Date: September 2nd, 2026 1:01 AM Author: Live from Plymouth! (Prestige Feuds)
You can tell they didn't watch the trial at all. Yeah in two non lawyer non educated pundits opinions the insanity plea shouldn't exist and if you lose your mind and commit a crime you should be burned at the stake? OK buddy. This is turning back the clock 400 years. Yeah let's just forget the legal process and administer the King's Justice.
Date: September 2nd, 2026 1:45 AM Author: Live from Plymouth! (Prestige Feuds)
I just think there's reasonably doubt and the Commonwealth did not prove that she understood her actions or could control them. She was by all accounts a nice, normal person who snapped. It could happen to anyone. We have no idea why people go insane. I don't think this was a situation at all where she didn't feel like being a mom anymore or the pressure of motherhood just got to her. I think she had a brain bug that activated 4 months after giving birth and she reached out to psychiatric professionals and they did a horrible job at understanding her case. I think they didn't listen to her or grasp the situation. The pills made her worse. I think we've all known somebody who went on meds and it made them worse.
The prosecution completely goofed in their opening statements and failed to prove several major pillars of their original case. I think it should have been bifurcated from the beginning. The prosecution only had two cudgels they wielded over and over. Cruelty and premeditation. They had no answers for her mental state. They got blown out by a lot of witness testimony. You're either mad as hell and ignored the evidence or if you paid attention to the trial, you know there's reasonable doubt.