Women kills infant son, eats parts of him.

[k^M]

the only thing this story needs is the Phelps involvement somehow that her eating the kid was a message from God and this would be the end of days with the 4 horsemen and rain of fire

[Azrayne]

I was wrong, she doesn't have other kids.

But for the sake of argument, I wasn't saying that if she did she should be allowed custody or anything ridiculous. She should be locked up for life, but any other children would at least be able to visit her and have her as part of their life.

[Indiana]

Originally Posted by Vatoreus

Hey, we should also execute just normal crazy people too, I mean, they're nothing but a drain, right? If you can't provide to society in some fashion, you should be put to fucking death. I think the Spartans had it right!

And why stop there. Anyone who is in anyway inconvenient or expensive for society to keep alive should be put down immediatly. Few handicapped people would pass a cost/benefit analysis either.

[Zhaun's_Shade]

Originally Posted by Indiana

And why stop there. Anyone who is in anyway inconvenient or expensive for society to keep alive should be put down immediatly. Few handicapped people would pass a cost/benefit analysis either.

You make that sound like a bad thing.

Originally Posted by Azrayne

I was wrong, she doesn't have other kids.

But for the sake of argument, I wasn't saying that if she did she should be allowed custody or anything ridiculous. She should be locked up for life, but any other children would at least be able to visit her and have her as part of their life.

"Daddy, why is mommy in jail?"
"Because she ate your brother, Little Jimmy."

Yeah, fabulous. Easier just to tell them that mom died or ran away until they're in their 20s or 30s before telling them the truth.

[Chanur]

Originally Posted by schwein

you have any idea how much it cost ?




naah i really had something to add. the reason they dont punish crazy people the same way is because they wouldn't understand why and thus it wouldn't really make any sense. you have to understand the punishment is not a form of revenge. if the person doesn't understand the punishment whats the point. it just becomes revenge at that point.

personally i would have no issue killing her but i dont think it is the "right" thing to do.

It is also to protect society not just to punish someone.

Also the 35k a year is for a regular prisoner. How much more does it cost for an actual hospital?

[chaos]

Originally Posted by Azrayne

I was wrong, she doesn't have other kids.

But for the sake of argument, I wasn't saying that if she did she should be allowed custody or anything ridiculous. She should be locked up for life, but any other children would at least be able to visit her and have her as part of their life.

Are you serious? Are you fucking serious? Holy shit dude... yeah, she should definitely still retain parental rights even though she decapitated and FUCKING ATE her newborn son. Thought processes like this make it embarrassing to be liberal in America.

[chaos]

Originally Posted by Sunder

Let me clear this up for you then. The definition of insanity in TX (where the crime occurred) follows the M'Naghten rule. Now, considering the trial will be in a Texas court room (probably not in Bexar county, but somewhere) you are basically asking 12 Texans to believe that a mother didn't know killing and eating her own kid was wrong and illegal. Good luck with that.

Being from Texas, with the majority of my family still there, I think I have pretty good insight into what the outcome will be. I've lived all over the country, and I still find that people in Texas are the least forgiving about anything criminal. 9 out of 10 Texans don't really give a fuck if she's crazy or not, count on that shit.

[Foozles]

Dumb bitch should have eaten the heart to gain the infants strength and courage

[Etoille]

Originally Posted by Sunder

Let me clear this up for you then. The definition of insanity in TX (where the crime occurred) follows the M'Naghten rule. Now, considering the trial will be in a Texas court room (probably not in Bexar county, but somewhere) you are basically asking 12 Texans to believe that a mother didn't know killing and eating her own kid was wrong and illegal. Good luck with that.

Well thats good to know . Like I said I never opposed it I just wanted proper procedures followed and if it went according to established rule of law I'd be happy with the outcome. (And obviously with no access to westlaw anymore and no familiarity with TX law I would only have a broad understanding of the insanity concept).

Quick question - wasn't (one of) the ladies who made headlines a few years back for drowning her 3 kids b/c of postpartum from TX? If so why do I remember her not getting the dp? Seems to me same logic you listed above in '12 Texans.....' would have been applied.

(Google search) Yup.

Andrea Yates - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

See also, Yates' roomate apparently. Dena Schlosser - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Ok so I wasn't too far off hon. Seems its really not as black and white and again more grey....grey enough that shes had more than 1 trial and was never sentenced to the DP in the first place. Drowning your 5 kids in a bathtub is definitely less offensive than killing your own baby (which if you look at what Schlosser did its actually even closer to the case at hand) and eating it but surely no less heinous a crime - with the same motivation (post partum psychosis) no less.

Like I said I don't have a clear cut 'rule' I follow here - I'd be more like an O'Connor on this issue and take each case as it comes (executing the insane/mentally retarded/kids). I'd need all the facts and medical opinions before I made a judgment.

[Sunder]

Originally Posted by chaos

Being from Texas, with the majority of my family still there, I think I have pretty good insight into what the outcome will be. I've lived all over the country, and I still find that people in Texas are the least forgiving about anything criminal. 9 out of 10 Texans don't really give a fuck if she's crazy or not, count on that shit.

Dude, I live in Texas, you don't have to tell me what we're like.

Originally Posted by Etoille

Well thats good to know . Like I said I never opposed it I just wanted proper procedures followed and if it went according to established rule of law I'd be happy with the outcome. (And obviously with no access to westlaw anymore and no familiarity with TX law I would only have a broad understanding of the insanity concept).

Quick question - wasn't (one of) the ladies who made headlines a few years back for drowning her 3 kids b/c of postpartum from TX? If so why do I remember her not getting the dp? Seems to me same logic you listed above in '12 Texans.....' would have been applied.

(Google search) Yup.

Andrea Yates - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

See also, Yates' roomate apparently. Dena Schlosser - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Ok so I wasn't too far off hon. Seems its really not as black and white and again more grey....grey enough that shes had more than 1 trial and was never sentenced to the DP in the first place. Drowning your 5 kids in a bathtub is definitely less offensive than killing your own baby (which if you look at what Schlosser did its actually even closer to the case at hand) and eating it but surely no less heinous a crime - with the same motivation (post partum psychosis) no less.

Like I said I don't have a clear cut 'rule' I follow here - I'd be more like an O'Connor on this issue and take each case as it comes (executing the insane/mentally retarded/kids). I'd need all the facts and medical opinions before I made a judgment.

Yates was tried in Houston (Harris County). Big difference between there and Bexar County. Texas isn't real big on change of venue motions either, though it does happen on extremely high-profile cases. As this one will likely be very high profile, it has a chance to be moved, but I doubt they will send it to Harris County. It's much more likely to go farther west, where her chances will be even less that a jury won't unanimously vote for death penalty.

[Etoille]

Originally Posted by Sunder

Dude, I live in Texas, you don't have to tell me what we're like.


Yates was tried in Houston (Harris County). Big difference between there and Bexar County. Texas isn't real big on change of venue motions either, though it does happen on extremely high-profile cases. As this one will likely be very high profile, it has a chance to be moved, but I doubt they will send it to Harris County. It's much more likely to go farther west, where her chances will be even less that a jury won't unanimously vote for death penalty.

Whats the formal name of the motion to change venue because of liklihood of extreme prejudice in the appropriate forum? I forgot it but I assume thats what you're talking about.

Where was Schlosser tried?

[Sunder]

Originally Posted by Etoille

Whats the formal name of the motion to change venue because of liklihood of extreme prejudice in the appropriate forum? I forgot it but I assume thats what you're talking about.

Where was Schlosser tried?

Forum Non-Convenience

Also, Schlosser's prosecutors never asked for the death penalty (a requirement by Texas law), so the jury never had the question before them. The only question was "Prison time or Hospital time?" As for your direct question, she was tried in Collin County.

Prosecutors, who are not seeking the death penalty, argue Schlosser knew what she was doing and should be sent to prison for life.

Mother Says God Told Her to Cut Baby - washingtonpost.com

[Lejina Bloodbath]

Originally Posted by schwein

you have any idea how much it cost ?




naah i really had something to add. the reason they dont punish crazy people the same way is because they wouldn't understand why and thus it wouldn't really make any sense. you have to understand the punishment is not a form of revenge. if the person doesn't understand the punishment whats the point. it just becomes revenge at that point.

personally i would have no issue killing her but i dont think it is the "right" thing to do.

That's from the point of view that death penalty is done as punishment (which makes little sense to me : if I'm dead, I sure don't care about it, but if you lock me up for life I'd be quite annoyed and thus probably more punished).

The way I see it, death penalty is done because the individual is a deadly threat to society and the only way to get rid of said threat is to kill the person.

Not saying I agree with death penalty or not, but I always thought it was ass backward as a punishment.

[Eloora]

And that's another thing. Blaming "God" or "the Devil" for your own, or someone else's, hideous and unconscionable actions.

First of all, even children know how to play the blame game. It doesn't take a completely sound mind, or even an adult mind, to understand that, chances are, admitting you did something wrong of your own accord will yield more dire consequences than saying someone "told you to" or "made you" do it. If your older brother's not around, just blame God! If you're smart enough to blame, you're smart enough to know right from wrong.

Secondly, how many times now has God or Satan been used as an excuse for an array of unspeakable crimes? Imagine that we didn't have Christianity shoved in our faces in this country since its very inception. What if the crutch of God and/or Satan simply weren't there?

[Soygen]

Originally Posted by Eloora

What if the crutch of God and/or Satan simply weren't there?

Then I would blame it on potato salad.