Brittany Jno-Baptiste pleads guilty to manslaughter

10
Brittany Jno-Baptiste

Brittany Jno-Baptiste has pleaded guilty to manslaughter by diminished responsibility in the 2021 killing of 66-year-old Jane Finch. Initially charged with murder, Jno-Baptiste, who admitted to hallucinating during the incident, changed her plea following advice from her attorney. Finch was fatally stabbed with pliers at her Piccadilly home on October 4, 2021.

Advertise with the mоѕt vіѕіtеd nеwѕ ѕіtе іn Antigua!
We offer fully customizable and flexible digital marketing packages.
Contact us at [email protected]

10 COMMENTS

  1. Hearing that she was halucinating makes you wonder what was going on in ner mind. Mental health is still so stigmatized and we need more conversations

  2. It’s a difficult outcome but at least there some recognition of her mental state. This case raises lots of questions about justice and responsibility

  3. I can’t imagine the pain both families are going through. Mental health issues are so complex, and it’s good to see it acknowledged in the courtroom.

  4. Hopefully she will receive treatment for her disease, serve her time and return to her community to make atonement for killing another human being. It is what it is and she should never place herself in a situation where her thoughts can lead to harm another human. We all belong to the same race.

  5. Society has failed so many of these mentally disturbed persons and we only seek to incarcerate them after they have committed some serious atrocities. So many of them are still unable to obtain the treatment they need. They are literally ignored, neglected and forgotten in large numbers until they act, then they find themselves swept up into the burgeoning justice system. She would most likely be sent to prison with her mental situation untreated and can only deteriorate even further there.
    In the meantime , my friend and former villager is no more, having died a most horrific death.

  6. OH LAWD! ‘…DIMINISH RESPONSIBILITY:’ …EXPEDIENT PLEA DEAL: …TWO TRAVESTIES

    None shall be ‘…MISLED’ by this news development.

    NOTE:

    It has never been the ‘…EVIDENTIAL DUTY’ of any ‘…ACCUSED PERSON,’ to prove his/her ‘…INNOCENCE,’ but for the ‘…PROSECUTION’ to prove ‘…GUILT BEYOND REASONABLE DOUBT.’

    HERE IS WHY:

    Writing professionally and authoritatively, this ‘PLEA’ has resulted from:

    (i) ‘…That which appears to have been ‘…an EXPEDIENT PLEA DEAL:

    (ii) …Between:

    (a) …An apparent incompetent Crown Prosecutor: and
    (b) …A clearly cunning and exploitative Defence Attorney.’

    TRAVESTIES:

    The outcome, therefore, speaks to ‘…TWO GLARING TRAVESTIES:’

    (i) ‘…An apparent short-circuited ‘…PROSECUTORIAL TRAVESTY: and

    (ii) …A grave and unforgiveable ‘…TRAVESTY TO, AND OF JUSTICE.’

    In ‘MURDER,’ the constituent evidence, includes: ‘…MALICE,’ either:

    (a) ‘…EXPRESS- Spoken word: and

    (b) …IMPLIED- Evident by the ‘GRAVITY OF THE ACT,’ seen by the: ‘…NATURE AND
    SEVERITY’ of the alleged perpetrated violence, and ‘MULTIPLICITY’ of injuries
    inflicted on the body of the deceased,
    particularly where the ‘…VITAL ORGANS’ are located.’

    EVIDENTIALLY:

    In ‘…FULL MURDER TRIALS,’ these speak to both:

    (i) ‘…IMPLICATIONS: and

    (ii) …INTENT.’

LEAVE A REPLY

Please enter your comment!
Please enter your name here