2006-09-18 10:44:24 · 7 answers · asked by polisciencegirl 2 in Politics & Government ➔ Law & Ethics
famous san francisco case of dan white a city supervisor killing the mayor of SF and in his defence claimed it was the twinkies that made him do it
2006-09-18 11:05:55 · answer #1 · answered by acid tongue 7 · 0⤊ 0⤋
It refers specifically to a particular case where a person was partially acquitted (reduction of murder to manslaughter) because they had eaten so many Twinkies that their blood sugar spiked, and this chemical imbalance resulted in diminished capacity.
The term is generally used to describe any attempted defense that is so irrational that there is no way it should work, but the jury buys it.
2006-09-18 10:47:43 · answer #2 · answered by coragryph 7 · 3⤊ 0⤋
An urban legend - supposedly someone claimed that their reaction to the sugar in Twinkies caused them to lose control and that was why they killed someone - sort of a temporary insanity thing. However, I don't think it actually ever happened.
2006-09-18 10:50:14 · answer #3 · answered by WildOtter 5 · 0⤊ 1⤋
Twinkie defense" is a derogatory label implying that a criminal defense is artificial or absurd.
2006-09-18 10:50:30 · answer #4 · answered by rouble ( 2 · 0⤊ 0⤋
about 20 years ago,someone killed someone,and the defence argument was that the high sugar content in a twinkie the defendant ate prior to the crime,made him go crazy,thus the killing wasnt so much his fault,as a blood sugar thing.(the defendant was not diabetic).the defendant lost.
2006-09-18 10:54:22 · answer #5 · answered by Lyn K 4 · 0⤊ 0⤋
the twinkie made me do it
2006-09-18 10:46:18 · answer #6 · answered by Anonymous · 0⤊ 1⤋
hola
2006-09-18 10:46:51 · answer #7 · answered by BATALLA 5 · 0⤊ 1⤋