Bit of a useless article. Other than some basics it doesn't even include what her children died of or what evidence they used to convict her. Kinda important since the whole point is the wrongful conviction and how it's now overturned.
this post was submitted on 14 Dec 2023
98 points (96.2% liked)
News
23284 readers
3703 users here now
Welcome to the News community!
Rules:
1. Be civil
Attack the argument, not the person. No racism/sexism/bigotry. Good faith argumentation only. This includes accusing another user of being a bot or paid actor. Trolling is uncivil and is grounds for removal and/or a community ban. Do not respond to rule-breaking content; report it and move on.
2. All posts should contain a source (url) that is as reliable and unbiased as possible and must only contain one link.
Obvious right or left wing sources will be removed at the mods discretion. We have an actively updated blocklist, which you can see here: https://lemmy.world/post/2246130 if you feel like any website is missing, contact the mods. Supporting links can be added in comments or posted seperately but not to the post body.
3. No bots, spam or self-promotion.
Only approved bots, which follow the guidelines for bots set by the instance, are allowed.
4. Post titles should be the same as the article used as source.
Posts which titles don’t match the source won’t be removed, but the autoMod will notify you, and if your title misrepresents the original article, the post will be deleted. If the site changed their headline, the bot might still contact you, just ignore it, we won’t delete your post.
5. Only recent news is allowed.
Posts must be news from the most recent 30 days.
6. All posts must be news articles.
No opinion pieces, Listicles, editorials or celebrity gossip is allowed. All posts will be judged on a case-by-case basis.
7. No duplicate posts.
If a source you used was already posted by someone else, the autoMod will leave a message. Please remove your post if the autoMod is correct. If the post that matches your post is very old, we refer you to rule 5.
8. Misinformation is prohibited.
Misinformation / propaganda is strictly prohibited. Any comment or post containing or linking to misinformation will be removed. If you feel that your post has been removed in error, credible sources must be provided.
9. No link shorteners.
The auto mod will contact you if a link shortener is detected, please delete your post if they are right.
10. Don't copy entire article in your post body
For copyright reasons, you are not allowed to copy an entire article into your post body. This is an instance wide rule, that is strictly enforced in this community.
founded 1 year ago
MODERATORS
More details here.
Basically she had written in her diary about her enduring feelings of guilt over the deaths of her children, which is what formed the base of the original case against her. Prosecutors argued that the children were probably smothered, despite there being no physical evidence for that.
A recent enquiry heard new evidence that at least 2 of her children carried a genetic defect that could potentially have caused their deaths, which coupled with the circumstancial nature of the evidence used in the original conviction was enough the NSW governor to pardon her under reasonable doubt. That pardon lead to a trial in the criminal court of appeals which have now acquitted her of the charges.
What parent DOESNT feel guilty over the death of their children?
They are always going to be plagued by doubt, what if, etc etc.
Hell, my grandmother lost an adult son to cancer like 20 years ago and she still gets hit by episodes of guilt over not magically noticing/doing something different/outliving him/etc.
What a fucking ridiculous bullshit reason to convict her.
The legal system does shit like that all the time.
Lie detectors are fake yet used to get false confessions. Eyewitness testimony is one of the highest forms of evidence yet humans are noticeably terrible at remembering details especially in traumatic events. Word choice matters to the point of one misspoken word could cast doubt yet most people aren't deliberately thinking about their word choice.
The legal system expects people to operate like they've been in the legal system for years and that's just not how it works.
Thank you.
Edit: That's a much better article.
It says she was pardoned - at least in the US, that's different from having a conviction overturned.
She was pardoned in June and has subsequently has been acquitted in the criminal court of appeals.