I'm referring to the California woman who stabbed her boyfriend 108 times after consuming cannabis and only sentenced last month to 100 days of community service.

This case reminds me of Sarah Halimi's one in France where an elderly lady got thrown off a window by a man who had just taken cannabis before his rampage and was considered not criminally responsible penally.

Although, contrarily to that other murder I do think that Bryn was indeed in a serious state of psychosis as she not only stabbed her boyfriend but her dog, and herself. And when the police intervened, even taser and baton strikes were not very effective at stopping her.

That being said I do believe that the sentence she received was highly problematic (way too low) for these 4 reasons:

• Even if marijuana frenzies can potentially happen on rare occasions, I just don't believe a mentally stable person could reach such violence with only marijuana. This led me to believe that she either consumed other additional substances or that she has some sort of mental instability that can lead her to become violent in some instances. And if that second hypothesis is true, then she needs psychiatric treatment (which was the decision for Sarah Halimi's murderer)
• Maybe the most important of my 4 points: Her not being aware during the killing doesn't mean she isn't responsible for it. The fact that she willingly decided to take psychotropic drugs that could potentially cloud her judgment meant she was responsible for putting herself in that state. Correct me if I'm wrong but if a person after consuming alcohol becomes violent and attacks others, he will be convicted. Removing all responsibility for marijuana sounds like encouragement for murderers to use this excuse and be cleared of charges.
• Receiving only 100 days of community service after brutally killing someone is shameful and a total disrespect for the deceased and his family. It just isn't right.
• Let's not fool ourselves, she only got this miraculous judgment because she was an upper-class white woman. If it was a man, poor or of color that sentencing would have been different.

And for these 4 reasons are believe that Bryn judgment was not only unfair but dangerous.

Correction: It's not 100 days but 100 hours of community service which is even worse than what I thought...

​

Update: This post blew out much more than what I initially thought and it became a bit overwhelming to get every response. But I did change my mind about some point:

While I never doubted the marijuana frenzy I wrongly assumed that it was because she either took it with other drugs or had mental antecedent. After reading a bunch of articles on that subject it seems that there is indeed a link between psychosis and marijuana even though it is still not well understood and can happen without any signs prior. As for the Sarah Halimi case, the murderer had clear psychiatric deficiencies, which is not the case of Bryn Spejcher. So we can't really compare the two.

Here is my update for my four points:

1. Bryn Spejcher does not have psychiatric antecedents but it seems that this kind of psychosis can lead to severe mental illness. And often a long follow-up period is needed to identify them. More on that in this article. While internment is too much, she should at least have had psychiatric monitoring.
2. A lot of comments told me that she was coerced to take the drug by her boyfriend. But the reports are not that clear and at this point, I can't really choose between giving her right or wrong, the trial already happened anyway. So I will give a general thought on that sort of case: If she chooses to take the drug, she is responsible. Even if it's strongly mitigated by the extreme nature of the reaction. She is an adult, who chooses to take substances that mess with her faculty, and knew at least that considering that she had taken marijuana seven times before that incident. I'm not gonna give you what sentences she should have because that is not my field (which is also the case of 99% of the redditor here) but I do think she should have received at least something.
3. This point was totally subjective so I didn't expect it to change anyway. The mother killed herself two years after the killing of her son, so I can only imagine how disgusted the father was at the announcement of the verdict (he was indeed pretty unhappy).
4. That one still stands too and it seems most of you agreed with the fact that a POC would have been more severely punished. And I reiterate that a man would also have much more chance to be given prison time if in the shoes of Bryn Spejcher.

Do I still think Bryn Spejcher's sentence was ridiculous Yes, I do. manslaughter is still manslaughter. But to be clear I do not hate her. What happened is a tragedy and I'm sad, not only for her boyfriend and his family but for her too to some extent.