Not guilty by reason of insanity?
I never really agreed with the whole not guilty by reason of insanity thing. I mean, either you’re guilty, or you’re not, it’s as simple as that. You still did the crime. Now suck it up, call yourself nutty if you want, and take your lumps as they come. And this here case is a perfect example of why I don’t agree with it. A mother drowns her 5 kids in a bathtub, then says she was insane. I followed this story closely when it was developing 5 years ago, though I couldn’t very well be blogging about it then. Whether she snapped, lost her mind, or whatever it is you wanna call it or not, the point is moot in the end. She still killed all 5 of her children. And the only difference in the case was that her husband didn’t testify. Personally, I’d of had him testify anyway if I was the prosecuter. She’d of probably been found guilty, then. Ah well, no one’s perfect. Some people just so happen to be farther from perfect than others. Sorry, mad mommy, but you’re on the wrong end of the perfect spectrum.
Just stopped by to check out your link you left me. I agree with you on the whole who cares if you’re insane deal. I mean, come on-you are OBVIOUSLY insane because you just killed someone! I laughed when I read your commentary about mad mommy being on the wrong end of the perfect spectrum. Call it like it is, cowboy!
Check ya later,
Stac
Here’s one for common sense. As I said once before on here, I love it when people agree with me.