Not Guilty by reason of Insanity READ OP FIRST

average_runner

bubblypop wrote: »

Fathers have been found insane in similar circumstances

Haven't seen any in a long time. Please share

Lollipops23

average_runner wrote: »

If Alan Hawe from Cavan was found not guilty by reason of insanity, wonder how the responses would be then!!!
It is a female v male thing!

She presented at a hospital weeks before the murder, pleading for help.

Hawe didn't- he just wanted to murder his kids, for his own selfish reasons.]

I'm glad she's going to get the help she needs- for everyone's safety.

Jequ0n

[Deleted User] wrote: »

Everyones cv there open in fron of you, eh?

Or do "intelligent" people just always happen to exactly agree with you?

I do not need a CV. If someone is unable/ unwilling to even try to see a situation from a different angle and just makes broad and emotionally loaded statements they show themselves for what they are.

Sometimes it’s not about being right or wrong but what you can learn when you listen to others

namloc1980

CptMonkey wrote: »

Why do the juries deliberate when the judge tells them the verdict to arrive at? What’s the point in it?

The jury had an impossible job. They were basically told what verdict to arrive at by the judge. They did come back at one point and said could the consider the verdict separately for the 3 kids - I suspect they had some debate on the murder of the eldest child in particular who she picked up from school after killing the other two and she had plenty of time to consider her actions.

average_runner

average_runner wrote: »

Haven't seen any in a long time. Please share

That's a good thing!

Can't post links, I'm in the phone but there was a case in killiney, John Carroll was the father, murdered one son with a lump hammer

JP Liz V1

spookwoman wrote: »

To smother / stangle a person takes time and to do that 3 times takes a special kind of monster.
Seeking help knowing something was wrong and then regretting and wanting to turn back time to me means she knows the difference between what's right and what's wrong and should have been charged with murder.

Did I read she knew she did wrong when killing the first eldest child but didn't know what to tell the siblings so killed them too, imho she knew what she was doing, that poor father, an awful tragedy, those 3 angels, cherish your kids, life in an asylum is that what she got so?

Dempo1

A deeply tragic and sad story but I have to say some of the reporting in some print media especially the indo was just horrific and I wondered did people really need to know some of the graphic details, I was actually shocked the Judge did not restrict reporting. I'm very much for freedom of the press but have to say sharing graphic details unnecessary in this case.

JP Liz V1

namloc1980 wrote: »

The jury had an impossible job. They were basically told what verdict to arrive at by the judge. They did come back at one point and said could the consider the verdict separately for the 3 kids - I suspect they had some debate on the murder of the eldest child in particular who she picked up from school after killing the other two and she had plenty of time to consider her actions.

Apologies I must have read wrong so, each child deserved a separate case and trial then

Jerry Attrick

namloc1980 wrote: »

The jury had an impossible job. They were basically told what verdict to arrive at by the judge. They did come back at one point and said could the consider the verdict separately for the 3 kids - I suspect they had some debate on the murder of the eldest child in particular who she picked up from school after killing the other two and she had plenty of time to consider her actions.

Having also tried to poison them the night before. My heartfelt commiserations to the unfortunate husband - I assume that he can now have the marriage annulled - no doubt some well-paid 'experts' will be able to confirm that she was insane when she agreed to marry him - and hopefully he'll then find happiness with someone new.

Jequ0n

Jequ0n wrote: »

I do not need a CV.


If someone is unable/ unwilling to even try to see a situation from a different angle and just makes broad and emotionally loaded statements they show themselves for what they are.

Your first sentence, the post preceding, the second sentence

It's, as you say yourself, beautiful.

"Everyone should be as considered and see the other perspective like i do and if they dont ... theyre stupid"

Be great if we *could* discuss this from all sides, yep. Without one side closing down this topic with derogatory remarks to the opposing views who seem to be held not to know whats good for them, arguing against their betters.

Jerry Attrick

Jerry Attrick wrote: »

Having also tried to poison them the night before. My heartfelt commiserations to the unfortunate husband - I assume that he can now have the marriage annulled - no doubt some well-paid 'experts' will be able to confirm that she was insane when she agreed to marry him - and hopefully he'll then find happiness with someone new.

What difference does it make it he can annul his marriage? That's weird.

Jequ0n

[Deleted User] wrote: »

Your first sentence, the post preceding, the second sentence

It's, as you say yourself, beautiful.

"Everyone should be as considered and see the other perspective like i do and if they dont ... theyre stupid"

Be great if we *could* discuss this from all sides, yep. Without one side closing down this topic with derogatory remarks to the opposing views who seem to be held not to know whats good for them, arguing against their betters.

Whatever this gibberish is supposed to mean ...

Go on, bring the matches, but try not to set yourself on fire.

murphthesmurf

[Deleted User] wrote: »

I see this going the usual route

"The court has ruled and technically its correct and experts have said it so anyone who has an issue with it is either ignorant or a monster"

That wont help the next three kids and bear in mind before that high horse runs off with you on it that the person commenting may have very relevant experience in being raised by parents where the latter's diagnosis and treatment came before the child's wellbeing.

This ☝
A lot of people don't seem to understand the concept of a forum. Or indeed an opinion. Whenever a person posts an opinion that someone doesn't like they are immediately met with the usual replies "what makes you an expert" etc.
One poster in this thread posted his opinion and that his father tried to strangle him as a child. The replies he got were "keyboard warrior", "he's emotional" , "what's your expert opinion".
Having lived through an experience like that I'd be more inclined to listen to him than the poisonous mob on here.

The Raging Bile Duct

What's the weird fetish people have with having to put the word experts in inverted commas?

Jequ0n

Jequ0n wrote: »

Whatever this gibberish is supposed to mean ...

Go on, bring the matches, but try not to set yourself on fire.

Great that you're so far above the discourse to wade in sneering at whomever doesn't agree with you, certainly you've shown that broad perspective you bemoaned lacking in others since.

kilkenny31

My opinion on this is she should have been found guilty of murder. I get she was depressed but to say she had no idea what she was doing is wrong.

She killed the kids. Wrote a note to apologise ( knew she did wrong). Then when she woke up she told cops she regretted what she done. Also it says her husband and all her family had no idea what she was going through. I think you could be living with someone depressed and not see it. But I think if she truly was insane someone would have noticed.

I get she was depressed but this sets a dangerous precedent. Anyone that kills someone isn't in the right frame of mind.

quickbeam

CptMonkey wrote: »

Why do the juries deliberate when the judge tells them the verdict to arrive at? What’s the point in it?

Why does it even go to trial when the Prosecutors push for a not-guilty verdict.

Jerry Attrick

The Raging Bile Duct wrote: »

What's the weird fetish people have with having to put the word experts in inverted commas?

Whot sort of 'people' would they be?

The Raging Bile Duct

Jerry Attrick wrote: »

Whot sort of 'people' would they be?

You seem to be one from looking at previous posts.

Faugheen

This thread is going swimmingly well and isn't led by emotion whatsoever.

Comparisons to Alan Hawe are nonsense. He was a controlling d!ck and took his wife and family so they would never find out about his great fall from grace as an upstanding member of the community.

Anyone who can't see the clear differences between these two cases is blind or trying to push an agenda. It's a horrific case and if more details come to light I will happily change my mind but right now I don't see any other verdict but this one.

Jequ0n

[Deleted User] wrote: »

Great that you're so far above the discourse to wade in sneering at whomever doesn't agree with you, certainly you've shown that broad perspective you bemoaned lacking in others since.

Of course I am above it because I can keep emotions out of the equation.
Are you posting just to bemoan the court’s decision or to engage in a discussion that focuses on mental health and possible preventative steps?

Jerry Attrick

The Raging Bile Duct wrote: »

You seem to be one from looking at previous posts.

Ah so what you're actually asking is why I used flying commas around the word 'expert' in my comment.

The answer is because I regard such 'experts' with much the same contempt as I have for anti-vaxxers.

Bear in mind that similar 'experts' concluded that she had recovered, a couple of years before she killed those unfortunate children.

For all their professed 'expertise' they called it very wrong - and three innocent lives were lost. Yet you appear to believe that I'm the one with the 'wierd fetish'.

Strumms

TheValeyard wrote: »

I do wonder what broke inside her. What triggered this horrific sequence of events.

I dont wish death upon her as others have said. I'd say her own mind will be her prison the rest of her life.

God love that father who has lost everything he ever cared for, I have such sympathy for him.

RIP to those little souls.

Me too ...though we’ll have a Q of grief from the mental health excusers...

Zero thought for three kids who have lost their lives, a father who lost everything, extended family.... should be locked up and left locked up for eternity.

KingCong

Reading about this case over the last few days I thought it was fairly clear that she would be found not guilty by reason of insanity.

It reminds me though of another case a few years ago where a father(Sanjeev Chada) killed his two sons (see IT article here). The two cases have a lot of similarities, though the father in this one didn't seem to have a history of previous mental illness. I'm not sure I understand why he was found guilty and got 2 life sentences (though is serving them in the Central Mental Hospital) while in very similar circumstances Deirdre Morley is found not guilty due to insanity and could potentially be released in the not too distant future when/if she's deemed well enough by her psychiatrists.

Curse These Metal Hands

Faugheen wrote: »

Comparisons to Alan Hawe are nonsense. He was a controlling d!ck and took his wife and family so they would never find out about his great fall from grace as an upstanding member of the community.

Thankfully people have spent their entire careers in psychiatry disagree with you. What evidence do you have that he was sane? 10 years of counselling usually means something is up.

If you're going to quote the school rumour, this has been clarified by the school to be false.

Much more convenient to just say "evil" I suppose.

yaknowski

Alan Hawe was a pox, mental or not and so is this woman.

I'd assume that she'll top herself if/when her mental health issues are resolved and the gravity of her actions start to bear down on her. Hopefully she is mentally disturbed enough that she never has to fully comprehend or relive the horror.

The last thoughts those children took to the grave was their mother was doing that to them. It's beyond horrific.

How can you be so self-absorbed that you believe your children are better off dead than being without you, when in these cases, the opposite is most definitely true.

Munstergirl854

The eldest child was 9.He would have put up a fight and been well aware what was happening, the poor thing.

She collected him from school, bought him a roll and at home she asked him to play a game with her.She said they would both put tape on their mouths and try and speak,then moving to put the bag over their heads as part of this game.

I'm of sound mind and I couldn't plan to such a degree.

Very difficult on a jury of men and women who had little option in verdict delivered.
I'm sure they struggled to decide on the eldest child.

Jerry Attrick

KingCong wrote: »

Reading about this case over the last few days I thought it was fairly clear that she would be found not guilty by reason of insanity.

It reminds me though of another case a few years ago where a father(Sanjeev Chada) killed his two sons (see IT article here). The two cases have a lot of similarities, though the father in this one didn't seem to have a history of previous mental illness. I'm not sure I understand why he was found guilty and got 2 life sentences (though is serving them in the Central Mental Hospital) while in very similar circumstances Deirdre Morley is found not guilty due to insanity and could potentially be released in the not too distant future when/if she's deemed well enough by her psychiatrists.

Perhaps his lawyers didn't employ the right 'experts'.

Strumms

Curse These Metal Hands wrote: »

Thankfully people have spent their entire careers in psychiatry disagree with you. What evidence do you have that he was sane? 10 years of counselling usually means something is up.

If you're going to quote the school rumour, this has been clarified by the school to be false.

Much more convenient to just say "evil" I suppose.

Illness should not enable people to live a life devoid of responsibility and outcomes and consequences when they do things that are wrong, illegal and desperately despicable...

Immortal Starlight

Tipsy McSwagger wrote: »

Thousands of young men have killed themselves in this country because they could not bring themselves to talk to anyone.

Themselves but not 3 innocent children.

yosser hughes

CrabRevolution wrote: »

I don't know why you're referring to trials, cases and the law considering neither my post nor the one I replied to were talking about the law.

I was talking about the media response. Alan Hawe was made out to be evil incarnate, yet this case is all "the poor craytur". The obvious distinction is that Hawe was a man, so made a useful story for people to push "toxic masculinity" stories, which isn't possible here.

You used the word 'case' in your post. But I accept you are not engaging with law or facts, whereas I am.
We may be at cross purposes.
Your point that she is being treated differently because she is a woman may have some merit, but it's purely conjecture.

tobefrank321

Unfortunately outcomes like this give encouragement to others who are definitely not insane to plead insanity.

Beggars belief why she did this. Was it a sudden bout of madness or were there signs there of something not being right in which case she should have been sectioned earlier.

Deleted User

Deleted User wrote: »

I see this going the usual route

"The court has ruled and technically its correct and experts have said it so anyone who has an issue with it is either ignorant or a monster"

That wont help the next three kids and bear in mind before that high horse runs off with you on it that the person commenting may have very relevant experience in being raised by parents where the latter's diagnosis and treatment came before the child's wellbeing.

That's what Tusla is for.

Rezident

Such a tragedy. She clearly has serious issues and I agree that she may have little or no control over some of her dark thoughts, but I do not agree that she had no control over her actions.



Many people have dark thoughts, as many of you know already, but we do not have to choose to act upon them. We have free will. Take every thought captive.


Was there any information on what condition she has? Borderline? Paranoia? EUPD? These issues are seemingly becoming more common these days, and we really need to understand them better to recognise the signs in advance. The warning signs are there if we have eyes to see them.

BloodBath

gibgodsman wrote: »

I don't think most her understand the law, she was never going to be found guilty because simply put she is insane, and she has been found insane, she will spend the rest of her life in a mental institution where she belongs, Jail isn't suitable for people like her

She could never have been found guilty of murder due to the fact anyone with a brain could tell she was bat**** crazy

Most murderers are bat **** crazy. They don't get a free pass.

The Raging Bile Duct wrote: »

Why do you think she's going to spend the rest of her time in a mental institution? In her testimony she talked of being put onto new medication after she was arrested that seems to have stop her psychosis completely. Medication that they were able to proscribe her once they knew the full extent of her mental health issues - something she had been keeping hidden from everyone - including her psychiatrist - because of the shame she felt.

Yet she doesn't mind living with the shame of killing her 3 kids. Give me a break. This woman should spend the rest of her life locked up. Mental illness is not an excuse to murder 3 children.

dmakc

Bit shocked at the amount defending her. At what point does a crime become so heinous that the perpetrator earns sympathy.

Samsonsmasher

A lot of criminal acts are committed by mentally ill people - people with schizophrenia, bipolar disorder, anti social personality disorder, anxiety, depression etc. They can be clinical or subclinical.

Insanity is a legal term.

The person must at the time the crime was committed have been unable to distinguish right from wrong.

This unfortunately lady could not so she is guilty but insane.

That is my understanding and that is why this was the outcome.

It's understandable that people are angry but this woman was sick at the time she killed her children. Hopefully she can recover and return to normal life.

Necro

quickbeam wrote: »

Why does it even go to trial when the Prosecutors push for a not-guilty verdict.

I'd agree, it does seem that all were in agreement that it was insanity so it is a bit confusing that it required a jury trial.

The fact they had to ask about whether they could consider seperate verdicts as well and were refused is all a bit confusing and you wonder what actual purpose a jury in this case actually served.

Maybe someone with legal knowledge can explain it?

Curse These Metal Hands

Strumms wrote: »

Illness should not enable people to live a life devoid of responsibility and outcomes and consequences when they do things that are wrong, illegal and desperately despicable...

I agree, it's not exactly getting off scot free though. There will be a sentence and in any moments of improved mental health the realisation of their actions.

My hearts went out to anyone on the Jury. I found the details most upsetting.

Strumms

Tipsy McSwagger wrote: »

Thousands of young men have killed themselves in this country because they could not bring themselves to talk to anyone.

Suicide is not a crime.

Murder certainly is. Murdering three young, innocent children is as heinous and evil as it gets.

If you are mentally ill, unstable etc.. if you kill someone it’s still murder. You should still be punished, held accountable and society should be protected from you...

shesty

Rezident wrote: »

Such a tragedy. She clearly has serious issues and I agree that she may have little or no control over some of her dark thoughts, but I do not agree that she had no control over her actions.



Many people have dark thoughts, as many of you know already, but we do not have to choose to act upon them. We have free will. Take every thought captive.


Was there any information on what condition she has? Borderline? Paranoia? EUPD? These issues are seemingly becoming more common these days, and we really need to understand them better to recognise the signs in advance. The warning signs are there if we have eyes to see them.

A form of bipolar schizophrenia was what was said by one psychologist yesterday I think.
She wanted to kill herself too.Not in her right mind.

Munstergirl854

Rezident wrote: »

Such a tragedy. She clearly has serious issues and I agree that she may have little or no control over some of her dark thoughts, but I do not agree that she had no control over her actions.



Many people have dark thoughts, as many of you know already, but we do not have to choose to act upon them. We have free will. Take every thought captive.



Was there any information on what condition she has? Borderline? Paranoia? EUPD? These issues are seemingly becoming more common these days, and we really need to understand them better to recognise the signs in advance. The warning signs are there if we have eyes to see them.

Diagnosed as bi-polar.I think it was after a child patients death which seemingly triggered something.

BloodBath

BloodBath wrote: »

Most murderers are bat **** crazy.

No they are not. Why would you think that?

Samsonsmasher

BloodBath wrote: »

Most murderers are bat **** crazy. They don't get a free pass.



Yet she doesn't mind living with the shame of killing her 3 kids. Give me a break. This woman should spend the rest of her life locked up. Mental illness is not an excuse to murder 3 children.

Mental illness and insanity are different.

Insanity means not knowing right from wrong ay the time of the crime.

Lots of people are mentally ill and many people are never diagnosed but they know right from wrong so never come before the courts.

This lady was assessed by a psychiatrist and it was determined she had lost touch with reality believing by killing her children she was doing good. She was the definition of insane.

Ted Bundy had anti social personality disorder but he knew right from wrong so he was not committed to hospital but condemned to death.

That's the difference.

Samsonsmasher

Strumms wrote: »

Suicide is not a crime.

Murder certainly is. Murdering three young, innocent children is as heinous and evil as it gets.

If you are mentally ill, unstable etc.. if you kill someone it’s still murder. You should still be punished, held accountable and society should be protected from you...

If you are insane you don't know right from wrong.

Mental illness is not the same as insanity.

It's the reason why one person gets committed for murder and another gets sent to prison for life.

Calahonda52

bubblypop wrote: »

Your opinion is that all the experts, the jury and the courts are wrong.

NO, the poster disagrees with their judgement, which is different

Calahonda52

Calahonda52 wrote: »

NO, the poster disagrees with their judgement, which is different

the poster disagrees with them because he believes they are wrong.

Jerry Attrick

Samsonsmasher wrote: »

This lady was assessed by a psychiatrist and it was determined she had lost touch with reality believing by killing her children she was doing good. She was the definition of insane.

Decent of her to leave a note warning her husband not to go upstairs. Surely if she thought that she was doing good, she'd have been looking for his approval.

Mental health is a serious problem and I'm glad it's getting more attention these days.

That said, this person is a child killer, and shouldn't be allowed out of psychiatric care. Always the possibility of killing someone else.

Plus, rightly or wrongly, she will be targeted both inside and out of any prison/facility. Child killers and pedophiles will always be targets, mental health issues or not. Just reality.