Sentencing terms for Molly Martens who was jailed for the brutal killing of her Irish husband Jason Corbett said she had acted under “strong provocation” and that she had previously been a “person of good character”.
A checklist of “mitigating factors” for Ms Martens, which governed her release from prison, said that she had acted under duress, because of coercion, under threat and compulsion.
It said none of these reasons were enough to “constitute a defence” but that each of them had “significantly reduced the defendant’s culpability.”
Another item on the checklist of her sentencing terms was ticked off saying: “The defendant acted under strong provocation.”
It said that Ms Martens had been of good character up until the killing of her husband and that she had a “good reputation” in the community in which she lived.
The determination was signed off by the person who oversaw her trial, Superior Court Judge David Hall in a document entitled ‘Felony Judgment: Findings of Aggravating and Mitigating Factors (Structured Sentencing).’
It said that Molly Martens had a support system outside of jail and that a mitigated sentence was justified based on the evidence and arguments given at trial and in a sentencing hearing.
A lengthy list of factors that could have aggravated the offence were also detailed in the documents, but a box at the end was instead ticked stating: “There are no findings of any aggravating factors.”
A separate form signed off by Judge Hall called a ‘Judgment and Commitment Active Punishment – Felony (Structured Sentencing)’ said Ms Martens was prohibited from having any contact whatsoever with the victim’s family.
It also said an immediate assessment should be conducted to see if Ms Martens was a suicide risk and that all available mental health services be offered.
The form said: “[She] is to receive a psychiatric evaluation by a medical doctor – not a psychologist – and thereafter, be afforded any treatment that may be indicated as a product of that evaluation.
“The defendant is to be provided all opportunities to continue her education.”
The records were released by the North Carolina Department of Adult Correction following a Freedom of Information Act request about how an incorrect date for her release had been announced late last year.