That’s interesting, though it still might be a struggle for the jury to “work through”, so to speak. Maybe she did it before - drugging, duct tape over the mouth (not nose), etc. and her past experience leads her to believe the baby wouldn’t die. Of course, that would not negate your point about a reasonable person. A reasonable person could certainly expect that this would cause death.
A reasonable person could certainly expect that this would cause death.
- - - - - -
Exactly. Which is also why the defense played the not competent card again last week. By the fact she is competent to stand trial, she must therefore be competent to know that her actions could have caused death.
And I agree, that she probably did it before (at least the drugging) and nothing happened so she kept doing it.
I remember hearing about a case several years ago, where a woman went on a date to a drive in movie and put her kids in the trunk of the car (with snacks) while she was on her date and they suffocated. She got murder one.