Anonymous #1 11w

Part of the problem I think is that most Americans don’t even understand what that word means. Even if the jury returns a NGRI verdict (which is a coin-flip coming down to jury determinations of expert credibility), she is still “guilty” in layman terms in that she killed the kids. NGRI, like self-defense, is an affirmative defense. “Yes, I did it, but ….” I wish people could just understand that much.

11

Anonymous OP 11w

I mean, it just seems like a terrible precedent to set that severe depressive cognitive states can be utilized to rationally attain NGRI.

4

Anonymous #1 11w

It’s existing precedent lol, major depressive episodes especially post partum can cause psychosis. She did it but GBRI is a valid defense

2

Anonymous #1 11w

1,000% it is. At the very least though, she’ll still be incapacitated via mental hospital for a pretty lengthy period of time. But yes, the US has absolutely gone too far with NGRI, and it’s caused some needless reoffending. Ass backwards country that’s charmin soft on violent crime and white-collar crime and laser focused on drug crime.

0

Anonymous masterdebater6769 11w

“Can.” When pleading an affirmative defense, the defense have to prove that it “did.” They will be trying to overcome evidence that the vast majority of PPP episodes happen within weeks after birth, and she was at 8 months. NGRI is a viable legal path. But, we have a troubling reoffending pattern with these cases that suggests that the legislature needs to address what is arguably becoming a loophole and endangering the public.

1

Anonymous #1 11w

I thought she was having a psychotic episode, not depression

1