Posted on 04/07/2006 10:01:14 AM PDT by Diddle E. Squat
McKINNEY -- Dena Schlosser, who was being retried on a capital murder charge for the killing of her 10-month-old daughter by cutting off her arms, was found not guilty by reason of insanity this morning.
Both sides waived closing arguments, and a judge issued the verdict after a brief proceeding. Schlosser, 38, of Plano, is expected to be committed to a state mental hospital for treatment.
Police arrested Schlosser in November 2004 after finding her baby dying in its crib and Schlosser soaked in blood, holding a kitchen knife and listening to a hymn.
Both sides agreed last week to have Judge Chris Oldner decide the case, after a jury deadlocked in February, forcing a mistrial.
The case against her had hinged on whether Schlosser had severe mental problems that kept her from knowing her actions were wrong.
Defense attorneys told the judge last week that Schlosser had a brain tumor that could have caused hallucinations before the killing.
Several psychiatrists testified that Schlosser lost touch with reality, suffered severe mood swings and experienced religious hallucinations and delusions. One doctor said she told him she wanted to cut off her baby's arms and her own limbs and head and give them God.
The defense faulted Schlosser's husband for not getting her adequate mental health treatment and also blamed her preacher, Doyle Davidson, who believes only God can cure mental illness.
The state argued the defense was trying to deflect responsibility from Schlosser. Prosecutors presented a methodical case, focusing on possible inconsistencies and behaviors that might indicate she knew that killing her baby was wrong.
John Schlosser, her husband, has filed for divorce and has custody of the couple's two other daughters.
If she's sane she should be executed. If she's insane she should be put out of her misery.
> she wanted to cut off her baby's arms and her own limbs and head and give them God
Just imagine the look on God's face when this headless, limbless woman comes up to him and (somehow) deposits a pile of bits and pieces.
"Uh.... yeah.... thanks for that..."
> Certainly an insane person may not know what they are doing, but if that is the case they will ALWAYS be a potential threat to others/society.
I don't know that that's true. Some forms of insanity are chemically driven, and can be cured (or at least controlled) via drugs. And in those cases, if someone is a raving psycho one day and perfectly rational and nice the next after medical care... is it right to lock 'em up forever? I dunno.
But if they quit taking their medicine, then they can lapse back into that dangerous state. Hence there is always that risk, and thus they will always be a potential danger to society.
I should also differentiate that most people struggling with various levels of mental illness are NOT a potential danger to society. I am not talking about them, but only those who have proven capable of such heinous crimes as murder.
> Hence there is always that risk, and thus they will always be a potential danger to society.
That risk of course exists whether the nut in question has killed or not (yet). So...that means that everyone who is a potential risk should thus be locked up.
Wow, this'll get expensive.
Nice try. That was one reason I made it clear that someone has to first attempt an action such as murder or clearly demonstrate capability and intent to commit violence. Lots of the ill might have such thoughts from time to time, few would actually act on it.
In many states a person found not guilty by reason of insanity may still be committed.
*shrug* allah would be pleased.
> That was one reason I made it clear that someone has to first attempt an action such as murder or clearly demonstrate capability and intent to commit violence.
Then those who commit violent acts should *never* *ever* be released, sane or no.
> allah would be pleased.
Possibly. Certainly with the beheading part.
Yes, it is right to lock 'em up forever. A person who becomes violent without the use of medication can not be trusted to always take their meds in order to prevent further attacks.
Also, what happens if a person who is medicated yet they are starting to become resistant to the medication and symptoms of their psychosis begins to set in?
For the protection of society, those who are mentally ill but have proven the ability to kill or severly maim others should be locked up.
> A person who becomes violent without the use of medication can not be trusted...
Indeed. Those who commit acts of violence *without* even the excuse of mental illness need to be separated from society and the gene pool. Those who are verifiably chemically imbalanced, however, at least have the potential of actually being good people.
How do you suppose she would give her head and arms to God if she cut off her arms?
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.