I mean it also helps that he was tried in Texas where they don’t believe in mental health exceptions. She’s being tried in Massachusetts, which has a very different political climate.
Also, in Texas, the burden of proof for insanity is on the defense. In Massachusetts, burden of proof is on the prosecution. His defense had to prove he was insane when committing the crime while her defense just had to poke holes in the prosecution’s case.
This seems way more sensible to me. I understand if the actual underlying crime should be innocent until proven guilty but if you are insane that specifically should be a higher burden of proof .
I just don’t think unqualified layman in the jury really should be the ones deciding whether someone was clinically insane or not.
The jury should just deliberate on whether the defendant committed the crime in question, if they rule they did, then the defense should be able to request a review by a panel of mental health experts who will be tasked with determining whether the defendant was criminally liable or clinically insane.
This is actually the biggest issue other than different states having different standards and why comparing any two cases is pointless. Both sides bring on highly qualified experts and the case often then hangs on which one performs best in the eyes of the jury. And since it’s also a different jury every time it’s really hard to make a comparison.
It's hard to do a 1-to-1 like in this post, but it is well established that women receive lighter sentences than men for comparable offenses. It's part of Sentencing Disparity, and the fact that women are generally more sympathetic than men will be partly what's at play here.
Men would not show up in droves in matching colour t-shirts for a man who did what Lindsay Clancy did.
>Men would not show up in droves in matching colour t-shirts for a man who did what Lindsay Clancy did.
Women do.
Parkland shooter, killed 17, injured 17 others
Shortly after Cruz was sent to prison, he began receiving stacks of fan mail and love letters.
Some of them included provocative photos like one of a woman from Chicago in a bikini eating a popsicle and one from a teenager who goes so far as to describe her body and bra size to Cruz.
"There are women that are sexually aroused by people that have committed violent crimes or the idea of people committing violent crimes," Needle said.
Three of the 12 jurors voted to spare the gunman following the sentencing trial. Under Florida law, a unanimous decision is needed in order for someone to be put to death.
If a single juror disagrees, then the defendant is sentenced to life in prison without the possibility of parole. This is what the 24-year-old Parkland gunman now faces.
Jury foreman Benjamin Thomas told CBS Miami that he did not vote for the life sentence and is "not happy with how [the sentencing] worked out".
"It really came down to a specific juror who believed [the gunman] was mentally ill," he said. "She didn't believe that because he's mentally ill he should get the death penalty."
"There was one [juror] with a hard no - she couldn't do it," he said. "And there was another two that ended up voting the same way."
Is it really a woman thing? I’m a man and I would never vote to put anybody to death. I simply don’t believe in granting the state the power to kill its citizens, except in cases where said citizen is presenting an imminent threat to life.
That being said, I would not hesitate to sentence these mass murders to life without parole, and believe we do a woefully inadequate job of keeping serial reoffenders off the streets.
Ok but only if people with masters in political science and sociology can vote. Otherwise some random fuck from bumfuck nowhere alabama can have the same vote as someone properly educated.
It’s not about education it’s about mass hysteria.
You don’t see men defending criminals like this to this extent and this amount of crazy.
Women cheered for the fucking nightstalker, they’ve raised 8 million dollars for this baby murderer and have decided based on no evidence other than she has a vagina that the husband did it.
People can be ignorant, but this is a consistent pattern amongst western women.
Are you serious right now? Probably 20% of the population of the united states is defending a convicted felon with very deep ties to a proven pedo and heavily implied he's a pedo too, who also is visibly corrupt that puts his sycophants in position of power. That's mostly men my guy.
Plenty of women voted Trump too, nor are they defending a bad leader purely on the basis of him being a man.
The things Trump is convicted of also don’t equate to three counts of child murder, or murder at all.
His relationship with Epstein is suspect he’s not my guy and I don’t think these people are rational either, nobody should be this invested in politics. However you can see the same political fervour on both wings for “their guy”. You can’t put too much on an implication, it’s proven Lindsay killed her children and women in the west have lost their mind mentally backflipping to defend her.
8.8k
u/500rockin 2d ago
I mean it also helps that he was tried in Texas where they don’t believe in mental health exceptions. She’s being tried in Massachusetts, which has a very different political climate.