Anon & Lawyer, Sun Tzu: "I stand by it.
Beyond a reasonable doubt is a high bar.
The evidence I saw does not clear it.
You do not have to agree with my read of the case. I started thinking she did it. The more I looked at the investigation, the scene, and who was treated as a suspect from minute one, the more I had real doubt.
Patrick was the one who came home, made the 911 call, and became the main source for what she supposedly said.
Police locked onto her and never seriously tested another theory. That is not how you build a case that leaves no sensible doubt.
People keep saying Reddington stipulated she did it. That was the defense he had under the evidence as it stood, including what she believed after the fact.
A stipulation for an insanity defense is not the same thing as the Commonwealth proving first-degree murder beyond a reasonable doubt.
Reasonable doubt is not “I feel like she did it.” It is evidence so strong that a reasonable person has no sensible doubt left.
Ask a criminal defense lawyer you actually respect. A lot of them will tell you this record is not that.
I am tired of influencers who have not sat with the file screaming that she deserves the death penalty. She is in a wheelchair. If there is reasonable doubt, she should not be convicted. That is the standard. Use it."
