Not Guilty by reason of Insanity READ OP FIRST

jmayo

joe40 wrote: »

Did you read the Man's statement. He agrees the verdict probably correct.
If the father of the dead children can accept the verdict then I I don't want anyone thrown of a cliff.

What else is he going to say ?
Fry her?

I can't ever see them together again.

How many guys here would ever ever forgive their partner if they did this?

How could anyone live together in any form of normality with this hanging over them.

Of course there are some here who will probably brand a guy something or other because he would not support his wife. :rolleyes:

JimmyVik

iamwhoiam wrote: »

Have you even read the case ? Other children were very unlikely to have been at risk .

A would you give over.
The woman murdered her own 3 children and then you come on here saying it is unlikely she might have murdered someone elses child.
Get real.

Its the idea that she had any more right to kill her own that disturbs me

As i said, we have some dark and ugly ideas about the rights of parents

raclle

bubblypop wrote: »

But she has been deemed by the court to have been insane at the time.
So why do you think that the experts, the jury and the court is wrong?

DrFrost wrote: »

Yeah, exactly. People can say what they want about "insanity... Should be released when well", but they wouldn't have her living next to them and their families.

And this raises serious questions. What if she kills again? Is she going to be continually deemed as insane. Where's the line drawn?

JimmyVik

jmayo wrote: »

What else is he going to say ?
Fry her?

I can't ever see them together again.

How many guys here would ever ever forgive their partner if they did this?

How could anyone live together in any form of normality with this hanging over them.

Of course there are some here who will probably brand a guy something or other because he would not support his wife. :rolleyes:

You can be 100% sure his mind has been bent and fcuked up by this.
His therapist and priest as well as in-laws probably telling him the only way he will get over it is to "forgive" her.
Even if he does forgive her i doubt he would let another child near her.

JP Liz V1

Bit cynical wrote: »

The judge is only there to advise on law. The jury don't have to accept direction outside of law and could have found the defendant guilty if they wished.

Surely then it was pre meditated murder for the eldest child at least

py2006

Hard to avoid the obvious double standard here.

Very sad that these children will never play with their friends again and grow up to live full lives.

R.I.P

Faugheen

Also, people need to be very careful when they insinuate she could have killed other people's children.

You can't defame the dead, but she's still alive.

Just something that some of the legal experts here should note before they go off like they are.

JimmyVik

JP Liz V1 wrote: »

Surely then it was pre meditated murder for the eldest child at least

Sure she previously had gathered the drugs and tried to kill them the day before.
You cant get more premeditated than that.
Then she had her little murder spot and moved them out of it and upstairs, so she could get the next kid into the murder spot too.

We all know what’s really happened but “insanity” is what will be trotted out. It’s all worked out a dream for her in timing.

Murdered 3 kids, key should be thrown away.

starkid

Lux23 wrote: »

I agree, it is totally disgusting.

you know whats disgusting people having completely distorted realities, many of us who don't share these views. Sanjeev Chada was sentenced to life imprisonment in 2014 were you crying over that? this woman murdered her kids. The fact she may be released is utterly scandalous. If she were a man this wouldn't be happening.

silverharp

jk23 wrote: »

This reminds me of the Chris Benoit case, he was a professional wrestler. Had sustained years of trauma to his head and committed murder suicide of his wife and child.

He has been virtually erased from the company he worked for history and is rightly branded a murderer even though it was found afterwards that his brain was incredibly damaged....

there was a serial killer in the states, I think he used a sniper rifle and shot people from a building, at some stage they looked at his brain and found a huge mass. in a situation like that you kind of drop the moral argument that he was culpable

JimmyVik

Faugheen wrote: »

Also, people need to be very careful when they insinuate she could have killed other people's children.

You can defame the dead, but she's still alive.

Just something that some of the legal experts here should note before they go off like they are.

Here we have a woman who planned and carried out the murder of her 3 children.
And you think that she wasnt capable of murdering a different child too.

SimonTemplar

JP Liz V1 wrote: »

Surely then it was pre meditated murder for the eldest child at least

I don't think 'not guilty by insanity' means the killings were done in a sudden fit of insanity. I think the premeditated part is also covered under the insanity. It is up to the doctors to decide the duration of the insanity.

Faugheen

starkid wrote: »

you know whats disgusting people having completely distorted realities, many of us who don't share these views. Sanjeev Chada was sentenced to life imprisonment in 2014 were you crying over that? this woman murdered her kids. The fact she may be released is utterly scandalous. If she were a man this wouldn't be happening.

Sanjeev Chadha pled guilty to murder.

Seathrun66

JimmyVik wrote: »

Sure she previously had gathered the drugs and tried to kill them the day before.
You cant get more premeditated than that.
Then she had her little murder spot and moved them out of it and upstairs, so she could get the next kid into the murder spot too.

Insanity and premeditation are not incompatible.

Hoboo

JimmyVik wrote: »

A would you give over.
The woman murdered her own 3 children and then you come on here saying it is unlikely she might have murdered someone elses child.
Get real.

The reason she killed them, there's the clue. Now go read the case.

iamwhoiam

JimmyVik wrote: »

A would you give over.
The woman murdered her own 3 children and then you come on here saying it is unlikely she might have murdered someone elses child.
Get real.

Obviously you haven’t read the case .

Faugheen

Faugheen wrote: »

Sanjeev Chadha pled guilty to murder.

I'll give him that much credit at least

JimmyVik

Hoboo wrote: »

The reason she killed them, there's the clue. Now go read the case.

Tell me this.
Would you let her babysit your own kids?

Faugheen

JimmyVik wrote: »

Here we have a woman who planned and carried out the murder of her 3 children.
And you think that she wasnt capable of murdering a different child too.

As I said, do what you wish, but she's still alive and you're going down a very slippery slope here.

starkid

Faugheen wrote: »

Sanjeev Chadha pled guilty to murder.

yeah because of - The psychiatric report which was prepared heard that he suffered from "cognitive dissonance", but that it did not qualify him for a defence under the Insanity Act.

cry over her all you want, views like yours disgust me.

As another poster said Chris Benoit etc springs to mind. You keep trying to defend this by going on about hawe, the other case etc.

This act is indefensible, and i'm sickened that we accept it as a society. On the day of the Cortes sentence as well. Utterly sickened that i live in such a a country.

joe40

joe40 wrote: »

Did you read the Man's statement. He agrees the verdict probably correct.
If the father of the dead children can accept the verdict then I I don't want anyone thrown of a cliff.

Exactly.
All the experts on mental health posting here and the eye for an eye justice seekers need to read the dignified statement by the man most affected by all this.
This thread as usual has descended into farce.
I've read enough, it will only get worse

raclle

raclle wrote: »

And this raises serious questions. What if she kills again? Is she going to be continually deemed as insane. Where's the line drawn?

Yeah, they can never take that risk so she'll (hopefully) never get out. Also, it wouldn't be safe for her on the outside anyway considering the crime she committed.

Larbre34

I do not know how that man could be more broken as a human and yet still be breathing. It is beyond even the remotest comprehension of us all.

I must say however, I'm not sure how it is correct that Deirdre Morley may remain at liberty. The fact remains, she perpetrated the most awful crime against other individuals and irrespective of her illness being the cause, she had the capacity to do that. In my opinion she should be detained in the Central Mental Hospital for an indefinite time, at least until many years of treatment and assessment have taken place.

Faugheen

Faugheen wrote: »

As I said, do what you wish, but she's still alive and you're going down a very slippery slope here.

When her own psychiatrist couldnt spot she was about to kill three kids she had access to i think you're on a hell of a reach here attempting to control what people might speculate fairly about in terms of what she would or could have done

Immortal Starlight

Seathrun66 wrote: »

And therein lies the rub. You don't care.

Most of us do. This poor woman. This poor man. These poor children. Enough suffering, why would you want more?

I said I don’t care about her. I never said I don’t care about the 3 innocent children and their dad. Please stop trying to change my post.

Curse These Metal Hands

starkid wrote: »

cry over her all you want, views like yours disgust me.

As another poster said Chris Benoit etc springs to mind. You keep trying to defend this by going on about hawe, the other case etc.

This act is indefensible, and i'm sickened that we accept it as a society.

That poster only shows sympathy for women in these cases. Completely biased.

Rubberchikken

She, in an extremely bad place, thought she was doing the right thing. I think the verdict was the correct one.
The mental health service in this country is seriously underfunded and could be more consistently run by the HSE if only they had a clue.

Seathrun66

Larbre34 wrote: »

I do not know how that man could be more broken as a human and yet still be breathing. It is beyond even the remotest comprehension of us all.

I must say however, I'm not sure how it is correct that Deirdre Morley may remain at liberty. The fact remains, she perpetrated the most awful crime against other individuals and irrespective of her illness being the cause, she had the capacity to do that. In my opinion she should be detained in the Central Mental Hospital for an indefinite time, at least until many years of treatment and assessment have taken place.

She is not at liberty. She is detained at a psychiatric institution and will remain so for some time. Possibly for a longer duration than had she been sentenced for murder.