[Mr. K]

For anyone who never studied a LOGIC course, it is impossible to prove a negative.

[Gay State Conservative]

This isn't really about state law. Yes,as a lifelong resident of the Gay State I can confirm that 80% of the laws on the books in this state are in violation of the US Constitution. But this trial is basically about the utter depravity of the majority...the *large* majority...of the state's residents.

It's really that simple.

[Opinionated Blowhard]

The law of the insanity defense is a rabbit hole that one can spend a lot of time in. Each state implements it differently. Hence, the idea that the Lindsay Clancy trial is going to create a national wave of women killing their kids and getting off is probably overblown because, as this article points out, the Massachusetts law is unique. The Massachusetts law is pro-defense but I don’t think you can put the enactment of these laws into the standard “liberal vs. conservative” box. States like New York, Washington and Wisconsin have some of the most “pro-prosecution” insanity laws on the books. Some “conservative” Southern states have the “guilty but mentally ill rule” which favors the defense. Its a patchwork.

[V_TWIN]

“Yet, because of the state’s burden to essentially prove a negative, 11 out of 12 jurors decided that those concrete facts still weren’t enough to totally disprove the possibility that a chaotic psychiatric condition was operating beneath the surface; they decided that a reasonable doubt remained.”

According to multiple female jurors none of that even came in to play.

Out of their own mouths they admitted this was their opportunity to “make a statement”.

THAT is jury misconduct as far as I’m concerned.

[Presbyterian Reporter]

“””Yet, because of the state’s burden to essentially prove a negative, 11 out of 12 jurors decided that those concrete facts still weren’t enough to totally disprove the possibility that a chaotic psychiatric condition was operating beneath the surface; they decided that a reasonable doubt remained.””””

---

Would 11 out of 12 jurors in a Conservative State come to the same conclusion as the 11 jurors from a very Leftist Massachusetts did?

I believe most States have similar laws regarding Not Guilty by Reason of Insanity/Mental Defect. If Clancy were tried in a in a different state would the result have been 11 for Not Guilty and 1 for Guilty?

[bobbo666]

Let’s not put too much confidence in anything done by Ma lawmakers or citizens. After all, they repeatedly sent a drunk murderer to the Senate.

Yeah, you can be OK with a bastid — “well, he is OUR bastid!” But, really?

[Honorary Serb]

She was a trained and practicing nurse. But she killed her children!

Guilty!!!