Lisa Montgomery Sentenced to Death for Cutting Baby from Womb in Fed DP Trial

[Michael]

Me too! 

But you see the anti throw the illness-card..... Without the background information some peoples opinion will be influenced by this (poor ill women), but if oyu know her history....

Regards

Michael

[Sibby]

Lisa Montgomery was a habitual liar.  She lied about being pregnant to get attention.  When this all came down Lisa was getting cornered with her lies.  Her ex husband was suing her for custody of the children she had with him, and he was going to use her faked pregnancy as a reason she was unfit.  The murder of Bobbie Jo to take her baby wasn't for the sake of having a baby, but to cover up the lies.  It was all about the lies.  She wasn't mentally ill, just desperate.

To read more on this story I suggest you go to crimerant.com and look at the blogs on Lisa, there a quite a few of them.

[Henrik - Sweden]

No, this woman doesn't look mentally ill in the sense "incompetent to stand trial" to me. A deeply disturbed human being maybe who most likely would score high on tests for psychopathy. But that shouldn't prevent us from regarding her as fully responsible for her actions.

Over the years to follow, probably millions and millions of dollars will be spent in the legal system and by lawyers in the struggle over this single life that - to be honest - can't be of much importance whether it is ended or continues in a single cell locked up 23 hours a day. I'm glad I'm not a U.S tax-payer (not that the swedish government doesn't vaste tax-money on various things. But that's another story...  )

[Jeff1857]

Henrik, I agree with you concerning her NOT being mentally ill and you're right all the thug huggers will be trying to prove she's crazy for the years to come. However I disagree with you of her life not being of importance. I would think that Mrs Stinett's family would disagree with you about that. If it wasn't for this "unimporatant" person, Mrs Stinett would still be alive with her child today. The punishment fits this type of heinous crime in my opinion. But who knows, some liberal judge or court somewhere down the line might decide in all their infinite "wisdom" she might be a mental midget.

[ebo]

So if this woman is not mentally ill, then what is she Henrik?  Can we expect this kind of behavior from just about anybody in our society?  And are people just "crazy" if they don´t comprehend that they did something wrong, or is it possible that people that can´t control themself, their feelings or actions for some reason are indeed mentally ill?

[sam]

This woman wanted a baby and decided the fastest way was to cut it out of the mother's womb. No difference between wanting money or jewlrey and shooting a person to get it. Under the euroweenie definition of mental illness, no one is truly culpable of their criminal actions. Under our laws, she knew the difference between right and wrong and therefore is culpable. What I think is insane and morally reprehensible is how euroweenies think that no matter how horrendous the crime, no one should be locked up for more than 10-15 years. 

[ebo]

Well your response to my writing Sam makes me very happy to be a euroweenie 

[Granny B]

Folks I read on another board that this creature DID in fact get the DP.. there's justice!

I can agree with calling her a creature.

Well, I'd call her spawn of satan, myself.  And no, mental illness does not cut it here.  She knew EXACTLY what she was doing.

[nats]

Folks I read on another board that this creature DID in fact get the DP.. there's justice!

I can agree with calling her a creature.

Well, I'd call her spawn of satan, myself.  And no, mental illness does not cut it here.  She knew EXACTLY what she was doing.

it's mental shes mental normal people dont i repeat dont do these things!!!

[Jeff1857]

So is this what you're saying Nats. Any crime committed anywhere in the world is done by all mental people. I mean normal people don't rob stores and shoot clerks in the head, normal people don't rob banks, normal people don't get into drug wars. So are you saying they're all crazy and don't need to be punished. I think you need to come up with a better scenario than that or did you go to Kansas and evaluate her yourself? Defense testimony should have shown and proven she was crazy if that was the case. 

[tramoore]

What she did took planning.  It was methodical and this may sound wrong, but it takes precision and calmness to do what she did without harming the infant.  You can't be too "unstable" to do what she did.

Granted there are a FEW people who are definetely mentally unstable who have and will committ crimes.  There are plently of "normal' people who commit crimes out of need unfortunately.  This crime was not "normal" by any means, but she knew EXACTLY what she was doing.

[Jeff1857]

GM, So Great to see ya back. You are soooooo missed.  ...Jeff

[Michael]

Hello tramoore,

you got the point - no additions are needed. 

Regards

Michael

[Henrik - Sweden]

It's wise to make a clear difference between "mentally disturbed" and "mentally ill". Of course this woman is very disturbed; you don't have to be a genius to make an educated guess that she lacks emphaty and the function called "conscience" in daily speech that prevents us from hurt other human beings, at least in more serious ways. Probably she has experienced a lot of violence in her life that has made her blunt to it. It takes something more than just a strong will to have something to perform such an extremly violent act as she did. Even most of your DR inhabitants probably wouldn't have commited this thing, no matter how much they would have wanted to have a child. But when it comes to the legal system I think it's best to have a very narrow definition on "mental illness". The broad way that we have used it in Sweden has caused a lot of problems and vaugeness in the system; many criminals have received treatment in a mental hospital for one crime and prison for the next. And it's almost impossible to describe where the line between "normal" and "disturbed" goes. Better then to "reserve" the term mental illness for people with acute schizophrenia, more heavy authistic syndroms, big psychosises not created by own drug use and similar things. In short: People whose minds and grasp over reality are so deeply disturbed and/or damaged that it would be barbaric to claim that they should have to stand responsible for what they did as a result of their illness.

[Peter]

Henrik,

With all respect, mental illness and being mentally disturbed still come under the same umbrella. Which ever excuse is made for an act of crime against a non-mentally ill or non-mentally disturbed amounts to the same net result, surely?

I agree with the suggestion that the system is 'vague' in dealing with mental illness. I believe that psychiatry is not an exact science and is, in law, shackled by that same law that serves us all no matter in which Country.

I can't agree with your suggestion that it would be barbaric to hold the perpetrator guilty of a crime, no matter what thier personal circumstance was. The crime has been committed and the victim remains the victim.

However, is good to debate! 

Peter M.