Quote:
|
Originally Posted by krwlz
http://www.cnn.com/2006/LAW/07/11/ya....ap/index.html
I read a lot of news, both cnn, and elsewhere, so I've watched this trial for a while.
My only question for this particular discussion (Though to see it move on elsewhere is great too) is how can "Not knowing it was wrong to drown 4 children" count as a defense???
I mean really, in my opinion, that justifies locking her up even more. Psychopaths who serial kill almost never see what they do as wrong. They, for the most part, are completly devoid of a moral compass. And we justifiably lock them up, or execute them.
How can not knowing right from wrong justify as a defense??
Your thoughts?
|
Well the question becomes "do we put her in jail for a specific sentence or in a nuthouse until she's cured?"
If she's found to have not known it was wrong to drown the kids, then she's tossed in the funny farm and they won't let her go until they feel she's no longer insane -- - which can take a long time - even a lifetime.
The real question is why the husband isn't being charged with accessory to murder when he KNEW she was crazy, yet left his kids alone with her anyway.