A Double Tragedy

There has been plenty of press coverage on the recent tragedy in Toronto, where a woman was found half-dead in the trunk of her car, beside her two young children, who were dead.  The autopsies have been completed, but there were no physical signs of why the children died.  There has not been any disclosure as to why the mother was half-dead.

I am willing to bet one of two things: The children were administered poison by the mother, who then took some herself (but, apparently, not enough to kill her) or that it is carbon monoxide poisoning.

Apparently, the woman has already been charged with the murder of the children.  Press reports suggest that she was very depressed by the death of her husband a year ago in an industrial accident.

What is the purpose of charging the woman with murder at this time?  I am not sure.  Think through what will happen:

The woman was reportedly having some emotional or mental problems.  A person doesn't hang out in a trunk of a car with two dead children when she is in her right mind.  (Assume for the sake of argument that the mother either admits or is proven to have caused the death of the children.)  So, the obvious defence will be that she was of unsound mind at the time the offence occurred.

Her lawyer will undoubtedly raise temporary insanity as a defence.  The lawyer will also insist on a jury trial.  Can anyone contemplate a jury of 12 people coming to the conclusion that the woman was NOT suffering from a disease of the mind when she killed her children? I don't think so.

The result will be that she will be committed to a mental facility until she is deemed to be of sound mind.  She was suffering some form of depression which can probably be treated and will result in her no longer being a risk to herself and others in some period of time, meaning that she will be released.

So what is the point of a prosecution?  Why don?t we just ensure that she gets the proper medical care to treat her for her injuries and whatever condition caused her do this in the first place?

The crown attorney has an obligation not to proceed with a charge if he or she feels that there is no reasonable prospect for a conviction.  Certainly, this is a case where the crown attorney's discretion ought to be exercised early.

Of course, that's just my opinion.