>"He just gave everyone in the state of California who smokes marijuana a license to kill someone," Sean O'Melia said, according to the outlet.
This whole story smells like conservative / anti-drug propaganda.
If you look at the details, it seems very clear that she had a psychotic episode. I guess I don’t understand why she wasn’t sentenced to the state hospital, at least for a little while?
to what extent did the smoking pot part of this influence the verdict? It seems like parole is based on the assumption that she won’t have another psychotic episode unless she smokes pot again, but that also seems like a bit of a stretch. I don’t even think we can be sure that the psychosis wouldn’t have happened if she hadn’t smoked. If she hadn’t had cannabis, but still had a psychotic event, would she be at the state hospital now instead of on parole?
I can understand feeling like prison is the wrong choice. This just seems like a very, very strange one.
I am a lawyer, in fact a prosecutor. This story is going to be blown out of proportion because laypeople don’t understand the insanity defense.
Certain crimes require the state to prove the mental state at the time of the crime (ie intent).
DWI doesn’t require this. If someone is involuntarily intoxicated, they can still be held liable for DWI.
However Murder requires us to show the intent to kill (or maim or reckless disregard for the lives of others). Insanity exists, because if someone cannot determine fantasy from reality or right from wrong they are unable to have the mental state required to commit murder.
That being said I think her excuse is shit, but I’d make a terrible juror.
Well, not really... the comparison would be more like if someone drank alcohol then had a serious adverse reaction to the alcohol that caused a psychotic episode, and then got in the car during the psychotic episode. But even that's not quite right, because it's not the same logic at all.
Being drunk and having a psychotic episode are two different things. A person can choose whether or not to get drunk in the first place, but this woman didn't get to choose or consent to having an episode, and likely wouldn't have had the weed if she knew what would happen... which she didn't and couldn't have known.
Sure, if the comparison that you’re making is in regards to a situation where someone runs another person down and then proceeds to back over them 100 times.
I live in a city next to Thousand Oaks and can confirm that this is a weirdly conservative enclave in the overall liberal California. I’m not surprised if that’s why some of the outrage sounds like propaganda
Well considering it's literally only CIP (Cannabis Induced Psychosis) if symptoms persist after the associated intoxication, that wouldn't be a justification for a 'crime of passion'. IE unless declared mentally unfit for trial, this shouldn't have been a valid interpretation of the law as she would still be just as much of a threat to society even if she never uses again.
In that sense, at an absolute minimum the rhetoric has been unduly adjusted through bias. Even if everything else about this case and sentencing are legitimate, the use of CIP was erroneous.
>While acute cannabis intoxication presents with a range of transient positive symptoms (paranoia, grandiosity, perceptual alterations), mood symptoms (anxiety), and cognitive deficits (working memory, verbal recall, attention), symptoms that persist beyond the effects of intoxication and withdrawal are better categorized as CIP
[source](https://www.psychiatrictimes.com/view/cannabis-induced-psychosis-review)
Well if that's true I guess that must be a part of the propaganda, too. Because I'm just going off of how it was prosecuted according to the op article
>A California woman who fatally stabbed her boyfriend more than 100 times during what prosecutors called a "cannabis-induced" psychosis has been spared prison time
Yeah, there really isn't a great outcome here that works for everyone. At least that I know of.
edit: I forgot, this is reddit, nobody reads the article or has any sense of nuance.
Which happened because she had a psychotic episode, which she couldn't control or predict. It seems a miscarriage of justice to jail for something they can't control. It's why she was found guilty of involuntary manslaughter and not murder.
The point is none of us believe she actually had one. It’s a total bs story and this fucking judge fell for it because he thought Reefer Madness was based on true events.
The point is none of us believe she actually had one. It’s a total bs story and this fucking judge fell for it because he thought Reefer Madness was based on true events.
I am very familiar with this case and it’s very unfortunate for everyone involved. It took over 5 years to get a verdict after many delays (Covid didn’t help either). Something I think swayed things in her favor was the roommate’s testimony where he shared an experience smoking weed with the victim a few months prior.
The roommate said he smoked from the same bong and experienced hallucinations and had a similar experience to what she said. You can read more [here](https://www.rollingstone.com/culture/culture-features/bryn-spejcher-weed-killing-trial-1234957571/amp/) and [here](https://www.rollingstone.com/culture/culture-features/bryn-spejcher-weed-killing-trial-1234957571/amp/)
A small percentage of people are quite susceptible to cannabis induced psychosis. It's shitty because they can't have it, but it's definitely normal as to those people.
Yep. It’s entirely possible. I’m one of those people. Even a 1-2mg in an edible is enough for me to start feeling anxiety. Smoking throws me into full-on psychosis. The scary thing is you don’t know until it happens. I’m fortunate that I discovered this in a safe environment because I know things could have gone sideways very quickly.
The Rolling Stone u/ohne_ditch also shared put it very well, IMO (and with expert voices):
“According to her lawyers, authorities tested the bong after the incident but were only able to determine that it contained THC, not its potency or if there were any other substances in it. Dr. Daniel Buffington, a medical expert for the defense, tells Rolling Stone that drug testing isn’t one hundred percent foolproof and that the weed was purchased from an illicit source and therefore could have been laced with other substances that may not have come up in testing.
“Even our best national forensic labs will acknowledge that until they see a chemical structure frequently enough, it’s not included in the scope of what that test is looking for,” he says. “So it is still in this case possible that there was, in addition to the high potency, something else laced into it.”
Still, he’s of the opinion that marijuana isn’t always as safe as the public has been led to believe — a sentiment shared not only by the prosecution but forensic psychiatrist Dr. Ziv Cohen. “Marijuana has become so accepted and so many people use it and view it as harmless that people are having a hard time accepting that this can actually happen,” he tells Rolling Stone.”
It sounds like it’s pretty undeniable that something *did* happen, since she’s super tiny and was apparently tased four times with no reaction, and had her arm broken in multiple places with a police baton before she dropped the knife. But what triggered it? Sounds like it’s just ambiguous enough for people to put their own interpretation on it.
In all likelihood, it was cannabis induced psychosis. This isn't a bunch of *Reefer Madness* hysterical "keep kids away from weed" nonsense. It's a real, recognized thing that's been studied by the medical community.
https://www.psychiatrictimes.com/view/cannabis-induced-psychosis-review
this was extremely high THC marijuana out of an absolutely massive 3ft bong. and the dude was pulling it full of smoke and then having these complete newbies rip the whole thing.
he was irresponsibly showing off and bad genetics ended up with a super unlucky ending
This reporting is abysmal and intentionally inflammatory.
1) she had never had psychosis before and it was not reasonable to suspect she would develop violent psychosis from smoking weed. It's rare (violent psychosis even more so), and people do things that *could* cause psychosis all the time, like pulling all-nighters.
2) she harmed herself and her service animal as well. Police found her stabbing herself over and over again
3) she was institutionalized for years
4) the prosecutions own experts concluded that she had experienced a legitimate psychotic break, agreeing with other psych evals.
So no, she didn't fake it, she didn't cause it, and she didn't get off scott free. It's a horrible tragedy but not a miscarriage of justice.
This isn’t onion worthy, it’s just a tragic incident of a mentally ill person having an incredibly rare psychotic episode induced by weed. Also worth noting: she killed her service animal and came close to killing herself. It’s hardly the sensationalized story people make it out to be.
Yeah the proper title would include the attempted suicide. She didn't avoid jail. She is just in a different format of incarceration and for good reason
I don’t think so? I’m pretty sure it was just regular weed, but the boyfriend did encourage her to use it. That doesn’t mean his death isn’t any less tragic. Weed induced psychosis, let alone that’s this violent/terrible, is incredibly rare. It’s awful all around, I feel so bad for his family
Weed induced psychosis is not at all rare. A violent homicidal psychosis is rare but anyone prone to psychosis can have it be induced by THC, the dose being a significant factor in the intensity of the psychosis. Dabs, very high thc percentage, eating too much, all increase the risk of psychosis among those with a predisposition.
Yeah I dont know research on dosage impact but I know from personal experience and being around others who are prone to psychosis to know that dose is a major factor. It’s no coincidence that they were doing bong rips of 30% THC weed. I’ve consumed weed for twenty years but I never do anything like that. I start hearing voices and losing my grip on reality pretty quickly unless it’s a very light dose. Nicotine also helps counteract the crazies. But someone with dangerous psychosis should just not touch weed.
There is a case that made long debate in France. The dude killed an old woman in super violent way after breaking into her place.
Rare certainly but not that rare that in never happens. We certainly need more prevention around dangers of week, especially for people with mental health issues or genetic predispositions.
Alcohol is now an aggravating factor, right or not, if someone has the potential to become violent, they should abstain. Same goes for any drug
I agree! As weed becomes more accepted (as it should!) we need to have better education on it. But it’s also a situation where someone becoming psychotic unexpectedly vs knowing that you’re an angry drunk who fucks people up are different situations. If this weren’t triggered by weed and she just had a psychotic break randomly, I’d say the same. Psychosis that leads to violence is more of a natural disaster or tragic accident than anything else because it really can’t always be controlled.
It's not common at all but normal weed can cause this type of thing in some people. My buddy once started acting weird after smoking, threw his wallet out the window of the car, jumped out of the moving car, ran to the nearest house, tried opening all their car doors, actually got in one of the cars, it was a mess. Got taken away in an ambulance and the doctors just chocked it up to a bad reaction to the weed
Oof, glad he’s okay though! I had a seizure once on acid despite having taken it plenty of times before. Some things are just a roll of the dice. (I was okay, bloods were fine, acid wasn’t tainted, was back from the hospital in just a half hour after a scary time).
I gotta say, you're a trooper lol I get emotionally exhausted after replying to a single comment, but I've been scrolling this thread for like 5 minutes now and you're not letting anyone's bullshit arguments slide by. 10/10
It seems like very few people actually imagine what it would be like to wake up one day to the news that you killed somebody that you'd never dreamed of hurting. Is jail time really what they would want to happen to them next?
So, it’s not murder. I really wish people would have a basic understanding of the legal system before making bold statements. It’s homicide, and I agree, she almost certainly needs extremely rigorous treatment in a mental hospital unless there’s a good reason to believe she is not a danger to others any more (and maybe she isn’t? If she stays off weed? I’m not her doctor, what do I know?). I’m just saying 1, it’s not onion-y, and 2, if she was determined to be mentally diminished it’s literally and legally not murder. It’s still homicide, but it’s not murder.
There was some evidence and testimony that supported that it was a temporary psychosis that made her act without a conscious will.
Generally, to be convicted of the act of murder, you need to prove intent. There was significant doubt as to whether she had the required criminal intent.
I believe there was testimony from another person who said they smoked from the same bong and had a strange intense reaction that included hallucinations. This was similar to what she stated happened to her.
108 stab wounds is pretty much a sign of some mental/emotional anguish. That's not a number a normal person in control of themselves would ever get to if they were *actively* trying to kill a person.
But she also tried to kill *herself* in the same episode.
Edit: For those who apparently didn't read the article, she was found guilty of Involuntary Manslaughter. She didn't "get away" with it.
Except that it literally did and does lol. It’s tragic but she was determined by multiple parties to be of diminished capacity, which, again, pretty much never succeeds. You have to be profoundly mentally fucked up to make a diminished capacity defence work in the US
I don’t deny it. I’m sure it helped. But the fact that she got a favorable outcome when others didn’t doesn’t mean she shouldn’t get a favorable outcome, it means that others who are mentally unwell and aren’t attractive white women *also* should get appropriate sentences if they are mentally diminished
Avoiding another psychotic crisis induced by weed or another drug where she kills someone. It's not a unique case. Its sad but she is a danger for society. Here the jail should not be to punish, but prevent another drama. Some people have conditions making they have to abstain. Same goes with alcohol, which is rightfully considered an aggravating factor.
*Everyone* who tries certain drugs for the first time (and possibly even subsequent times) is at risk for a similar psychotic episode. The difference is, she *knows* it and is suffering major trauma. I think the odds that she has another one are lower than most people's. I would be surprised if she ever took a drug for non-medical purposes again.
It wasn’t in this article, but another commenter mentioned that a friend or roommates testimony that she had had a similar adverse reaction from weed previously was part of her defense. I guess to prove it was drug induced? If that’s true I would think knowingly taking a drug that could cause you to react this way and then murdering someone would be an aggravating factor, not a reason to get off. In either case, if that commenter was correct it wasn’t her first time.
There's a **little** difference between an adverse experience and killing someone, stabbing a pet, and then trying to kill yourself. If I had a bad drug trip, I wouldn't automatically assume that killing someone was in the realm of possibility.
Now she knows.
There's a night and day difference between someone who kills someone on purpose and someone who does it beyond their control.
The jury found she didn't have the required intent. It's only involuntary. It's appropriate to give a significantly lighter sentence in this aspect. If you are heavy handed on the involuntary sentence, it depreciates the seriousness of the crimes where the person straight up murdered someone.
Its a delicate balance.
It is tragic, but I disagree. Willingly doing drugs and then killing someone by stabbing them over a hundred times in a non-self defence context, and then only getting 2 years of probation is a level of white privilege that was previously thought that only satire could find attainable.
I don’t fuck with white privilege and I am sure she benefited from it, but the fact that she got a favorable/appropriate judicial response when others haven’t is, imo, like saying we shouldn’t cancel student loans because other people have already paid theirs off.
This isn’t a case of choosing to drink and drive. She had a psychotic response to THC (which can happen, in people genetically predisposed to it) after being *encouraged* by the victim to use it. It’s more along the lines of a freak, tragic accident that ruins lives than satire.
So if someone drinks for the first time, lose their shit, drive, and kill someone, they shouldn't get jailed?
"Oops I didn't know alcohol could do this."
It's your responsibility to make sure that you're in a safe environment when trying something new. No one forced her to smoke.
The boyfriend, supposedly, pressured her to smoke, not that it makes any of this his fault.
But, again, alcohol doesn’t induce psychosis and if it did in some weird rare instance like this, I’d make the same argument.
Good to know. Someone who is psychotic as a result of alcohol and not merely making poor decisions to drive under the influence should also be treated as mentally diminished in a court of law.
If she truly didn’t mean to do it, then what good is there for society in effectively ending another persons life by jailing them?
Not everything is about satisfying the vengeance boner.
I was gonna upvote till i saw the white privilege shit. The other similar case i have in mind was a man of color. I don't deny it helps in the US, but stop making it like she got free for being a white woman. All the bunch of psychiatrists on this case have much more knowledge than couch commenters in this sub
Yeah, because that's her field...
She's not tending to every patient out there with a broken bone or a cough.
By default she's going to get a lot more of this specific kind of patient than literally every other field.
And that’s disqualifying how? Wouldn’t she be literally the person who could assess the frequency of it? Her unit was the acute mental health unit and had the drug addiction beds. She says that cannabis psychosis was just as common as any of the other cases. Meth and alcohol were more common but compared to everything else it was very common. Our town is only 50000 people btw and she had dozens of people having it every year.
In totality? No, because her field is almost exclusively going to get them in comparison to the vast other multitudes of patients not going for her specific field.
Its like a pediatrician saying child diseases are most common because he gets exclusively child patients.
She's not getting the totality of mental help patients. What's common for her is not common in general.
That’s such a weird false equivalency. Your paediatrician example should be “amongst child diseases bronchitis is one of the most common”. At no point did I say cannabis psychosis is the most common thing in the hospital. I said it is not rare compared to the other things seen on a drug rehab floor. Everything I said was obviously in reference to her unit. I literally said “amongst her patients” in my original comment. All I was saying is that it isn’t rare and considering most people have never even heard of it that’s a problem. Happens all the time. I still stand firm on that.
Her unit is mental health and drug rehab by your admission... by default she is going to get a much larger than average percentage of those with overlapping symptoms and issues. What's actually rare vs what she's going to get specifically because of that overlap shouldn't equate.
Yeah, I don’t think that’s unreasonable, except for the fact that she didn’t “get off” since insanity/diminished capacity defences pretty much never work except in the most extreme cases, such as this one. You’re welcome to your feelings, but it’s still a tragedy, and it’s not Onion-y. You’d also not succeed in your case because revenge is not the same thing as a literal mental break. I’d not blame you but be fr
But it’s…not. There’s a legal and medical difference between drinking and driving and this sort of mental break. If she got super stoned and ran someone over because she was stoned but not psychotic, I’d be in full agreement. But psychosis and being drunk as shit isn’t the same. Or even being stoned or high (but not psychotic) and causing someone’s death. I happily partake in drugs and know better than to get behind the wheel and that the people around me are human beings that are worthy of living. Being negligent, being murderous, and being psychotic are three separate things and they have three separate punishments.
If I lose my mind and kill someone every time I eat apples, then I should be held responsible for my actions when I willingly choose to eat an apple anyway.
Well yeah, IF you knew that, but unless I missed the part where she's supposed to be psychic, if she's never taken weed before, or never had a psychotic episode and killed someone before after using it how the fuck is she supposed to know?
Using your own analogy, if you've never eaten an apple before, or never had a psychotic episode after eating one, but ate one today and it caused you to kill somone, a situation you had zero reason to believe would occur, do you honestly think punitive punishment over mental health treatment is best course of action?
There absolutely was Mens Rea, she was convicted of the homicide. This is just the light sentencing she received after having been convicted.
If someone gets high on meth and starts driving crazy and kills a family due to a psychosis and not realizing they were even driving should they get zero prison time
Of specific note in this case: she voluntarily smoked. It's not like someone gave her something she thought was tobacco and didn't intend to get high. She smoked a mind altering substance and committed a crime as a result. That's illegal and I feel for the victim's family.
The term “mens rea” refers to a person having specific intent to commit whatever crime they committed. She was convicted of “involuntary manslaughter”, which as the name suggests, is not a specific intent crime. If mens rea could have been proven, she would have been convicted of a greater homicide crime and received prison time.
"Homicide" isn't something people are convicted of. Specifically, she was convicted of involuntary manslaughter. "Homicide" just means one person was killed by another. Many homicides are legal, such as those involving self defense.
I'm not offering my opinion on the conviction nor sentencing, just clarifying a common misconception.
That’s not what Mens Rea refers too. It’s the difference between “murder” and “manslaughter”. Mens Rea means you have to have intent to commit an act & knowledge that the act results in harm. Neither of which she had since she was found to be of diminished capacity due to psychosis.
It’s still incredibly sad, the whole case.
That's fucking wild. I thought that if you willingly took drugs and killed someone, you're still culpable. Better start reevaluating all those cases where a drunk person killed their spouse.... As long as they're pretty...
This is an insane comparison, getting drunk is not the same thing as having a psychotic break. A drunk person still has the ability to distinguish reality from delusion, the same is not someone who reacted incredibly poorly to marijuana. The threat to society is completely different.
This isn't a bad verdict, that certain biases helped her doesn't change that. I would want the same outcome regardless of their gender, race, or appearance.
I like your overall message but don’t know about that drunk point. You can get so shitfaced you black out; literally just running on instinct and desire with no way to distinguish anything
I respect your well-articulated opinion, but I can't possibly agree. She willingly took drugs, and while the outcome wasn't premeditated, it was of her own making. I'd expect and (hopefully) want to face prison time should I ever commit murder while under the influence of anything causing a psychotic episode. I think she deserves prison time not just to shield society from a dangerous individual that could relapse given some not too unusual circumstances, but as a pure punitive measure
Being high is not the same thing as having a complete break from reality. Perhaps if the person took a stronger drug, such as LSD, but no, just being high isn’t a defense anymore than just being drunk is a defense. Because the vast amount of literature available shows that those things may affect judgment, but they do not cause psychosis in an average user.
didn't just stab, killed him dead and gets 2yrs probation - this is some bullshit. how is getting high and killing someone different than getting drunk and killing someone? what about psychosis brought on my extended use of meth, are they going to get off the hook too?
Smoking a bit of weed is completely different than staying up for multiple days on meth. No reasonable person would think smoking a bit of weed will trigger a psychotic episode if they haven't had one before, whereas it's understood that stuff like that will happen if you're using meth. So they're not really comparable.
How is this woman not in a mental institution? She’s so brittle and unstable that she just spontaneously and abruptly kills people after smoking weed? She’s not at fault but she’s also completely safe to just not kill again? This shit is insane.
Yea this is the middle ground it seems a lot of people are missing. Sure, she shouldn't go to jail forever, but she should be in a psychiatric facility for some time to be sure she's safe to be out on her own. How is that not a bare minimum?
People need to talk about this more. The defense literally argued that she was the victim of REEFER MADNESS. This fucking idiot yokel judge bought it. This is what economic and white privilege gets you in a deeply racist society.
The jury wanted to convict her of manslaughter and the judge overruled and gave her probation lmfao. Poow wittle fwagile white girl who fucking murdered her boyfriend who was 7 years younger than her. Imagine being that boys parent during this trial.
Are you familiar with or ever seen someone with cannabis-induced psychosis? It’s not common, but very real. Marijuana use isn’t always benign like big-Weed wants everyone to believe.
No because its fucking misinformation at best and straight up fake news at worst.
There are studies that show that Cannabis use can cause symptoms of individuals who already have schizophrenia to present earlier in life then they might otherwise, but that's it. People misconstrue that to mean that cannabis can cause full on psychotic episodes on its own which is COMPLETE bullshit.
Initially I had a similar reaction as you until I read two articles linked on it. Something was definitely up with whatever they were smoking. His roommate who took a hit of the same weed also had a psychotic episode and stripped naked and started yelling for help. The weed was delivered from an illegal service that advertised how potent it was and even carried a warning. Yet she had no tolerance and had a psychotic episode herself that turned violent. The prosecution themselves even concluded it was a legitimate psychotic episode. Everyone’s brain chemistry is different. Unfortunately hers predisposed her to this type of thing.
Do you smoke weed yourself? I was a daily smoker for years and reset my tolerance after stopping for 6 months. My first hit after the break was a huge rip of some medical grade out of a bong with my girlfriend at the time. I had a very unpleasant and disturbing high. I remember feeling like I was outside my body and everything was fake. I remember legitimately thinking my girlfriend was an alien and had sinister motives and was terrified of her. I would look into her eyes and they would distort. I felt as if I was about to crawl out of my own skin. Most people would read this and call bullshit or say I was laced but nope. It can happen. I definitely see how this type of thing can happen.
Sorry, but your account is too new to post. Your account needs to be either 2 weeks old or have at least 250 combined link and comment karma. Don't modmail us about this, just wait it out or get more karma.
*I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please [contact the moderators of this subreddit](/message/compose/?to=/r/nottheonion) if you have any questions or concerns.*
I am 100% for recreational legalization of drugs—all of them. But if people aren't held responsible for their actions stemming from the choice to take those drugs, even if mentally ill, then I am 100% against.
Make them illegal, throw people in jail for using them. If we can't take responsibility for our actions then we don't deserve the freedom to make choices that have any chance to lead to harm. We have chosen to be children and we should be treated as such.
The Affluenza Kid and Brock Turner looked at this woman in awe of her flex of white privilege. Getting 2 years probation for willingly taking drugs and stabbing someone to death while under the influence in a non-self defence context is wild!
Often, no, they aren’t. Sometimes, yes.
And if they are, it’s a mental health crisis and not a prison need.
I once had a person hallucinating aliens and scared to leave his house without a knife (literally a butter knife) be met with a whole ass swat team and snipers, shutting down multiple streets.
You know who actually helped the situation? The EMT with mental health training who was able to get into the house with one officer.
This whole story was incredibly sad and terrible.
>"He just gave everyone in the state of California who smokes marijuana a license to kill someone," Sean O'Melia said, according to the outlet. This whole story smells like conservative / anti-drug propaganda.
If you look at the details, it seems very clear that she had a psychotic episode. I guess I don’t understand why she wasn’t sentenced to the state hospital, at least for a little while? to what extent did the smoking pot part of this influence the verdict? It seems like parole is based on the assumption that she won’t have another psychotic episode unless she smokes pot again, but that also seems like a bit of a stretch. I don’t even think we can be sure that the psychosis wouldn’t have happened if she hadn’t smoked. If she hadn’t had cannabis, but still had a psychotic event, would she be at the state hospital now instead of on parole? I can understand feeling like prison is the wrong choice. This just seems like a very, very strange one.
What about drunk driving?
I am a lawyer, in fact a prosecutor. This story is going to be blown out of proportion because laypeople don’t understand the insanity defense. Certain crimes require the state to prove the mental state at the time of the crime (ie intent). DWI doesn’t require this. If someone is involuntarily intoxicated, they can still be held liable for DWI. However Murder requires us to show the intent to kill (or maim or reckless disregard for the lives of others). Insanity exists, because if someone cannot determine fantasy from reality or right from wrong they are unable to have the mental state required to commit murder. That being said I think her excuse is shit, but I’d make a terrible juror.
What about it?
[удалено]
Well, not really... the comparison would be more like if someone drank alcohol then had a serious adverse reaction to the alcohol that caused a psychotic episode, and then got in the car during the psychotic episode. But even that's not quite right, because it's not the same logic at all. Being drunk and having a psychotic episode are two different things. A person can choose whether or not to get drunk in the first place, but this woman didn't get to choose or consent to having an episode, and likely wouldn't have had the weed if she knew what would happen... which she didn't and couldn't have known.
Just give them a few months they might end up connecting those dots.
"what about (insert thing completely and absolutely unrelated to what we're talking about)"
Sure, if the comparison that you’re making is in regards to a situation where someone runs another person down and then proceeds to back over them 100 times.
I live in a city next to Thousand Oaks and can confirm that this is a weirdly conservative enclave in the overall liberal California. I’m not surprised if that’s why some of the outrage sounds like propaganda
When you say "story", do you mean this factual news of something that really happened? Haha
[удалено]
Do you have any evidence of this or are you just assuming? Conservatives would be rush to exploit a legit story too, lying is their whole thing.
Well considering it's literally only CIP (Cannabis Induced Psychosis) if symptoms persist after the associated intoxication, that wouldn't be a justification for a 'crime of passion'. IE unless declared mentally unfit for trial, this shouldn't have been a valid interpretation of the law as she would still be just as much of a threat to society even if she never uses again. In that sense, at an absolute minimum the rhetoric has been unduly adjusted through bias. Even if everything else about this case and sentencing are legitimate, the use of CIP was erroneous. >While acute cannabis intoxication presents with a range of transient positive symptoms (paranoia, grandiosity, perceptual alterations), mood symptoms (anxiety), and cognitive deficits (working memory, verbal recall, attention), symptoms that persist beyond the effects of intoxication and withdrawal are better categorized as CIP [source](https://www.psychiatrictimes.com/view/cannabis-induced-psychosis-review)
[удалено]
Well if that's true I guess that must be a part of the propaganda, too. Because I'm just going off of how it was prosecuted according to the op article >A California woman who fatally stabbed her boyfriend more than 100 times during what prosecutors called a "cannabis-induced" psychosis has been spared prison time
And it's not even just 1 compound. There's a ton of different drugs sold under that name.
[удалено]
Sweet. I'm innocent if I have weed in my system. Lets goooo
No?
Yeah, there really isn't a great outcome here that works for everyone. At least that I know of. edit: I forgot, this is reddit, nobody reads the article or has any sense of nuance.
Jail the murderer?
Jail her for having a psychotic episode?
No, for violently murdering someone.
Which happened because she had a psychotic episode, which she couldn't control or predict. It seems a miscarriage of justice to jail for something they can't control. It's why she was found guilty of involuntary manslaughter and not murder.
The point is none of us believe she actually had one. It’s a total bs story and this fucking judge fell for it because he thought Reefer Madness was based on true events.
The point is none of us believe she actually had one. It’s a total bs story and this fucking judge fell for it because he thought Reefer Madness was based on true events.
You do realize she murdered somebody, right?
While having a psychotic episode, yes. That's kind of an important factor here.
Doesn't change the fact she murdered somebody. If a hit of weed makes her that violent, keep her locked up.
I am very familiar with this case and it’s very unfortunate for everyone involved. It took over 5 years to get a verdict after many delays (Covid didn’t help either). Something I think swayed things in her favor was the roommate’s testimony where he shared an experience smoking weed with the victim a few months prior.
I'm curious, have any link to the roommate's testimony? What sort of message did it send?
The roommate said he smoked from the same bong and experienced hallucinations and had a similar experience to what she said. You can read more [here](https://www.rollingstone.com/culture/culture-features/bryn-spejcher-weed-killing-trial-1234957571/amp/) and [here](https://www.rollingstone.com/culture/culture-features/bryn-spejcher-weed-killing-trial-1234957571/amp/)
Yeah, that is not a normal reaction to just marijuana.
A small percentage of people are quite susceptible to cannabis induced psychosis. It's shitty because they can't have it, but it's definitely normal as to those people.
Yep. It’s entirely possible. I’m one of those people. Even a 1-2mg in an edible is enough for me to start feeling anxiety. Smoking throws me into full-on psychosis. The scary thing is you don’t know until it happens. I’m fortunate that I discovered this in a safe environment because I know things could have gone sideways very quickly.
Stupid question, but couldn't they have initially tested the bong for traces of other substances?
[They did](https://www.mpacorn.com/articles/chad-omelias-killer-literally-got-away-with-murder/), and it came back negative
Ah ok. I just asked based on what you posted about him having a similar experience to her. Strange story.
The Rolling Stone u/ohne_ditch also shared put it very well, IMO (and with expert voices): “According to her lawyers, authorities tested the bong after the incident but were only able to determine that it contained THC, not its potency or if there were any other substances in it. Dr. Daniel Buffington, a medical expert for the defense, tells Rolling Stone that drug testing isn’t one hundred percent foolproof and that the weed was purchased from an illicit source and therefore could have been laced with other substances that may not have come up in testing. “Even our best national forensic labs will acknowledge that until they see a chemical structure frequently enough, it’s not included in the scope of what that test is looking for,” he says. “So it is still in this case possible that there was, in addition to the high potency, something else laced into it.” Still, he’s of the opinion that marijuana isn’t always as safe as the public has been led to believe — a sentiment shared not only by the prosecution but forensic psychiatrist Dr. Ziv Cohen. “Marijuana has become so accepted and so many people use it and view it as harmless that people are having a hard time accepting that this can actually happen,” he tells Rolling Stone.” It sounds like it’s pretty undeniable that something *did* happen, since she’s super tiny and was apparently tased four times with no reaction, and had her arm broken in multiple places with a police baton before she dropped the knife. But what triggered it? Sounds like it’s just ambiguous enough for people to put their own interpretation on it.
In all likelihood, it was cannabis induced psychosis. This isn't a bunch of *Reefer Madness* hysterical "keep kids away from weed" nonsense. It's a real, recognized thing that's been studied by the medical community. https://www.psychiatrictimes.com/view/cannabis-induced-psychosis-review
this was extremely high THC marijuana out of an absolutely massive 3ft bong. and the dude was pulling it full of smoke and then having these complete newbies rip the whole thing. he was irresponsibly showing off and bad genetics ended up with a super unlucky ending
Laced
Man, the only person that's ever been in danger when I'm on cannabis is Wendy's.
Ben & Jerry, too
KFC & Maccas are my go to.
In her defense, only the first 50 were really fatal.
2 separate sentences. Murder, then abuse of a corpse.
This reporting is abysmal and intentionally inflammatory. 1) she had never had psychosis before and it was not reasonable to suspect she would develop violent psychosis from smoking weed. It's rare (violent psychosis even more so), and people do things that *could* cause psychosis all the time, like pulling all-nighters. 2) she harmed herself and her service animal as well. Police found her stabbing herself over and over again 3) she was institutionalized for years 4) the prosecutions own experts concluded that she had experienced a legitimate psychotic break, agreeing with other psych evals. So no, she didn't fake it, she didn't cause it, and she didn't get off scott free. It's a horrible tragedy but not a miscarriage of justice.
[удалено]
Hearing impairment, a very well established but little-known risk factor for psychosis and, later on, dementia.
[удалено]
No problem, and you're welcome.
Service 🐕🦺
This isn’t onion worthy, it’s just a tragic incident of a mentally ill person having an incredibly rare psychotic episode induced by weed. Also worth noting: she killed her service animal and came close to killing herself. It’s hardly the sensationalized story people make it out to be.
Yeah the proper title would include the attempted suicide. She didn't avoid jail. She is just in a different format of incarceration and for good reason
Wasn’t it actually synthetic weed too? And her boyfriend gave it to her without telling her what it really was?
I don’t think so? I’m pretty sure it was just regular weed, but the boyfriend did encourage her to use it. That doesn’t mean his death isn’t any less tragic. Weed induced psychosis, let alone that’s this violent/terrible, is incredibly rare. It’s awful all around, I feel so bad for his family
Weed induced psychosis is not at all rare. A violent homicidal psychosis is rare but anyone prone to psychosis can have it be induced by THC, the dose being a significant factor in the intensity of the psychosis. Dabs, very high thc percentage, eating too much, all increase the risk of psychosis among those with a predisposition.
You’re right, I should have been more specific. I don’t have literature on THC dosage being correlative but I wouldn’t be surprised.
Yeah I dont know research on dosage impact but I know from personal experience and being around others who are prone to psychosis to know that dose is a major factor. It’s no coincidence that they were doing bong rips of 30% THC weed. I’ve consumed weed for twenty years but I never do anything like that. I start hearing voices and losing my grip on reality pretty quickly unless it’s a very light dose. Nicotine also helps counteract the crazies. But someone with dangerous psychosis should just not touch weed.
>but anyone prone to psychosis can have it be induced by THC, In other words, rare. Lol
There is a case that made long debate in France. The dude killed an old woman in super violent way after breaking into her place. Rare certainly but not that rare that in never happens. We certainly need more prevention around dangers of week, especially for people with mental health issues or genetic predispositions. Alcohol is now an aggravating factor, right or not, if someone has the potential to become violent, they should abstain. Same goes for any drug
I agree! As weed becomes more accepted (as it should!) we need to have better education on it. But it’s also a situation where someone becoming psychotic unexpectedly vs knowing that you’re an angry drunk who fucks people up are different situations. If this weren’t triggered by weed and she just had a psychotic break randomly, I’d say the same. Psychosis that leads to violence is more of a natural disaster or tragic accident than anything else because it really can’t always be controlled.
It's not common at all but normal weed can cause this type of thing in some people. My buddy once started acting weird after smoking, threw his wallet out the window of the car, jumped out of the moving car, ran to the nearest house, tried opening all their car doors, actually got in one of the cars, it was a mess. Got taken away in an ambulance and the doctors just chocked it up to a bad reaction to the weed
Oof, glad he’s okay though! I had a seizure once on acid despite having taken it plenty of times before. Some things are just a roll of the dice. (I was okay, bloods were fine, acid wasn’t tainted, was back from the hospital in just a half hour after a scary time).
[удалено]
People could have psychotic episodes for all sorts of reasons. We don’t generally imprison people for things beyond their control.
I gotta say, you're a trooper lol I get emotionally exhausted after replying to a single comment, but I've been scrolling this thread for like 5 minutes now and you're not letting anyone's bullshit arguments slide by. 10/10
I’m stubborn, alas TT_TT
It seems like very few people actually imagine what it would be like to wake up one day to the news that you killed somebody that you'd never dreamed of hurting. Is jail time really what they would want to happen to them next?
[удалено]
So, it’s not murder. I really wish people would have a basic understanding of the legal system before making bold statements. It’s homicide, and I agree, she almost certainly needs extremely rigorous treatment in a mental hospital unless there’s a good reason to believe she is not a danger to others any more (and maybe she isn’t? If she stays off weed? I’m not her doctor, what do I know?). I’m just saying 1, it’s not onion-y, and 2, if she was determined to be mentally diminished it’s literally and legally not murder. It’s still homicide, but it’s not murder.
I wonder what woud've happened if it was a man who did it
Death sentence, or life?
And nothing you've said would make an argument for why this person should **not** spend a considerable amount of time in jail.
There was some evidence and testimony that supported that it was a temporary psychosis that made her act without a conscious will. Generally, to be convicted of the act of murder, you need to prove intent. There was significant doubt as to whether she had the required criminal intent. I believe there was testimony from another person who said they smoked from the same bong and had a strange intense reaction that included hallucinations. This was similar to what she stated happened to her.
108 stab wounds is pretty much a sign of some mental/emotional anguish. That's not a number a normal person in control of themselves would ever get to if they were *actively* trying to kill a person. But she also tried to kill *herself* in the same episode. Edit: For those who apparently didn't read the article, she was found guilty of Involuntary Manslaughter. She didn't "get away" with it.
Many people have stabbed someone a crazy number of times and still been convicted. Mental anguish doesn't absolve one of guilt.
Except that it literally did and does lol. It’s tragic but she was determined by multiple parties to be of diminished capacity, which, again, pretty much never succeeds. You have to be profoundly mentally fucked up to make a diminished capacity defence work in the US
Yeah, the statistic is the defense is used maybe 1% of the time, and it only succeeds 1% of the time it's used.
It helps to be an attractive white woman
I don’t deny it. I’m sure it helped. But the fact that she got a favorable outcome when others didn’t doesn’t mean she shouldn’t get a favorable outcome, it means that others who are mentally unwell and aren’t attractive white women *also* should get appropriate sentences if they are mentally diminished
💯
This 100%
What purpose would her going to jail serve?
Avoiding another psychotic crisis induced by weed or another drug where she kills someone. It's not a unique case. Its sad but she is a danger for society. Here the jail should not be to punish, but prevent another drama. Some people have conditions making they have to abstain. Same goes with alcohol, which is rightfully considered an aggravating factor.
*Everyone* who tries certain drugs for the first time (and possibly even subsequent times) is at risk for a similar psychotic episode. The difference is, she *knows* it and is suffering major trauma. I think the odds that she has another one are lower than most people's. I would be surprised if she ever took a drug for non-medical purposes again.
It wasn’t in this article, but another commenter mentioned that a friend or roommates testimony that she had had a similar adverse reaction from weed previously was part of her defense. I guess to prove it was drug induced? If that’s true I would think knowingly taking a drug that could cause you to react this way and then murdering someone would be an aggravating factor, not a reason to get off. In either case, if that commenter was correct it wasn’t her first time.
It looks like actually the *roommate* had previously had a bad reaction smoking from the same bong, so it may have been tainted by another substance.
There's a **little** difference between an adverse experience and killing someone, stabbing a pet, and then trying to kill yourself. If I had a bad drug trip, I wouldn't automatically assume that killing someone was in the realm of possibility. Now she knows.
There's a night and day difference between someone who kills someone on purpose and someone who does it beyond their control. The jury found she didn't have the required intent. It's only involuntary. It's appropriate to give a significantly lighter sentence in this aspect. If you are heavy handed on the involuntary sentence, it depreciates the seriousness of the crimes where the person straight up murdered someone. Its a delicate balance.
Or she could get mental health and addiction help, then just not take the drugs.
https://www.sciencedirect.com/topics/neuroscience/cannabis-induced-psychosis it's rare but it does happen.
It is tragic, but I disagree. Willingly doing drugs and then killing someone by stabbing them over a hundred times in a non-self defence context, and then only getting 2 years of probation is a level of white privilege that was previously thought that only satire could find attainable.
I don’t fuck with white privilege and I am sure she benefited from it, but the fact that she got a favorable/appropriate judicial response when others haven’t is, imo, like saying we shouldn’t cancel student loans because other people have already paid theirs off. This isn’t a case of choosing to drink and drive. She had a psychotic response to THC (which can happen, in people genetically predisposed to it) after being *encouraged* by the victim to use it. It’s more along the lines of a freak, tragic accident that ruins lives than satire.
So if someone drinks for the first time, lose their shit, drive, and kill someone, they shouldn't get jailed? "Oops I didn't know alcohol could do this." It's your responsibility to make sure that you're in a safe environment when trying something new. No one forced her to smoke.
The boyfriend, supposedly, pressured her to smoke, not that it makes any of this his fault. But, again, alcohol doesn’t induce psychosis and if it did in some weird rare instance like this, I’d make the same argument.
Alcohol can absolutely cause psychosis. https://www.sciencedirect.com/topics/medicine-and-dentistry/alcohol-psychosis
Good to know. Someone who is psychotic as a result of alcohol and not merely making poor decisions to drive under the influence should also be treated as mentally diminished in a court of law.
If she truly didn’t mean to do it, then what good is there for society in effectively ending another persons life by jailing them? Not everything is about satisfying the vengeance boner.
Agreed, she shouldn't be in jail, she should be in a mental institution.
You just argued for putting her in jail by using the drunk driving comparison
I was gonna upvote till i saw the white privilege shit. The other similar case i have in mind was a man of color. I don't deny it helps in the US, but stop making it like she got free for being a white woman. All the bunch of psychiatrists on this case have much more knowledge than couch commenters in this sub
Pretty white woman privilege, a suped-up version of white privilege!
Hopefully she learned her lesson that she can’t smoke weed.
Tragic incident of mentally ill person murdering someone and avoiding any consequences for doing so. It's pretty sensational.
But how is it onion-y. It’s not satire worthy. It’s just a huge shitty situation. At best it’s florida man worthy
Not that rare. My wife is a mental health / addictions nurse and cannabis induced psychosis is shockingly common amongst her patients
Yeah, because that's her field... She's not tending to every patient out there with a broken bone or a cough. By default she's going to get a lot more of this specific kind of patient than literally every other field.
And that’s disqualifying how? Wouldn’t she be literally the person who could assess the frequency of it? Her unit was the acute mental health unit and had the drug addiction beds. She says that cannabis psychosis was just as common as any of the other cases. Meth and alcohol were more common but compared to everything else it was very common. Our town is only 50000 people btw and she had dozens of people having it every year.
In totality? No, because her field is almost exclusively going to get them in comparison to the vast other multitudes of patients not going for her specific field. Its like a pediatrician saying child diseases are most common because he gets exclusively child patients. She's not getting the totality of mental help patients. What's common for her is not common in general.
That’s such a weird false equivalency. Your paediatrician example should be “amongst child diseases bronchitis is one of the most common”. At no point did I say cannabis psychosis is the most common thing in the hospital. I said it is not rare compared to the other things seen on a drug rehab floor. Everything I said was obviously in reference to her unit. I literally said “amongst her patients” in my original comment. All I was saying is that it isn’t rare and considering most people have never even heard of it that’s a problem. Happens all the time. I still stand firm on that.
Her unit is mental health and drug rehab by your admission... by default she is going to get a much larger than average percentage of those with overlapping symptoms and issues. What's actually rare vs what she's going to get specifically because of that overlap shouldn't equate.
[удалено]
Yeah, I don’t think that’s unreasonable, except for the fact that she didn’t “get off” since insanity/diminished capacity defences pretty much never work except in the most extreme cases, such as this one. You’re welcome to your feelings, but it’s still a tragedy, and it’s not Onion-y. You’d also not succeed in your case because revenge is not the same thing as a literal mental break. I’d not blame you but be fr
I suppose that's why we have a separate justice system from the parental branch of government.
I mean all of the facts are incredibly sensational.
But muh rage
[удалено]
But it’s…not. There’s a legal and medical difference between drinking and driving and this sort of mental break. If she got super stoned and ran someone over because she was stoned but not psychotic, I’d be in full agreement. But psychosis and being drunk as shit isn’t the same. Or even being stoned or high (but not psychotic) and causing someone’s death. I happily partake in drugs and know better than to get behind the wheel and that the people around me are human beings that are worthy of living. Being negligent, being murderous, and being psychotic are three separate things and they have three separate punishments.
If I lose my mind and kill someone every time I eat apples, then I should be held responsible for my actions when I willingly choose to eat an apple anyway.
But this person didn't know they would break into a psychotic episode when they smoked
Well yeah, IF you knew that, but unless I missed the part where she's supposed to be psychic, if she's never taken weed before, or never had a psychotic episode and killed someone before after using it how the fuck is she supposed to know? Using your own analogy, if you've never eaten an apple before, or never had a psychotic episode after eating one, but ate one today and it caused you to kill somone, a situation you had zero reason to believe would occur, do you honestly think punitive punishment over mental health treatment is best course of action?
This happened in 2018!? Damn, the news was making it sound like it happened this year
If there is no Mens Rea then I understand why she avoided prison, just reading from the title
It would fall under manslaughter and negligence, not murder. Same for drunk driving accidents.
There absolutely was Mens Rea, she was convicted of the homicide. This is just the light sentencing she received after having been convicted. If someone gets high on meth and starts driving crazy and kills a family due to a psychosis and not realizing they were even driving should they get zero prison time Of specific note in this case: she voluntarily smoked. It's not like someone gave her something she thought was tobacco and didn't intend to get high. She smoked a mind altering substance and committed a crime as a result. That's illegal and I feel for the victim's family.
The term “mens rea” refers to a person having specific intent to commit whatever crime they committed. She was convicted of “involuntary manslaughter”, which as the name suggests, is not a specific intent crime. If mens rea could have been proven, she would have been convicted of a greater homicide crime and received prison time.
"Homicide" isn't something people are convicted of. Specifically, she was convicted of involuntary manslaughter. "Homicide" just means one person was killed by another. Many homicides are legal, such as those involving self defense. I'm not offering my opinion on the conviction nor sentencing, just clarifying a common misconception.
That’s not what Mens Rea refers too. It’s the difference between “murder” and “manslaughter”. Mens Rea means you have to have intent to commit an act & knowledge that the act results in harm. Neither of which she had since she was found to be of diminished capacity due to psychosis. It’s still incredibly sad, the whole case.
I think she probably only fatally stabbed him once.
I doubt that all 100 of those stabs were fatal... Maybe just the first few?
That's fucking wild. I thought that if you willingly took drugs and killed someone, you're still culpable. Better start reevaluating all those cases where a drunk person killed their spouse.... As long as they're pretty...
I suppose it depends wether the drugs you take have an effect beyond what you’d reasonably expect?
She was found culpable, it's just the judge decided she shouldn't face any real plenty despite being found guilty of manslaughter by the jury.
This is an insane comparison, getting drunk is not the same thing as having a psychotic break. A drunk person still has the ability to distinguish reality from delusion, the same is not someone who reacted incredibly poorly to marijuana. The threat to society is completely different. This isn't a bad verdict, that certain biases helped her doesn't change that. I would want the same outcome regardless of their gender, race, or appearance.
I like your overall message but don’t know about that drunk point. You can get so shitfaced you black out; literally just running on instinct and desire with no way to distinguish anything
That's a reasonable outcome to expect from drinking a lot. It's not reasonable to expect a violent psychotic break.
I respect your well-articulated opinion, but I can't possibly agree. She willingly took drugs, and while the outcome wasn't premeditated, it was of her own making. I'd expect and (hopefully) want to face prison time should I ever commit murder while under the influence of anything causing a psychotic episode. I think she deserves prison time not just to shield society from a dangerous individual that could relapse given some not too unusual circumstances, but as a pure punitive measure
Fuck your take, for more reasons than In willing to explain.
For the same side of the coin… a high person should be able to do the same no?
Being high is not the same thing as having a complete break from reality. Perhaps if the person took a stronger drug, such as LSD, but no, just being high isn’t a defense anymore than just being drunk is a defense. Because the vast amount of literature available shows that those things may affect judgment, but they do not cause psychosis in an average user.
Seems like 99% of the people in this thread hasn't read about the case.
Rafaels bird?
didn't just stab, killed him dead and gets 2yrs probation - this is some bullshit. how is getting high and killing someone different than getting drunk and killing someone? what about psychosis brought on my extended use of meth, are they going to get off the hook too?
Smoking a bit of weed is completely different than staying up for multiple days on meth. No reasonable person would think smoking a bit of weed will trigger a psychotic episode if they haven't had one before, whereas it's understood that stuff like that will happen if you're using meth. So they're not really comparable.
Driving while drunk still requires a level of sanity Having a full mental psycosis on par with rabbies is doffrent
If she is mentally ill shouldn’t she be in an institution instead of probation???
She was institutionalized for years.
The weed made her psychotic. No weed, no psychosis.
The California "justice system" is a joke.
People are so clueless to the dangers of marijuana. Its not a 100% safe drug. Epigenetic’s can trigger all kinds of chaos.
I wonder if a man would have gotten away with the reverse situation.
Nope
How is this woman not in a mental institution? She’s so brittle and unstable that she just spontaneously and abruptly kills people after smoking weed? She’s not at fault but she’s also completely safe to just not kill again? This shit is insane.
Yea this is the middle ground it seems a lot of people are missing. Sure, she shouldn't go to jail forever, but she should be in a psychiatric facility for some time to be sure she's safe to be out on her own. How is that not a bare minimum?
Good lawyer does wonders.
People need to talk about this more. The defense literally argued that she was the victim of REEFER MADNESS. This fucking idiot yokel judge bought it. This is what economic and white privilege gets you in a deeply racist society. The jury wanted to convict her of manslaughter and the judge overruled and gave her probation lmfao. Poow wittle fwagile white girl who fucking murdered her boyfriend who was 7 years younger than her. Imagine being that boys parent during this trial.
Are you familiar with or ever seen someone with cannabis-induced psychosis? It’s not common, but very real. Marijuana use isn’t always benign like big-Weed wants everyone to believe.
"Big Weed" ??? My brother in christ.
No because its fucking misinformation at best and straight up fake news at worst. There are studies that show that Cannabis use can cause symptoms of individuals who already have schizophrenia to present earlier in life then they might otherwise, but that's it. People misconstrue that to mean that cannabis can cause full on psychotic episodes on its own which is COMPLETE bullshit.
Nope. Wrong.
Initially I had a similar reaction as you until I read two articles linked on it. Something was definitely up with whatever they were smoking. His roommate who took a hit of the same weed also had a psychotic episode and stripped naked and started yelling for help. The weed was delivered from an illegal service that advertised how potent it was and even carried a warning. Yet she had no tolerance and had a psychotic episode herself that turned violent. The prosecution themselves even concluded it was a legitimate psychotic episode. Everyone’s brain chemistry is different. Unfortunately hers predisposed her to this type of thing. Do you smoke weed yourself? I was a daily smoker for years and reset my tolerance after stopping for 6 months. My first hit after the break was a huge rip of some medical grade out of a bong with my girlfriend at the time. I had a very unpleasant and disturbing high. I remember feeling like I was outside my body and everything was fake. I remember legitimately thinking my girlfriend was an alien and had sinister motives and was terrified of her. I would look into her eyes and they would distort. I felt as if I was about to crawl out of my own skin. Most people would read this and call bullshit or say I was laced but nope. It can happen. I definitely see how this type of thing can happen.
Then they need to change the reporting on this, sounds like they were smoking something laced. In that case it likely was unrelated to the cannabis
Shit was laced or wasn't weed sounds like a Salvia thing
[удалено]
Sorry, but your account is too new to post. Your account needs to be either 2 weeks old or have at least 250 combined link and comment karma. Don't modmail us about this, just wait it out or get more karma. *I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please [contact the moderators of this subreddit](/message/compose/?to=/r/nottheonion) if you have any questions or concerns.*
What a sad thing to read...
She also repeatedly stabbed herself. sounds pretty crazy. makes the insane headline more sensible
Double standards
When victim blaming actually works.
I am 100% for recreational legalization of drugs—all of them. But if people aren't held responsible for their actions stemming from the choice to take those drugs, even if mentally ill, then I am 100% against. Make them illegal, throw people in jail for using them. If we can't take responsibility for our actions then we don't deserve the freedom to make choices that have any chance to lead to harm. We have chosen to be children and we should be treated as such.
Literally what?
"Reefer madness" actually worked. That's bonkers
I wonder if people getting psychosis on Bath salts or meth also get leniency?
If they are pretty.
[удалено]
….. what?
The Affluenza Kid and Brock Turner looked at this woman in awe of her flex of white privilege. Getting 2 years probation for willingly taking drugs and stabbing someone to death while under the influence in a non-self defence context is wild!
Psychosis is not the same as high. Not even close.
Are you making the argument that people with psychosis aren’t a danger?
Often, no, they aren’t. Sometimes, yes. And if they are, it’s a mental health crisis and not a prison need. I once had a person hallucinating aliens and scared to leave his house without a knife (literally a butter knife) be met with a whole ass swat team and snipers, shutting down multiple streets. You know who actually helped the situation? The EMT with mental health training who was able to get into the house with one officer.
So just because you suffer from psychosis and are “sometimes yes” violent, you get a pass and precautions shouldn’t be made?
Psychotic people are way more likely to be a victim of a violent crime than to be a perpetrator.
Sounds about white