I've got to be honest, I don't get this argument. Is this some kind of double think? Where the fact that someone has written 'i killed them on purpose', and 'I'm evil I did this' is actually used as evidence to say that someone is innocent.
It’s almost an affirmation of it. I killed them, On purpose. That’s what suggests doubt to me. No need to reaffirm that one did indeed kill them on purpose. same as I am evil, I did this. it’s not what I would expect in cold language almost like the ending is a dramatic and emphatic use of language. I’m leaving it there though, my position on that note is unchanged.
imo there is only one way that sentence would be used and it’s in a genuine admission of guilt to an external audience Where there is doubt either in the minds of the audience or the individual saying it has created doubt in others minds deliberately. If there Is no external audience imagined or otherwise then the sentence is directed at oneself And thus no need to affirm ones own deliberate action. Blaming oneself for something that one really does know one didn’t do is double think. It’s called being in two minds about something, otherwise known as ”did I” or “didn’t I“ and is a frequent aspect of ones lived experience if they live in a world that’s accusing them of something. Akin to gaslighting and the endless inner conflict that comes with it.
does it make sense for her to write “I haven’t done anything wrong”? Then write that as well. Not to me, too many conflicting statements at the same time suggests to me inner turmoil and conflicted thinking ie being unsure. There’s nothing in any of her notes, personal coms, reactions, sequences of events that to me suggest she knows she did it.
Would agree Mary, the first insulin case was the first case where the link to LL was weak.
You're forgetting, these were notes to herself. She didn't need to explain it.
It is ridiculous when you are clarifying it to yourself.
Absolutely, her notes are full of contradictions. On one hand she writes 'I did it, I am an evil and horrible person' and 'i killed them on purpose'. Elsewhere she writes she's done nothing wrong, and is not good enough.
But by that logic, why write the notes at all? If she already knows the true state of things and her own mind, why write anything?
That really makes no difference as to whether the sentence itself makes sense or not.
Change of argument... which I've already addressed in my last post.
Okay, so it's all down to individual interpretation.
I’m going to deadhead my daffodils so I can make a million pounds. Linguistically Makes sense, rationally is insane. strangely accurate example of word salad.
I agree that note isnt Proof of innocence But it is certainly nothing even approaching proof of guilt, the only sentence in it that could be construed that way is the fact that there was no police investigation at that time.
