[Lilly]

Originally Posted by blazey

Funnily enough the jury don't just sit down and think, yes she's obviously guilty, all agreed? and that's the end of it. They have to talk about everything they have seen in court and decide what offence the person is actually guilty of. Obviously she killed the baby but they have to decide whether the evidence suggests she is deemed insane or whether the reasons were enough for them to see why she might have done it. Depression for a start is very common and could easily change the entire perspective of a case like that. It's easy enough to say it's easy to send someone down when you are just reading the newspaper but I think anyone with any sense knows that court is nothing like what the newspapers make it out to be, and it's far more complex. I think it'd be disgusting if sound minded people could sentence someone to a lifetime in prison based on their own view point instead of deliberating over the evidence with the other members of the jury in case they missed something of relevance and considering it from every angle, and even more so if capital punishment was still an option. Newspapers simply don't give enough detail to really make a decent judgement like that in my opinion.

You're right, Blazey.

Newspapers don't give us all the evidence and they portray stories to make us think what they want us to think.

This woman did an evil thing...was she mentally ill? I think she must be but they don't answer that question, do they?

There is no excuse for what she did but if the balance of her mind was disturbed it might go some way to explaining her actions.