Vessel said:
ErnestEndeavor said:
Vessel said:
ErnestEndeavor said:
If she ends up winning on this insanity claim it will because the evidence supports it.
There is no evidence for insanity in any instance other than we have to believe the words of the person we are supposed to believe is insane. Talk about a logical conundrum. The best evidence of her insanity is murdering her 3 kids, but that would preclude sending any murderer to jail.
She never heard voices before the murders and she hasn't heard voices since. She was never "insane." She plotted the murders and methodically implemented her plan. Straight to jail.
Even the prosecution experts aren't agreeing with you. You aren't watching the trial at all. You are getting a pre-determined narrative from social media influencers. The state's own witnesses testified to mental illness. The state's last expert agreed there was evidence of an acutely psychotic episode but ended up rejecting the theory preferring an alternative explanation. The prosecution has all but abandoned the methodical plot to fake mental illness and the fake suicide attempt narrative.
Correct, I don't need to. Obviously shrinks are going to say mental illness is real and psychosis is possible. What they need is the everyday man on the stand saying "yeah it all sounds like bs." Because it is bs. The "evidence" of an acutely psychotic mental episode is her claim to hear voices and then the murder of her children. That's it. At least he has the intelligence to reject the theory because it's obviously absurd.
I understand she will likely be deemed not guilty by reason of insanity. But logically, there is no limiting principle here. Why Lindsay Clancy and not any other mass murderer? Why can't any killer claim to have heard voices at the time of the murders? How do we know if they are telling the truth?
These are things that you and other people focused on the little details of the trial can't reconcile.
Incarcerated felons use hearing voices incessantly for secondary gain.
Individually, mental health is a convenient form of self-deception permitting the murderer, rapist, child molester, what have you, to avoid that fact.
On a societal level that has eschewed God and morality, and free will, mental health is another convenient explanation.
Throw in nonjudgementalism (e.g., avoiding moral judgment, no culture is better than another, etc.) and you have the perfect storm for mental illness as
the sole explanation.
Consider the following words from noted psychiatrist Anthony Malcolm Daniels, aka Theodore Dalrymple, in
Life at the Bottom:Quote:
That criminals often shift the locus of responsibility for their acts elsewhere is illustrated by some of the expressions they use most frequently in their consultations with me. Describing, for example, their habitual loss of temper, which leads them to assault whomever displeases them sufficiently, they say, "My head goes," or "My head just went."
What exactly do they mean by this? They mean that they consider themselves to suffer from a form of epilepsy or other cerebral pathology whose only manifestation is involuntary rage, of which it is the doctor's duty to cure them. Quite often they put me on warning that unless I find the cure for their behavior, or at least prescribe the drugs they demand, they are going to kill or maim someone. The responsibility when they do so will be mine, not theirs, for I knew what they were going to do yet failed to prevent it. So their putative illness has not only explained and therefore absolved them from their past misconduct, but it has exonerated them in advance from all future misconduct.
Moreover, by warning me of their intention to carry out further assaults, they have set themselves up to be victims rather than perpetrators. They told the authorities (me) what they were going to do, and yet the authorities (I, again) did nothing; and so when they return to prison after committing a further horrible crime, they will feel aggrieved that "the system," represented by me, has once again let them down.
But were I to take the opposite tack and suggest preventive detention until they could control their temper, they would be outraged at the injustice of it.
