.8k Upvotes

91% Upvoted

1.4k comments sorted by

View all comments

23

u/SoulPossum ☑️ 20h ago

Someone who knows more about the case, what exactly were the options for this lady? Would she just walk if they cane back not guilty or would it be a "by way of mental defect" situation where she would just not be in jail? It feels like the more I learn about this the further it ventures into white feminism territory.

159

u/solidwallzofsound 20h ago

It's neither. The question wasn't "did she do it" cuz she admitted she did. The question was "was she sane enough to know it was wrong." The options were a) guilty, in which she would go to prison or b) not guilty by insanity, where she would be placed in a mental institution indefinitely until she is deemed no longer a threat.

There's not an option where she's not punished in some way. Shit, she tried to kill herself already and, probably regardless of if she got out of an institution tomorrow or in 30 years, will probably kill herself the moment she is free.

42

u/Skrrt_2711 19h ago edited 12h ago

To be noted, she will never walk again due to her attempt.

EDIT: some of you have no idea how paralyzed people take a shit. Nobody would willingly want this upon themselves.

-6

u/gibgabberr 10h ago

Which is why most likely, she wasn't intending on injuring herself that badly (since her suicide attempt was so poorly conceived).

-3

u/traparms 16h ago

where she would be placed in a mental institution indefinitely until she is deemed no longer a threat.

Which would likely be not long at all considering this is a temporary insanity defense, so the implication is that she's already not a threat.

8

u/solidwallzofsound 16h ago

Not really, the facility would also have to determine that these episodes would never recur, which would require years of conditioning and medication

-3

u/traparms 16h ago

How could they possibly determine that unless she's postpartum? Massachusetts law also has a minimum of 6 months commitment with an evaluation every year to determine eligibility - requiring years to make a determination if it could happen again or not sounds unfounded and like wishful thinking.

-4

u/DionysianComrade 15h ago

the question was very much did she do it because she never admitted guilt or plead guilty, stop spreading misinformation

•

u/SnooDucks3701 1h ago

This is exactly why the trail should have been bifurcated. He repeated the jury instructions so many times but people just dont understand it. Ive been so frustrated screaming this into the void. 

-5

u/NoConflict3231 17h ago

This entire line of thought is faulty. Who would kill anyone willingly in their right mind?? You can make up whatever you want to fit your needs using this logic

20

u/solidwallzofsound 17h ago

Gang and criminal killings, crimes of passion, even manslaughter are all different from, say, God's Voice randomly shouting in your ear that you have to kill your children. "Right mind" and "unable to distinguish reality" are different settings

8

u/Mec26 16h ago

Many people’s right minds aren’t all right. Or they justify it somehow.

There’s a big difference between ‘that person has something wrong’ and ‘due to psychosis, this person had both no control and no understanding.’

5

u/JadedRoll 15h ago

Right mind in these cases has a very specific legal and clinical definition. (Confusingly, that definition can vary from state to state, as can the entire way these cases are handled).

It's usually a) did they have the capacity to understand what they were doing, and b) did they have the capacity to understand it was wrong.

Two real examples: a schizophrenic man lived with his parents. He went off his medication and became increasingly delusional and paranoid. Eventually he became convinced his parents were taken over by demons and kidnapping and murdering babies in the basement. When they tried to leave one night, he attacked them to stop them from kidnapping a baby. He knew he was attacking them, but he did not understand it was wrong because in his delusions he didn't think they were people.

Second case, a young woman ran away from home where her stepfather had been sexually abusing her for years. She ran into a street and a police officer grabbed her to try and pull her to safety. In her triggered and disassociated state, she thought her stepfather was grabbing her and she fought back. She ended up breaking the cop's leg. She was found guilty except insanity because her severe PTSD made it so in that moment she didn't really have the capacity to know what she was doing, i.e. that the cop was not her stepfather assaulting her.

Now a very valid question is: how do we know? How do we know they aren't making up stories? There are a battery of assessments that give good data, but there will always be a judgment call by a professional evaluator. And the skill and biases of an evaluator will affect the results.

I'm not familiar with all states, but in my state there also specific conditions that are ruled out. GEI can't be argued if the diminished capacity was from a personality disorder or substance abuse/intoxication. It also doesn't count if the symptoms only occur in criminal situations (i.e. seem selective).