Aurora Shooting Trial

[Ranb]

Again I don't know much about this stuff, but am very interested in learning how all the mental illness analysis comes out. I think (but am not sure) that if you are judged 'insane', then you are confined for the time you need treatment, and released when you are no longer insane. Which could mean anyone could commit an atrocity, plead insanity under current law and your scenario, go get treatment, and then be free.

I was listening to a news report on the Hinkley trial years ago. The prosecution was trying to prove he was sane when he shot Reagan, while the defense said insane. Upon the verdict of not guilty by reason of insanity, the state would attempt to keep him confined to a hospital by claiming he was insane/dangerous while Hinkley's lawyers would attempt to show he was sane/not a threat and get him released.

How much of that was hyperbole? Don't know.

Ranb

 

[Denver]

One of the reasons I am so interested in the outcome here is that apparently Holmes was already under psychiatric care, and on medications, some of which I believe were anti-psychotics, and which have side-effects that I believe the defense is going to try to point to as at least partly the cause of the violence. The medicinal side of mental illness treatment seems to me to be not really well understood, with patients going through several kinds in a trial-and-error sequence, trying to find one whose benefits outweigh the side effects.

At least that is what I've gleaned so far from the media. I think the defense will began presenting their side at the end of June. I hope to be able to keep up more with the trial then, to see what I can learn about the medicine side.

 

[phiwum]

In practice that doesn't happen though. If you kill a theater full of people they are never declaring you sane enough to be released.

Don't be too sure. John Hinckley is visiting his mother at her home for seventeen day stretches these days. There is a chance that he'll eventually be released.

And, if he can be released, then so could, in principle, Holmes.

Not that that's necessarily a bad thing. If, in fact, they were once incompetent, did something horrible, and received treatment which "cured" them of their mental illness, then they should live outside of prison and a mental institute.

 

[Jrrarglblarg]

Had Hinkley shot anyone but a president he would have been released years ago.

 

[stanfr]

Had Hinkley shot anyone but a president he would have been released years ago.

Actually, it is far more likely that he would have had a so-so attorney, and ended up spending life in prison w/o parole for murder.

 

[HenryLee]

Actually, it is far more likely that he would have had a so-so attorney, and ended up spending life in prison w/o parole for murder.

Nobody died.

Well, not until much, much later.

 

[stanfr]

Nobody died.

Well, not until much, much later.

Well, in my hypothetical shooting, the person died, OK?
At any rate, Reagan was brain-dead long before Hinkley took a shot at him

 

[Jrrarglblarg]

Two drums and a high hat fall off the stage.

 

[oody]

Nobody died.

Well, not until much, much later.

Interestingly enough, James Brady's death was ruled a homicide last year.

Monday’s death of President Ronald Reagan’s press secretary James S. Brady has been ruled a homicide resulting from the gunshot wound he suffered in the assassination attempt on Reagan in 1981, more than three decades ago.

link
/derail

 

[Polaris]

I thought Holmes had already been tried.

 

[Gawdzilla Sama]

A Life Sentence for James Holmes, Aurora Theater Gunman Who Killed 12

 

[Checkmite]

I find this acceptable.

 

[Gawdzilla Sama]

But only one?

 

[PhantomWolf]

A Life Sentence for James Holmes, Aurora Theater Gunman Who Killed 12

I know that some of the victim's families are disappointed that he didn't get the Death Penalty, but I'll repeat myself here, the Death Penalty is giving them the easy option. I like this way better, lock him in a little cell to rot until he pops his clogs naturally after having had a long time to think about what took him there and he's old and forgotten.

 

[Gawdzilla Sama]

I know that some of the victim's families are disappointed that he didn't get the Death Penalty, but I'll repeat myself here, the Death Penalty is giving them the easy option. I like this way better, lock him in a little cell to rot until he pops his clogs naturally after having had a long time to think about what took him there and he's old and forgotten.

I remember one judge giving a guy eleven life sentences, to be served consecutively. "You will die in prison, and your bones will be there for a few hundred years." I thought it appropriate given the crime.

 

[Trebuchet]

I oppose the death penalty for both ethical and practical reasons. Ethical because killing fellow humans, essentially for revenge, is not a good thing. Practical because a)the USA judicial system is far from perfect, and a good many innocent defendants have been conviceted; and b) cost: the cost of the endless appeals tends to be more than what it takes to just keep the perp locked up.

Good call, Colorado.

 

[Gawdzilla Sama]

I oppose the death penalty for both ethical and practical reasons. Ethical because killing fellow humans, essentially for revenge, is not a good thing. Practical because a)the USA judicial system is far from perfect, and a good many innocent defendants have been conviceted; and b) cost: the cost of the endless appeals tends to be more than what it takes to just keep the perp locked up.

Good call, Colorado.

I dismiss claims of revenge. It's just putting a bad dog down.

 

[stanfr]

I dismiss claims of revenge. It's just putting a bad dog down.

There's a germ of logic to that. But mental illness is a bit challenging to diagnose in dogs, I would imagine...and it does beg the question of whether we should treat our fellow humans any differently than dogs.