"GUILTY!"... now how hard was that?

[Dechristo]

Every society must decide what to do with its broken machines.

The thrift and ecologically minded society determines if the machine can be repaired. If the machine cannot be repaired, it is disassembled, good parts used in the repair of others, bad parts rendered for reuse of raw materials.

 

 

 

Arguing about guilt or innocence in cases of severe mental illness is as pointless as requiring a quadroplegic to compete in the decathlon.

This quadriplegic has shown a desire to compete - he's already won several deathcathlons.

However, there are those that maintain he shouldn't be allowed a "special" venue of competition as witnesses have seen him adequately use his limbs to perform killisthenics.

[ashw_justin]

On another note, as much as I think this guy should be held responsible and accountable for his violent and inexcusable actions, I am actually pleasantly surprised that the idea of charging him for some kind of 'terrorism' didn't materialize, especially having heard of 'terrorism' charges being brought against people for whom they would have been far less appropriate. Here's wikipedia's quote of the feds' definition:

…activities that involve violent… or life-threatening acts… that are a violation of the criminal laws of the United States or of any State and… appear to be intended (i) to intimidate or coerce a civilian population; (ii) to influence the policy of a government by intimidation or coercion; or (iii) to affect the conduct of a government by mass destruction, assassination, or kidnapping

It looks like they went with a hate crime charge instead. Now I personally don't think this is any better, since this kind of charge also condemns not simply an act, but a political or social state of mind that should not otherwise be considered illegal. But that's beside the point. The lack of politically-motivated charges seems to suggest that for the moment at least, we are not descending the slippery slope as quickly as one would have expected given the political climate of the past 6+ years. (Then again, things might have been different had this occurred in a very 'red' state.)

[tvashtarkatena]

There seems to be some confusion, at least among some here, between removal of a danger to society and punishment of a person guilty of murder. A mentally ill person who cannot control their urge to kill, or cannot even discern that they are, in fact, killing, cannot be guilty of murder, any more than a quadriplegic can run a decathlon. I didn't think I'd have to explain that one, but consider the 'diversity' of our audience here. This doesn't imply that such people should be allowed to keep killing of course, another thing that I incorrectly assumed required no clarification.

 

Was the person in question so mentally ill? The state decided to let a jury decide that. Judging from the inconclusive outcome, it sounds like the prosecution team overeached a bit with the charges. The jury, as in most cases, probably did a pretty good job of deciding the case based on the facts and charges presented to them. They usually do; one of many reasons why the jury system has stood the test of time for so long.

Edited June 9, 2008 by tvashtarkatena

[ashw_justin]

Particularly considering the rapid rise in what almost seem like designer disorders these days, at this rate we ought not to be surprised if ADD, SAD, and who knows, maybe PMS, start becoming solid insanity defenses for planned, premeditated, violent, lethal crimes.

 

I am imagining a potential future where all acts of violence are finally explained as spontaneous uncontrollable psychoses. But that won't be a problem, because they will simply have renamed all the prisons to 'asylums.'

[Dechristo]

The jury, as in most cases, probably did a pretty good job of deciding the case based on the facts and charges presented to them. They usually do; one of many reasons why the jury system has stood the test of time for so long.

 

Not to piss on your rainbow, but I wager your quick gloss job would/will tarnish to a different patina if/when you stand before a jury with the qualifier of "in most cases".

 

You may find the occurrence of two exceptions to your life pursuits, simultaneously: praying your ass off that this group doesn't find you a "special case".

[Dechristo]

...they will simply have renamed all the prisons to 'asylums.'

 

they're functioning as such, currently

[tvashtarkatena]

The jury, as in most cases, probably did a pretty good job of deciding the case based on the facts and charges presented to them. They usually do; one of many reasons why the jury system has stood the test of time for so long.

 

Not to piss on your rainbow, but I wager your quick gloss job would/will tarnish to a different patina if/when you stand before a jury with the qualifier of "in most cases".

 

You may find the occurrence of two exceptions to your life pursuits, simultaneously: praying your ass off that this group doesn't find you a "special case".

 

I am special. But, then again, we all are.

 

Yeah, baby! I just picked up a new "crippled Red Herring" DC lure (9 inches) from B&J's Fishing Supply, and it landed me a lunker on the first cast!

[tvashtarkatena]

I found a lure so big up here, I'm just putting that on my mantle.

[Dechristo]

We all know you are doing this in response to you being born with your mantle but a quarter so endowed.

[tvashtarkatena]

Cry, cry baby!!!!

[tvashtarkatena]

You promise core, speak of mantle, but deliver only stale crust.

Edited June 9, 2008 by tvashtarkatena

[Dechristo]

nyo, that's you.

 

you should soak that in a tub

[tvashtarkatena]

Bathroom...wrong atmosphere.

[Dechristo]

just to be clear, I wasn't talking about your wife