this post was submitted on 16 Aug 2023
54 points (100.0% liked)
Creepy Wikipedia
3891 readers
66 users here now
A fediverse community for curating Wikipedia articles that are oddly fascinating, eerily unsettling, or make you shiver with fear and disgust
Guidelines:
-
Follow the Code of Conduct
-
Do NOT report posts YOU don't consider creepy
-
Strictly Wikipedia submissions only
-
Please follow the post naming convention: Wikipedia Article Title - Short Synopsis
-
Tick the NSFW box for submissions with inappropriate thumbnails.
-
Please refrain from any offensive language/profanities in the posts titles, unless necessary (e.g. it's in the original article's title).
Mandatory:
If you didn't find an article "creepy," you must announce it in the thread so everyone will know that you didn't find it creepy
founded 1 year ago
MODERATORS
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
view the rest of the comments
Jeeeesus Christ talk about a weird case with no evidence leading someone to death row.
That whole trial seems insane like there's literally no evidence she did any of this shit. All they had was like some blood splatters they speculated MIGHT be caused by her raising the knife over her head to stab the kids.
Seriously what the fuck.
Edit: holy fuck have y'all read the signed affidavit from her husband explaining how he had seemingly hired someone to steal his car and rob his house for insurance claims???
After more reading it still seems like a lot of this is based on blood splatter stuff which is still super weird. It really sounds, the more I read the statement of facts, they took someone who was pretty fucked after what happened and who was already a little crazy and then cross examined the fuck out of her till she was like "I don't remember what happened!"
Which like shit I get that way when my girlfriend questions something I said too much. I have 0 confidence in my own memory.
I mean I agree with the defense like if you're willing to kill why not kill the husband for his life insurance why not idk rob someone. Killing your kids is such a shenanigans way to go about this if the motive is financial struggles.
The big thing that makes me question things is one of the knives in the block having fibers that are supposedly consistent with the intruder's entry point on it. A lot of people take that as she cut it from the inside and put the knife back. I mean that sounds compelling and all but like that's really the only thing here that feels like actually evidence that it may have been a staged crime scene.
Other than that it just seems a lot like they're speculating on blood stain patterns, remarking on a lack of evidence that there was an intruder when a lot of the evidence they expect from an intruder aren't the type of thing that HAS to be there, and they keep referencing these statements on the wound she had that are in my opinion really inconsistent. Like why'd they do the exploratory surgery? Idk the whole thing doesn't make a lot of sense to me.
Idk I'm just really hesitant to even believe the "statement of facts" because so much of this seems like she was presumed guilty from the start. I mean go back and read the original statement of facts from any death row murder case that ended up overturned to give you a good example. Kirk bloodsworth Like those are almost always written in such a way that supports the outcome of the case in my experience.
Ralph Wright is another one that comes to mind where there's a statement of facts out there that sounds incredibly damning but resulted in his exoneration after DNA testing.