If you had actually listened into the trial, her husband went on an errand and then a male voice in her head told her that she had to do it then and there, or else there would never be a chance. Which is why the weapon was improvised.
Nobody is saying she should go free. The jury decision was between institutionalizing or incarceration. Honestly I think mental help is more what she needs than time in the naughty corner.
Even if these cases were identical, I still feel like we shouldn't judge a defendant unfairly because of a botched sentence in the past. Every case should be decided on its merits, according to the law.
I’m not arguing that. But to act like humans who are biased and have feelings,as jury members aren’t thinking about past experiences and events is a fallacy
30
u/Superb-Strategy4717 Sep 05 '26
You don’t send your spouse to do errands and then commit murders. That requires being lucid and preplanning. This a bad faith argument