J

[J @px562038]

@KinG_PeroXide It’s frustrating but kinda how basketball works if we think about it. The best ever by a country mile is Steph. And at his very best is shooting around 46% from 3
sometimes there is no answer. You’re telling me an elite shooter has never missed a wide open look?

[J @px562038]

@ForArt @MarioFgras99 @dr_avery007 @Vicar0fChrist Ya I agree, law sucks sometimes and the lack of accountability to reshape some statutory frameworks is concerning

[J @px562038]

@GreyMan1547970 @MarioFgras99 @dr_avery007 @Vicar0fChrist Was that presented at trial? Did it meet the standard of beyond a reasonable doubt? In your opinion it certainly does and I respect you for sharing it, but our thoughts on evidence outside the courtroom are distinct from how that evidence is presented during a trial

[J @px562038]

@adamfrancisco_ No, if anyone agrees with number two, you don’t understand how the country built a system to avoid playing judge jury executioner

[J @px562038]

@Phantom2Phlyer I get confused by what supporting her means. Separating what she did vs this trial because the jury focused on the issue about the affirmative defense.

She killed her kids man, no support for that. But did her condition actually prove beyond a reasonable doubt? We can’t say

[J @px562038]

@layneashley222 Hmmmm almost like Clancy was the one on trial and Patrick wasn’t. People want proof for the actual defendant and not a third party? Shocker!

[J @px562038]

@TheRemnantView If this were asked to a jury…..grounds for an immediate mistrial. Golden Rule

[J @px562038]

@MarioFgras99 @dr_avery007 @Vicar0fChrist Do you know how the law works? The issue presented to the jury was not if she killed them. It was regarding the affirmative defense of insanity. Hope you know how jury instructions and burdens actually work

[J @px562038]

@MsMelChen The bigger exposure is less about this but more about how minimally informed people are about how the law works. You think she should be guilty no matter what? Not how the law works. People don’t even know that information not presented in the literal trial cannot be considered

[J @px562038]

@Kentuckygirl1 Two different stages of litigation. No dispute to what she did. Everything in complaint is deemed admitted unless denied in an answer. Moreover, when they say you didn’t watch the trial, they are saying the issue to the jury was the affirmative defense, not whether she did it

[J @px562038]

@RealJVincent @Thekatchandler She’s guilty of the murder and it’s bad but you have to realize what the actual issue presented to the jury is……it wasn’t murder but rather an affirmative defense of insanity and government keeps the burden under MA state law

Should insanity be a defense? Different issue

[J @px562038]

@Andy6624 @SalVetriDFS They can win the division sooner the more they win earlier