Hello all
General Question: "Do you think someone who has the mental predisposition to murder his own children is in any frame of mind to process the jurisprudence and weigh the pros and cons before he snaps?"
Answer: YES! His or HER own children. Susan Smith did, and there have been others.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Susan_Smith
First, I don't have any sympathy with any Mengele-esque view that it could be either proper or justified to experiment on a human being. Although it is understandable that the emotional rage against the slaughter of innocent children might create temporary visions of medieval payback. But I resent being lumped with this view...if that's what is meant previously.
The view that no one could could sanely stab their own children a combined 46 times because of the common and natural view that the love any parent should have for their own children makes the sane butchering of them completely impossible. Given that belief in every adult, combined with the horrific court photos of these bloody stabbed children to a judge or jury, along with the testimony, and sanity in such an act could not be believed. With such an emotional bias how could a judge or jury listen to any evidence that this might have been a calculated act of pure murder. I would bet that despite the best attempt to find an emotionally unprejudiced court that the prejudice was natural and nearly unbreakable against this tragedy being a sane act as soon as the basic story unfolded and certainly when the horror of the facts were presented.
The premise that everyone feels the same natural deep and unbreakable loving devotion to their children simply isn't true for all people. Men and women walk away and abandon them, they beat them, they abuse and sometimes have killed them, and sometimes they are simply a detached product of attachment to the other sex or a significant other. We remember the case of Susan Smith who calculatedly drowned her own very young children by strapping them into her car, letting it roll into a pond, then concocting a story that someone took the car and children so they wouldn't be in the way of getting another man than her husband.
No one here was there in court either and we surely don't know what was in this guy's mind either or his psyche. It is possible that the wife was who meant everything to him, not his kids, and when he felt betrayed by her he could have seen the kids as expendable payback against her...as inhuman and monstrous as it seems to the great majority of decent naturally loving people and their natural bond to their own children.
It may seem unfathomable that any person could ever calculatedly take out the distress of hyper emotional conditions with another person on their kids, but it has happened before after losing someone or in the prospect of binding someone to him or her.
In any case, whether it's normal prison or shut in a mental hospital, he shouldn't get out.
Cheers,
Merlot
General Question: "Do you think someone who has the mental predisposition to murder his own children is in any frame of mind to process the jurisprudence and weigh the pros and cons before he snaps?"
Answer: YES! His or HER own children. Susan Smith did, and there have been others.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Susan_Smith
First, I don't have any sympathy with any Mengele-esque view that it could be either proper or justified to experiment on a human being. Although it is understandable that the emotional rage against the slaughter of innocent children might create temporary visions of medieval payback. But I resent being lumped with this view...if that's what is meant previously.
The view that no one could could sanely stab their own children a combined 46 times because of the common and natural view that the love any parent should have for their own children makes the sane butchering of them completely impossible. Given that belief in every adult, combined with the horrific court photos of these bloody stabbed children to a judge or jury, along with the testimony, and sanity in such an act could not be believed. With such an emotional bias how could a judge or jury listen to any evidence that this might have been a calculated act of pure murder. I would bet that despite the best attempt to find an emotionally unprejudiced court that the prejudice was natural and nearly unbreakable against this tragedy being a sane act as soon as the basic story unfolded and certainly when the horror of the facts were presented.
The premise that everyone feels the same natural deep and unbreakable loving devotion to their children simply isn't true for all people. Men and women walk away and abandon them, they beat them, they abuse and sometimes have killed them, and sometimes they are simply a detached product of attachment to the other sex or a significant other. We remember the case of Susan Smith who calculatedly drowned her own very young children by strapping them into her car, letting it roll into a pond, then concocting a story that someone took the car and children so they wouldn't be in the way of getting another man than her husband.
No one here was there in court either and we surely don't know what was in this guy's mind either or his psyche. It is possible that the wife was who meant everything to him, not his kids, and when he felt betrayed by her he could have seen the kids as expendable payback against her...as inhuman and monstrous as it seems to the great majority of decent naturally loving people and their natural bond to their own children.
It may seem unfathomable that any person could ever calculatedly take out the distress of hyper emotional conditions with another person on their kids, but it has happened before after losing someone or in the prospect of binding someone to him or her.
In any case, whether it's normal prison or shut in a mental hospital, he shouldn't get out.
Cheers,
Merlot
Last edited:
