I'm not a fan of her or her actions at all. This isn't the place for explaining why, but I wanted to have my cards face-up. I'm not impressed by Mr. Miranda ("You have the right to remain silent...") either, but good policy doesn't worry about how much you like a particular defendant.
The "what" gets a lot of attention here, and for good reason. I'm also a little bothered by the "how" and "why" though. It's bad enough they were talking about withholding healthcare from an inmate, but the mechanism for doing so simply doesn't exist in a civilized society bound by the rule of law. We can lessen punishments for various reasons, but when you have somebody who has already been sentenced for her crimes you absolutely don't get to throw in a malicious little torture simply because the inmate hands you a lever you can use against her. It would have been bad enough if they acted like healthcare was something which could have been withheld for some infraction or other, but they didn't even attempt to suggest there was an infraction and were looking to screw her over for the sheer petty retribution of it.
At any rate, it's important to this community to see her getting proper healthcare recognized as such. It's also important to see the system pass on the opportunity to be simply vindictive.
