To: Lane3 who wrote (16016 ) 6/29/2002 5:18:22 PM From: Neocon Read Replies (2) | Respond to I know that what you want to do. But you are framing it in a way that pulls upon sympathy, and therefore one cannot ignore the concrete choices in the situation. She has the opportunity to make her case, and even to appeal for clemency if the law fails her. She can argue that she had no choice due to the effects of living with continual terror, under a diminished capacity theory (something like "battered wives syndrome"). And, if the law is too narrow in its construction of what constitutes self- defense, the parameters can be changed. But the case cannot be used to prove much about the overall framework of criminal justice. Besides, I made clear my theoretical grounds for imputing malice in a previous post.
