Amy Santoro, Ph.D.
Region: US
Thursday 10 September 2026 21:36:22 GMT
64946
5015
393
115
Music
Download
Comments
Jabar :
The lone juror was the only one remembering the true victims‼️🤦♂️😠
2026-09-11 00:54:51
129
Pastele2 :
I think that juror went in with an opinion of regardless of what he heard during the trial he was always going to vote guilty.
2026-09-10 21:45:34
184
Joan Grommell Pentek :
The ladies they interviewed, said a lot of things that bothered me too like having the nurses explain things, how they gushed over Redington‘s personality, why they kept playing the 911 call over and over again from the beginning to listen for the word basement (why would they even be doing that unless they had been on social media and knew about the Patrick conspiracies?) … most of this stuff we have heard doesn’t make me happy. I think they should try it again and sequester them.
2026-09-11 00:08:06
49
Emma (summer version)🏖☀️🍦 :
he also said he was scrolling on his phone.. like HOW was he allowed a phone in there??
2026-09-10 21:48:46
433
daisha :
Lock her up !!!!
2026-09-12 16:28:16
1
stphb10 :
Literally insane. And ppl calls the holdout a “hero”
2026-09-10 23:36:01
123
iancghln :
Yeah sure. we'll just base this opinion on what someone else said. This is just confirmation bias. You already believed it and so you're clinging to him saying what you already thought.
2026-09-12 08:10:56
3
SnarfEsq :
Massachusetts law on the insanity defense is weird to me. im not sure in most cases I could prove beyond a reasonable doubt someone WASNT insane.
2026-09-10 21:40:10
104
BrewUp 🇬🇧 :
The burden of proof is dumb. Anyone for anything could say they were insane.
2026-09-10 21:50:23
27
beautifulworld909 :
He said he didn’t believe she was insane
2026-09-10 21:40:09
14
Pixi426 :
The law needs to be changed. The verbiage needs to be changed to say beyond reasonable doubt it’s crazy because you’re looking at a crime as long as there’s no video you could poke holes into anything if you’re a good enough (Lawyer) be able to stay somebody was or wasn’t having a break from reality that’s like telling someone how they feel about something you can’t prove especially if you weren’t there that someone was actually having a break from reality. Maybe they’re just a great actor or actress maybe they thought about this for a long time and they’ve really fucking planned it out and since she was a nurse, she would know how people like that behave and the things that she would’ve needed to say to lay her plan so I mean, I’m just saying beyond reasonable doubt portion of our law needs to be changed
2026-09-12 11:23:13
0
Jo Schmoe 🆘🇺🇸 :
I can’t believe this was brought to the attention of the judge and he didn’t talk to that juror
2026-09-10 23:48:27
25
CitrusAndSpice :
Okay? Maybe he changed his mind after he said that.
2026-09-10 23:17:38
8
Anon. A. Mess :
So do they not explain to the jurors how it works?
2026-09-12 07:29:27
0
Teresa Isabel 🏴☠️ :
Thank you for saying this! I was screaming at my TV that the defense has nothing to prove!!! Gah! Basic civics people.
2026-09-10 23:16:31
22
Em :
I find it so alarming that someone on a jury is talking about the burden of proof for the defense. I feel like they should make jurors each individually explain the law they have to follow back to the judge to make sure the jury actually were listening to instructions and understand what they’re doing.
2026-09-11 03:58:01
26
Martin L Knight :
ok...cool...he said that...we still don't know what he was thinking...so ya, he could have said "I am not sure if the prosecution proved their case" but that could still fall within "beyond reasonable doubt is not beyond all possible doubt"
2026-09-10 21:46:38
9
Zaynie 🇮🇪 :
I said this in another comment section and I got ate alive lol
2026-09-10 22:06:59
6
SuzieQ2.0 :
Love your videos Amy!! so informative, you e reached all the way across the pond here in Ireland 🇮🇪 ❤️
2026-09-10 21:42:23
15
MrNewboots :
It's absolutely bonkers that the state has to prove someone's sane just because they claim insanity after the crime.
2026-09-10 21:54:52
7
Anna :
What happens if they don’t re try it? Or if KR wins the motion to ban a retrial?
2026-09-11 04:28:00
0
Turkey Lurkey :
I hear your point but still disagree. I think this case is a strange intersection where the prosecution has to prove a negative in a situation where the defendant has never had psychosis before and never had it since. This puts it in the area of almost "speculation". I understand that the defense doesn't really have to prove anything but if they aren't convincing then the explanation, at least to me, is still speculative.
2026-09-11 16:26:12
2
Hayley J :
Im confused because everywhere I look online says that the defense has the burden of proof on insanity. The prosecution has the burden of proof of guilt. Can you clarify please?
2026-09-10 23:18:03
1
To see more videos from user @amy_santoro, please go to the Tikwm
homepage.
