It really is about state law.
Massachusetts law is set up upon a foundation where the burden of proof is not upon the defense as the state believes if the prosecution goes all in, they should be the ones to prove what her mental state was.
“they should be the ones to prove what her mental state was”
How? They provided evidence, to include mental health people who had treated her the day prior to the killings - and the jury rejected it. This was jury nullification of prison for women who murder their kids...
In essence, the argument I’ve encountered on line is “No sane woman would murder her kids, so she must be insane!” If you ask them about MEN who murder their kids, they reply, “Men always murder kids!” FWIW, the statistics show mothers murder young kids as often or MORE than men, while men murder more teens. But facts are not important to liberals, so how do you have a fair trial in a place like Boston or NYC?
I call it the Trump Dilemma - how do you have a worthwhile jury trial where most of the people on the jury are liberals who reject objective truth?
Well,there *is* state law...but there’s also jury nullification.A concept that,when in the hands of the right people,can be a very useful,if not essential,tool.