I promise I’m not a killer and many people with dysfunctional families don’t go on to harm others, but I really honestly wouldn’t be surprised if there is some dysfunctional relationship with her parents. Her parents still being together and her going on holiday with them doesn’t mean they have a healthy relationship.
Absolutely. And there are many siblings who have had an identical upbringing, and yet chose completely different paths in life. Whilst I agree that looking at past events can shed light on some of our behaviour in the present, I do not think that they are always a reliable indicator of how we will act in future. As human beings, we are cognitively very complex. Some would even argue that we have "free will" or "agency" -- that we have
some control over environmental factors that enable us to make ethical choices. I'm not denying that factors in our past and environment do matter, but I think of them more as "enabling conditions" rather than "causes".
If we look at family relationships are "causes", then we erase "agency", and in doing so, we deny responsibility for our actions. So, to some extent at least, I believe that -- unlike a ball that once kicked (cause), can't change course (effect) -- we as human beings have the ability (cognitively) as rational beings to stop, think of our options, evaluate their consequences, and choose accordingly. I'm not talking about people who are biologically determined (e.g. someone with Tourettes or someone clinically insane). I'm just talking about the rest of us who have
some control over our own thoughts and freedom to choose our actions. And your own experience, Tofino, is evidence that people can overcome adversity, rather than be at their mercy without choice.
LL seems to me, no matter her background, not to fit into the category of someone who is incapable of making choices. She's made plenty of them, and the court has decided she's (cognitively and mentally) fit to stand trial. Even her lawyer hasn't argued otherwise. It find it very improbably that she's had some serious mentally incapacitating condition that has gone undetected all this time; if there were, her lawyer would've said she'd not fit to plead. So, whether guilty or innocent (and I'm in camp G), whatever events took place in her past, interesting as they may be, these were not "causes" of what she did; she was not biologically determined to do what she did. She's morally and legally responsible for her actions.
---
It's the nature nurture debate and it's difficult to comprehend someone would even think of doing this
I believe some people are born evil. LL is a full on a malignant narcissist with psychopathic tendencies. I believe she will have harmed/injured other babies in the past that we won't ever know about just to test the waters. People like LL love their ego being stroked and will do just about anything when not getting any attention. This is just my opinion in what I've had the displeasure of nursing LL types many moons ago. A previous poster said they love control and think they are above the rest and it's always someone else's fault, never ever theirs. She's evil to the very core, shame we don't have capital punishment
---
The trouble with saying "some people are born evil" is that it then makes us unable to hold them legally or morally responsible for what they do (like someone born with a particular hair, skin or eye colour, etc. Or someone who has genetically inherited a disease. It's not their choice; these are things beyond their control).
Some people are indeed born disturbed, but then we can't in those cases call what they do "evil" because it's not their fault how they were born, and what they did as a consequence. On the other hand, some people, though not born evil, "become" evil by doing "evil things". Those are the people who had control over what they did, and as a result, we can hold responsible for it.