Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote: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.

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.

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.

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?

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.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote: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.

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.

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.

You're right. She had gone through all kinds of stresses in her life. He easily could have given her the home and made sure his family was well taken care of. It was so simple. He could have easily moved on. She did a lot for him in the marriage, I didn't understand why he wasn't more sympathetic.

He was all about money. Usually when someone makes accusations, it's a reflection of themselves. Betty would have had an easier time keeping her original house, and Dan divorcing her. He conned her into selling because they had equity that he needed to buy his home near Balboa Park. He had no intention of moving into the LaJolla fixer upper, he just needed somewhere to put Betty while he finished the sale. He was scum.

Adding on to this. He was fine buying himself expensive, custom shirts/suits/ties. He even wanted to control the kid's wardrobes and not spend money on them. For an official family photo (at the new house) the two then adult girls had to wear Linda's work clothes for the picture. They didn't get their own choice in nearly anything. He was controlling. If you didn't play by his rules he would cut you off (took Lee out of the will...wouldn't pay for college or housing for Kim unless it's what he chose for her). Yuck.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote: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.

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.

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.

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?

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.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote: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.

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.

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.

You're right. She had gone through all kinds of stresses in her life. He easily could have given her the home and made sure his family was well taken care of. It was so simple. He could have easily moved on. She did a lot for him in the marriage, I didn't understand why he wasn't more sympathetic.

He was all about money. Usually when someone makes accusations, it's a reflection of themselves. Betty would have had an easier time keeping her original house, and Dan divorcing her. He conned her into selling because they had equity that he needed to buy his home near Balboa Park. He had no intention of moving into the LaJolla fixer upper, he just needed somewhere to put Betty while he finished the sale. He was scum.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote: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.

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.

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.

You're right. She had gone through all kinds of stresses in her life. He easily could have given her the home and made sure his family was well taken care of. It was so simple. He could have easily moved on. She did a lot for him in the marriage, I didn't understand why he wasn't more sympathetic.

He was all about money. Usually when someone makes accusations, it's a reflection of themselves. Betty would have had an easier time keeping her original house, and Dan divorcing her. He conned her into selling because they had equity that he needed to buy his home near Balboa Park. He had no intention of moving into the LaJolla fixer upper, he just needed somewhere to put Betty while he finished the sale. He was scum.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote: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.

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.

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.

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?

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote: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.

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.

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.

You're right. She had gone through all kinds of stresses in her life. He easily could have given her the home and made sure his family was well taken care of. It was so simple. He could have easily moved on. She did a lot for him in the marriage, I didn't understand why he wasn't more sympathetic.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote: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.

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.

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.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote: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.

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.

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.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote: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.

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.

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.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote: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.

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.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote: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.

Great theory if he were giving her enough money. He stalled and fined and did everything he could to give her nothing.

DP. I’m a feminist and a mother. Anytime you can’t exist without someone else’s money (especially if it is a man’s), things are probably not going to go well for you.

Anonymous wrote: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.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote: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.

Great theory if he were giving her enough money. He stalled and fined and did everything he could to give her nothing.

DP. I’m a feminist and a mother. Anytime you can’t exist without someone else’s money (especially if it is a man’s), things are probably not going to go well for you.

I don't disagree but they got married in 1969. It was a different time.