Reply to Is anyone watching Dirty John tonight? Betty Broderick's story

Forum Index » Entertainment and Pop Culture

Reply to "Is anyone watching Dirty John tonight? Betty Broderick's story"

Subject:

Emoticons





More smilies

Text Color: Font: Close Marks

[quote=Anonymous][quote=Anonymous][quote=Anonymous][quote=Anonymous][quote=Anonymous][quote=Anonymous][quote=Anonymous][quote=Anonymous][quote=Anonymous][quote=Anonymous][quote=Anonymous][quote=Anonymous][quote=Anonymous][quote=Anonymous]I would take Dan’s money and live a good life. Forget all that crazy shit she did. He was not that great and he was not worth all that crazy shit. Take the money and enjoy life.[/quote]

Therein lies the problem. It wasn't all Dan's money. She should have gotten 50%, but he swindled her. She also played right into his hands with her antics, but yes she should have outsmarted him. Good psychology wasn't her strength either. [/quote]

He knew she reacted emotionally rather than rationally. He manipulated her every step of the way, and yes she played into his hands until she couldn't take it anymore and snapped. I absolutely think none of this would have happened had he treated her decently and with respect. And Linda was dumb and narcissistic, enjoying twisting the knife instead of encouraging Dan to be generous and kind to a grieving ex, the mother of his children who had helped him build the successful life they both got to enjoy. A nasty pair, those two. Good riddance, except for the damage to those poor children.[/quote]

Do you think Betty should have gotten away with murder? What should the punishment be for a murderer if you think the victims deserved it?[/quote]

I think she still should have served substantial time, maybe 15-20 years. The lady who ran over her cheating husband with her stepdaughter in the car was out in 15. Many others far more dangerous to society than Betty Broderick served far shorter sentences. The fact that she's still in after 30 years is nuts to me. The juror who was persuaded to go along with 2nd degree murder said she thought she'd be out in 3 or 4 years, said she would have held out if she had known the sentencing would be that harsh. A male juror from the first trial said he didn't know what took her so long to do what she did. I absolutely believe there were unique aggravating circumstances that should be taken into consideration and that she is not a danger to society beyond those two highly specific victims. [/quote]

But Betty killed 2 people, not 1. I think that explains the longer sentence.[/quote]

The roadkill husband was "only" cheating--I think the degree of abuse in BB's case was far worse and therefore mitigating. At any rate, she's already served double that woman's sentence. So release her already?[/quote]

I thought she got 15 years for each murder, so she only just served her time. If she keeps getting denied parole because she doesn't say the right things to show remorse or acknowledge wrongdoing then she isn't helping herself. I don't think the system is working against Betty as much as she is sabotaging herself. Maybe she doesn't want to get out?[/quote]

I respect her for not lying and owning her truth. I probably wouldn't feel remorse either, other than for the damage done to the kids. If she passes the psych assessment, she should be released imo. CT is passing domestic violence legislation to expand dv definition to include exactly the kind of psychological, financial, and legal abuse experienced by Betty. Too late for her, but taking that into account her sentencing would most likely be different today. [/quote]

You would think in 30 years she might have had a few thoughts about what she could have done differently. She is taking zero ownership for her role in the murders, from what it sounds like. In reading the below snippet, it's hard to argue with the outcome of the hearing.

** Decades later, Broderick would face parole hearings in 2010 and 2017. Sources tell 10News her four children were divided on whether she should get out.

"She was unrepentant, unremorseful, and callous," said Sachs.

Sachs says in those hearings Broderick repeatedly blamed the victims.
Banging her fist calling him an SOB ... apologizing to his friends, saying 'I'm sorry you lost your drinking buddy,'" said Sachs.

The attitude was evident in a letter she recently wrote 10News, in response to a request for an interview. In it, she claimed she was "gang raped" by the "crooked courts," adding that her ex-husband used his power as a lawyer to "threaten" and "intimidate" her for years. Sachs says the Betty Broderick we see today has changed little.

"From the first days she plotted the crime and committed it, she's basically stuck in the same place," said Sachs.**

https://www.10news.com/news/local-news/three-decades-later-betty-broderick-still-unapologetic[/quote]

What you said is all true. However, all the things Betty stated is also true. She did say she wished she hadn't gone over there, but she also felt relieved that stress was over.

If there's any remorse it's over her kids losing a mother, and her being stuck in prison. Dan and Linda weren't remorseful for the life they took.

Many of his friends were no good as well. I actually think it's funny what she told Sachs, she knew what he was. [/quote]

She was apparently severely depressed and hadn't slept through the night in a long time. She genuinely felt their torment would never end, and only slept for the first time the night after the murders. So sad, she was clearly unwell and needed psychiatric treatment and a shark divorce lawyer. And yes Dan's friends were skunk drinking buddies who enabled his affair and helped his screw over his wife. It was quite the morally bankrupt boys club. [/quote]

Yes she was doing many impulsive things. It sounds like she had a nervous breakdown, and I'm not sure if she went over there to kill them or what. Or if she got startled by Linda and reacted, or she became enraged seeing Linda next to Dan. Who knows.[/quote]

Yeah so much evidence of a nervous breakdown, not sure how anyone perceived all her nutty actions as those of a rational woman. She never seemed especially clear or deliberate in her actions from day 1 of the separation, more like someone whose mental health continued to deteriorate throughout the ordeal.
There is a reason neither jury was unanimous about intent. The one or two holdouts in the second trial thought the lesser charge of second degree meant she'd get a lighter sentence. They should have held out for manslaughter.[/quote]

Options

	Disable HTML in this message
	Disable BB Code in this message
	Disable smilies in this message

Review message

Search Recent Topics Hottest Topics