I cannot cut her too much slack, because I have a 24 year old son, who is mentally challenged, ADHD, schizophrenia, autistic and a few other things. He takes much daily medication. But he also understands it is his responsibility to take his medication; if he doesn't and gets 'in trouble' he must deal with the consequences. He knows appropriate behavior, and even with low impulse control, he understands he must at all times try to control his impulses. We cannot cut him much slack, because if we did, he would know that, and expect it or manipulate with it. "Tough love" is very important in his management. Someday, I won't be here, and he must be able to survive in our world, even though someone will always be supervising him. He knows the responsibility for his behavior is on him, not us, not his aides or his supervisors. He does 'work', and attends adult daycare. He must obey the rules there. too.
I understand the judge did not want to imprison this woman for six months..I am ok with that,-but I am glad that he gave her the two days. She also needed to know she couldn't just walk away on such a serious offense. I don't think that with young people with these illnesses, that a six month or super heavy sentence will add much to the lesson they learn with a couple days or a week. I know it wouldn't with my son. The lesson is in the fact that he would go to jail at all, not in the length of time.
I do think this woman was pretty well aware of what she was doing, and I believe she intended to say what she said. I don't think, however, that she knew how MUCH trouble she would be in for saying it. I think she was pretty panicked when she had to go before the judge. I can't say too much about the lack of tears, as my son responds very emotional to crisis's, and when he gets in trouble, (and perceived injustices). He doesn't usually have the tears-he does have the emotional behavior and the 'panic'.
However, a valid question was raised-if Casey is proven to be diagnosed with these or equal mental problems, will the judge or the courts cut her slack in the sentencing? Using the standards applied yesterday, it seems that whatever 'slack' this woman was given, would also have to be applied in some degree to Casey, would it not? Granted-this girl didn't kill a child-but if it can be proved Casey didn't know right from wrong at that time, or has/had poor to no impulse control..wouldn't the same standards apply? Is this what the DT is counting on?
Just for the record, I don't think I would ever take my son into a courtroom-I have very serious doubts he would be able to be quiet-whatever goes through his brain, comes out his mouth. He would never be intending to hurt people, or cause trouble, but whatever he thinks, he says.
This is all JMO.
