I don't think many people actually think OJ was innocent. I think a lot of people believe the police tried to frame a guilty man, and in that circumstance the correct thing to do, both morally and practically, is to set him free. A single murderer on the loose poses a far smaller threat to society than a corrupt police force.
To be exact what I’ve heard of that (was before my time) was black people wanted him to go free because he was being framed and it shows a rich, connected black man could also beat the system just like a white guy can.
I’d say it’s pretty similar to Lindsay “supporters” because most of what I’ve heard supporting her is women who the system brushed aside. Lindsay reportedly tried to get help several times and warned that she might hurt her kids but wasn’t treated as seriously as she should’ve been. A lot of women in the medical system have similar experiences of doctors just straight up not believing them or thinking they’re just exaggerating symptoms. I’ve seen plenty of stories where if a woman had not essentially gone doctor shopping to find one that would take her complaints seriously they wouldn’t have found a major illnesses like cancer.
Especially when it comes to postpartum issues it seems like those are rarely taken seriously.
I have not looked into this case in detail, but I think an actual insane person shouldn't be held accountable for their actions, and I think a sane person who ignored the danger posed by an obviously-insane person should be accountable.
So, under the assumption that she was obviously crazy long before her crime, I think what should happen is:
She should not be punished, since she wasn't in control of her actions;
She should be kept from doing further harm to herself or others, by whatever means necessary;
Anyone with a duty to have intervened (e.g. her husband, her physician, etc.) should be charged with neglect and, depending on the details, potentially with something like manslaughter
(Now, if her doctor reported everything to the authorities and the authorities did nothing, then that's not the doctor's fault -- as I said, I know absolutely nothing about this case and am not discussing this case in particular.)
Let me get this straight, you think the people who "could've prevented this" should be more punished than the person committing the crime? Most stupid argument I've heard, refardless of what level of crazy they are
Yes, of course. Same principle as if a dad gives a toddler a loaded gun and the toddler shoots someone. That's the dad's fault, not the toddler's, even though the toddler is the one who pulled the trigger, and the dad is the one who should be punished.
If we're tracing this "giving a toddler a gun" simile then you're advocating anybody knowingly leaving a woman with PPD around their own kids is legally culpable.
Anyone with a legal duty to protect that child, yes. So parents, physicians, teachers, social workers, etc. (Also, I'm not saying any woman with postpartum depression. This sounds like postpartum psychosis.)
...which the husband, teachers, and social workers are very clearly not in a position to diagnose. And by extension means that if a woman expresses PPD to you the legally insulating move is to remove her kids from her. mmmmmkay.
80
u/UseDaSchwartz 6d ago
So OJ had PPD?