(12-17-2013 07:05 PM)Tom in Lazybrook Wrote:  This justifies a criminal trial. If she tried to kill the kids, she deserves to be in a mental institution for a long time or in prison. If the man was abusing the kids, he should be prosecuted as well.

There is no way she would be found sane at the moment she attempted to kill her kids. No sane person would do that. It's obvious that she needs some mental help, not a criminal trial.

Now, if the dude was abusing the wife and kids then he should face a jury of his peers.

(12-17-2013 08:21 PM)GrayBeard Wrote:  

(12-17-2013 07:05 PM)Tom in Lazybrook Wrote:  This justifies a criminal trial. If she tried to kill the kids, she deserves to be in a mental institution for a long time or in prison. If the man was abusing the kids, he should be prosecuted as well.

There is no way she would be found sane at the moment she attempted to kill her kids. No sane person would do that. It's obvious that she needs some mental help, not a criminal trial.

Now, if the dude was abusing the wife and kids then he should face a jury of his peers.

I disagree. The handwritten notes and screensaver show premeditaion.

Sent from my SCH-I535 using Tapatalk 2

(12-17-2013 08:58 PM)EverRespect Wrote:  

(12-17-2013 08:21 PM)GrayBeard Wrote:  

(12-17-2013 07:05 PM)Tom in Lazybrook Wrote:  This justifies a criminal trial. If she tried to kill the kids, she deserves to be in a mental institution for a long time or in prison. If the man was abusing the kids, he should be prosecuted as well.

There is no way she would be found sane at the moment she attempted to kill her kids. No sane person would do that. It's obvious that she needs some mental help, not a criminal trial.

Now, if the dude was abusing the wife and kids then he should face a jury of his peers.

I disagree. The handwritten notes and screensaver show premeditaion.

Sent from my SCH-I535 using Tapatalk 2

Crazy people are the best at premeditation. How that is conviction point, makes no sense.

(12-17-2013 09:17 PM)Jerry Falwell Wrote:  

(12-17-2013 08:58 PM)EverRespect Wrote:  

(12-17-2013 08:21 PM)GrayBeard Wrote:  

(12-17-2013 07:05 PM)Tom in Lazybrook Wrote:  This justifies a criminal trial. If she tried to kill the kids, she deserves to be in a mental institution for a long time or in prison. If the man was abusing the kids, he should be prosecuted as well.

There is no way she would be found sane at the moment she attempted to kill her kids. No sane person would do that. It's obvious that she needs some mental help, not a criminal trial.

Now, if the dude was abusing the wife and kids then he should face a jury of his peers.

I disagree. The handwritten notes and screensaver show premeditaion.

Sent from my SCH-I535 using Tapatalk 2

Crazy people are the best at premeditation. How that is conviction point, makes no sense.

Might as well legalize murder then because if you commit it you are either crazy or it was self defense.

Sent from my SCH-I535 using Tapatalk 2

(12-17-2013 08:58 PM)EverRespect Wrote:  

(12-17-2013 08:21 PM)GrayBeard Wrote:  

(12-17-2013 07:05 PM)Tom in Lazybrook Wrote:  This justifies a criminal trial. If she tried to kill the kids, she deserves to be in a mental institution for a long time or in prison. If the man was abusing the kids, he should be prosecuted as well.

There is no way she would be found sane at the moment she attempted to kill her kids. No sane person would do that. It's obvious that she needs some mental help, not a criminal trial.

Now, if the dude was abusing the wife and kids then he should face a jury of his peers.

I disagree. The handwritten notes and screensaver show premeditaion.

Sent from my SCH-I535 using Tapatalk 2

It does, but it does not prove she wasn't crazy.

(12-17-2013 08:21 PM)GrayBeard Wrote:  

(12-17-2013 07:05 PM)Tom in Lazybrook Wrote:  This justifies a criminal trial. If she tried to kill the kids, she deserves to be in a mental institution for a long time or in prison. If the man was abusing the kids, he should be prosecuted as well.

There is no way she would be found sane at the moment she attempted to kill her kids. No sane person would do that. It's obvious that she needs some mental help, not a criminal trial.

Now, if the dude was abusing the wife and kids then he should face a jury of his peers.

So an accusation of abuse (with no proof) requires a jury by peers, but an actual attempt to kill one's children mandates "help". What the hell bizarro world is this?

(12-17-2013 09:34 PM)GrayBeard Wrote:  

(12-17-2013 08:58 PM)EverRespect Wrote:  

(12-17-2013 08:21 PM)GrayBeard Wrote:  

(12-17-2013 07:05 PM)Tom in Lazybrook Wrote:  This justifies a criminal trial. If she tried to kill the kids, she deserves to be in a mental institution for a long time or in prison. If the man was abusing the kids, he should be prosecuted as well.

There is no way she would be found sane at the moment she attempted to kill her kids. No sane person would do that. It's obvious that she needs some mental help, not a criminal trial.

Now, if the dude was abusing the wife and kids then he should face a jury of his peers.

I disagree. The handwritten notes and screensaver show premeditaion.

Sent from my SCH-I535 using Tapatalk 2

It does, but it does not prove she wasn't crazy.

She is clearly crazy, but you put down the dog that bites the child. What she did takes a kind of evil that cannot be psychologically explained or excused.

Sent from my SCH-I535 using Tapatalk 2

(12-17-2013 09:40 PM)ODUsmitty Wrote:  

(12-17-2013 08:21 PM)GrayBeard Wrote:  

(12-17-2013 07:05 PM)Tom in Lazybrook Wrote:  This justifies a criminal trial. If she tried to kill the kids, she deserves to be in a mental institution for a long time or in prison. If the man was abusing the kids, he should be prosecuted as well.

There is no way she would be found sane at the moment she attempted to kill her kids. No sane person would do that. It's obvious that she needs some mental help, not a criminal trial.

Now, if the dude was abusing the wife and kids then he should face a jury of his peers.

So an accusation of abuse (with no proof) requires a jury by peers, but an actual attempt to kill one's children mandates "help". What the hell bizarro world is this?

Sure that is what i said.

I quoted you. Please tell me how that was a misrepresentation.

In Texas, a Dr.'s script is golden. It is a big problem. At the pain mills, the doctor doesn't even need to be on premise for the script to be dispensed.

Another reason why legalizing more intoxicant drugs at this point would not be a help for society. Recreational drug use is a bad idea.

(12-17-2013 11:18 PM)ODUsmitty Wrote:  I quoted you. Please tell me how that was a misrepresentation.

I did not say an "accusation" deserved a jury of his peers, but actual abuse that has transpired.

Whether the woman gets a trial for murder or gets sent away for psychiatric care, she does not need to be alone with her children for a long long long time.

(12-17-2013 09:40 PM)ODUsmitty Wrote:  

(12-17-2013 08:21 PM)GrayBeard Wrote:  

(12-17-2013 07:05 PM)Tom in Lazybrook Wrote:  This justifies a criminal trial. If she tried to kill the kids, she deserves to be in a mental institution for a long time or in prison. If the man was abusing the kids, he should be prosecuted as well.

There is no way she would be found sane at the moment she attempted to kill her kids. No sane person would do that. It's obvious that she needs some mental help, not a criminal trial.

Now, if the dude was abusing the wife and kids then he should face a jury of his peers.

So an accusation of abuse (with no proof) requires a jury by peers, but an actual attempt to kill one's children mandates "help". What the hell bizarro world is this?

Another ODU moron that can't read. Try reading it again. If you can't, please, find someone who can read it for you.

(12-18-2013 02:40 PM)RobertN Wrote:  

(12-17-2013 09:40 PM)ODUsmitty Wrote:  

(12-17-2013 08:21 PM)GrayBeard Wrote:  

(12-17-2013 07:05 PM)Tom in Lazybrook Wrote:  This justifies a criminal trial. If she tried to kill the kids, she deserves to be in a mental institution for a long time or in prison. If the man was abusing the kids, he should be prosecuted as well.

There is no way she would be found sane at the moment she attempted to kill her kids. No sane person would do that. It's obvious that she needs some mental help, not a criminal trial.

Now, if the dude was abusing the wife and kids then he should face a jury of his peers.

So an accusation of abuse (with no proof) requires a jury by peers, but an actual attempt to kill one's children mandates "help". What the hell bizarro world is this?

Another ODU moron that can't read. Try reading it again. If you can't, please, find someone who can read it for you.

Looks pretty clear to me... GrayBeard clearly says if he is accused of abuse he should go to trial and the woman who tried to kill her kids needs help and there should be no trial. Not sure where the controversy is, but I guess that's the logic they teach in Chicago?

(12-18-2013 02:45 PM)EverRespect Wrote:  

(12-18-2013 02:40 PM)RobertN Wrote:  

(12-17-2013 09:40 PM)ODUsmitty Wrote:  

(12-17-2013 08:21 PM)GrayBeard Wrote:  

(12-17-2013 07:05 PM)Tom in Lazybrook Wrote:  This justifies a criminal trial. If she tried to kill the kids, she deserves to be in a mental institution for a long time or in prison. If the man was abusing the kids, he should be prosecuted as well.

There is no way she would be found sane at the moment she attempted to kill her kids. No sane person would do that. It's obvious that she needs some mental help, not a criminal trial.

Now, if the dude was abusing the wife and kids then he should face a jury of his peers.

So an accusation of abuse (with no proof) requires a jury by peers, but an actual attempt to kill one's children mandates "help". What the hell bizarro world is this?

Another ODU moron that can't read. Try reading it again. If you can't, please, find someone who can read it for you.

Looks pretty clear to me... GrayBeard clearly says if he is accused of abuse he should go to trial and the woman who tried to kill her kids needs help and there should be no trial. Not sure where the controversy is, but I guess that's the logic they teach in Chicago?

Not to defend Robert, which makes me feel dirty, but I never said accused. I said, If he WAS abusing his wife and kids. Not accused. There is a difference. If there was an accusation of abuse, then there should be an investigation, not a trial.

Technically everyone who goes to trial (even the woman) is accused pending the verdict.

(12-18-2013 02:58 PM)EverRespect Wrote:  Technically everyone who goes to trial (even the woman) is accused pending the verdict.

Agreed, but there has to be some real evidence to proceed to a trial.

(12-18-2013 10:33 AM)GrayBeard Wrote:  

(12-17-2013 11:18 PM)ODUsmitty Wrote:  I quoted you. Please tell me how that was a misrepresentation.

I did not say an "accusation" deserved a jury of his peers, but actual abuse that has transpired.

Whether the woman gets a trial for murder or gets sent away for psychiatric care, she does not need to be alone with her children for a long long long time.

There was NO abuse by the husband that has been substantiated or even questioned by anyone other than his drug-addicted wife. Context matters, and there appears to be no smoke in this article to substantiate the woman's drug-induced rants. That was my point. To the ECU fan, I get your point, but was not comfortable letting go that there was some insinuation of abuse. And for RobertN....you deserve no response. Tapeworms are beneath me.