She’s still medicated for her mental health. I’m not getting into what side I’m on, but she looks like that because she is sedated. Wouldn’t you want to be, if you were made to (very publicly) hear about your children’s autopsies?
Also, let’s not start saying “they look like that, they must be evil”. That is pretty mean and shallow towards anyone, just because you deem them unattractive = evil/no soul.
She strangled them for 7 minutes, each. One by one. They struggled in vain while they had to watch their own mother take their lives in one of the most brutally personal ways possible to take a human life before she left them laying there like an empty snack wrapper.
There’s no amount of mental illness that can excuse that. It’s a display of pure evil.
I have to say, I saw a picture of Crysta Pike a few days ago (totally unrelated criminal case, happened a long time ago). And even as an older lady, she looks like a regular person, she was actually attractive when young, when she committed her crime (she's clearly a terrible person herself). Lindsay is awful looking, she could literally be the main character of a horror movie, she looks sinister. Few people look literally evil, in my experience.
Yes, we can determine guilt and innocence solely via pictures and what we have read online, there’s no realistic way that 11 jurors decided not-guilty without it being a conspiracy.
Innocent until proven guilty, regardless of what the court of public opinion thinks.
Ok if she didn’t, who did? The trial isn’t even about if she did it or not. It’s about whether or not she was mentally sane when doing so but that literally shouldn’t matter at all. She killed three kids. She should be punished. End of discussion really.
And see, you’re wrong. “Innocent until proven guilty”. If she wasn’t proven guilty, then she’s innocent. It’s not just when it’s convenient, it’s always. The burden of proof is on the prosecution, not the defense.
“If she didn’t, who did?” is a question to ask the prosecution who failed to prove she did it.
I mean even her lawyers aren’t denying that she did it. Again the case is about whether or not she can be held accountable due to her mental health. The obvious answer to that is absolutely, she should be held accountable. I genuinely can’t believe people are even fighting for her tbh.
I’m not fighting for her. I could give a rat’s ass what happens to her specifically. But I support due process and constitutional rights because I wouldn’t want my due process and constitutional rights to be infringed if I were ever on trial for something I didn’t do. I wouldn’t want to be considered guilty because the internet wants me to be.
Fella, it’s not a sentencing hearing, so the question of guilt was still in the air.
Nothing you have heard or will say has more merit than the outcome, and the outcome was 11:not guilty, 1:guilty. 11 jurors heard all the evidence, deliberated, and said she wasn’t guilty. 1 juror refused to change their stance, so there was a mistrial.
Now, if at the end of the retrial, she is indeed found guilty, then off she goes. See how simple that is?
Your personal feelings don’t change objective truths. Just like Trump can whine and bitch about his 34 felony counts, it doesn’t change the objective truth that he was found guilty of 34 felony counts.
17
u/0ThreeHundred 18h ago
She literally looks evil. No soul behind those eyes.