If the jury believes that no actus reus, no commission of a guilty act, occurred, then the jury would find the defendant not guilty. Doesn’t matter if the jury thinks the defendant is insane as no crime was committed. The jury decided against not guilty; therefore, they must believe that actus reus occurred and then decided the defense proved his client was insane thus NGRI instead of Guilty.
Many, many posters have said there was poor choices made on all sides, but LK is the only one who REFUSES to admit she made ANY poor choices and REFUSES to acknowledge she bears some responsibility for the whole situation.
Which brings me to my standard disclaimer - this by no means should be interpreted that she deserved to be shot.
Before the Seeker sidebar, the discussion was mostly about the specifics of NJ law - which in NJ means MB was found NG - he will not have a felony record. You can argue that your interpretations of it to mean that he is guilty, but in NJ, he will not be considered a convicted felon.
The issue that is at the forefront for most of us is that the police work was so shoddy that there was not a reasonable explanation of what happened other than the testimony of two known liars. So insisting that MB showed up with the gun with the sole intent of murdering LK is going to get quite a bit of pushback from many here.
Not only that, my CCU nurse family says no way the family is allowed to stay for that kind of dressing change. Considering this is the same family reporting that a broken hand didn’t need a cast….
A defendant can be found not guilty but still committed the crime. How naive to think all not guilty verdicts are a result of the defendant not being guilty of committing the crime. So why did the jury not find MB not guilty? Yes, mens rea could not be established, but actus reus was, thus NGRI instead of GUILTY.
It’s right that NGRI verdict doesn’t result in a felony conviction, as the goes back to Krol: treatment not punishment.
I’m not a human doctor nor to I play one on TV but this is all just hard for me to believe as anything but hyperbole. Both the leaving the abdominal cavity open in a regular hospital room and then teaching family members to change dressings on an intentionally opened abdomen. A dirty abdominal wound would be another situation.
The most useful thing you can do would be to get your adult daughter into drug rehab and counselling. She admitted on the witness stand to being an active opiod addict and lying continuously on social media. She is continuing on this course on a national platform now, with a TV documentary pending.
To the extent you are engaged in condoning and enabling her behavior no one is going to have much sympathy for you and your situation.
I don’t know what an aging parent can actually do with an over 40 adult child showing these behaviors, which have been lifelong. However, since the adult child managed to destroy the prosecutor’s case and has made many people very curious about the upcoming civil trials, I don’t think just begging us to be nice to the poor dear is going to have any effect.
I expect as a mother you may not have known much about what your daughter was up to in her private life and on social media until the trial blew some of it out into public. Once it gets out, however, you may want to think about how you can chamge the actual situation. Not just whitewash it or plea for us to be nicer. I mean change the behavior that has led to this situation rather than enable it.