Posted on 04/18/2007 1:55:30 PM PDT by Ben Mugged
A Virginia court found that Virginia Tech killer Seung-Hui Cho was "mentally ill" and dangerous. Then it let him go.
Back in 2005, the District Court in Christiansburg said that Cho was a danger to himself but not others. He was ordered to undergo outpatient care.
The ruling came after Cho was taken to a nearby psychiatric hospital for evaluation in December 2005, after two female schoolmates said they received threatening messages from him and police and school officials became concerned that he might be suicidal.
That information came to light two days after Cho, a Virginia Tech senior, killed 32 people and then himself in a shooting rampage on the university's campus.
Police obtained the order from a local magistrate after it was determined by a state certified employee that Cho met legal criteria for temporary detention that includes being a threat to others and being unable to care for himself.
Under Virginia law, "A magistrate has the authority to issue a detention order upon a finding that a person is mentally ill and in need of hospitalization or treatment.
"The magistrate also must find that the person is an imminent danger to himself or others," says the guideline from Virginia's state court system.
Wendell Flinchum, the chief of the Virginia Tech police department, said that it's common for police to work with mental health facilities
"We normally go through access [appealing to the state's legal system for help] because they have the power to commit people if they need to be committed," said Wendell Flinchum, chief of the Virginia Tech police department.
(Excerpt) Read more at abcnews.go.com ...
Thing is, this isn’t the first time that NICS and similar systems have been caught out doing this. NICS, for example, has been known to throw out false “do not sell” results for no apparent reason, as well as allowing felons whose info actually *is* in NICS to buy firearms.
The liberals promised us that NICS and similar systems would *never* have any problems. I say we hold them to that promise and scrap it since it’s had so many; and we’ve spent untold millions on it. We need to cut our losses. If we need a NICS-like system, fine - but we should start over. What we have now clearly doesn’t work, IMHO.
And if you could find it that way, it *should* have been in VCIN, no?
Well, someone could pull a FOIA request and see what comes of it...
No, but it's much easier. The PD files consist of paper in boxes somewhere also. Since they dragged up this info, I'd guess the info's on the net for some cash. Could be Lexis-Nexis would give it up.
"And if it’s in that computer index, chances are everything else relevant is too."
Sure, but it apparently didn't end up in the NICS, or VA's check(if they do a separate one). THey do in WI. A county check would turn it up.
The NICS law has an exception for commitments for evaluation or observation which is what Cho had.
It may be the system failed, but it may also be that for the purposes of NICS this legal action was insufficient to trigger submission to NICS.
In VA, the gun store still has to consult VCIN, which is the VA version of NICS. And VCIN is supposed to have that information in it.
I knew he had stalked but I wasn’t sure if the charges were pending or what. Thanks.
If he had a record of stalking, how did he get a gun?
Lovely.
That is the question we’re all asking.
Even more importantly, how did he manage to get TWO guns over the counter inside of two months?
I still do not believe temporary detention/evaluation orders meets the legal criterion. He was evaluated and released, not evaluated, adudicated mentally ill and involuntarily committed.
Sucks, but there it is. And do we want everyone ever evaluated against their will (perhaps at the behest of an enemy or ex-wife) prevented from purchasing or owning firearms?
Because he didn’t have a “record”. Complaints were made, but the girls refused to press charges. Never charged, never convicted, thus no “record”.
Can't this be traced back to Jimmah "the nut" Carter?
There is no such thing as "temporary detention/evaluation". There is only involuntary committment. That's what counts. Cho was involuntarily committed. The minimum stay is 3 days. The maximum is 'till death.
"do we want everyone ever evaluated against their will (perhaps at the behest of an enemy or ex-wife) prevented from purchasing or owning firearms?"
Yes. The committment process requires a court order and a hearing(s). The only way to get committed is if you're really nuts, or you fail to defend yourself. Cho had his hearing and the judge was convinced the guy was nuts. He was convinced by Cho's acitons and words, the police, and the 2 women that testified that Cho stalked and bothered them.
Sorry I don't use inacurate colloquial defs and meanings, especially from ABC. Cho was adjudicated incompitent and the relevant term is committed. The court finding should have been in the NICS database and caused the rejection of any and all firearm transactions. Cho also lied on the ATF form when he answered no to question 11-f, "~have you ever been adjudicated incompitent."
Read Virginia Statutes. They do have a Temporary Detention Order which preceeds an involuntary commitment. After being detained and evaluated you are either released or a hearing is held to obtain involuntary commitment and treatment.
Cho was released, not committed. Nor was he adjudicated incompetent (which means you have a guardian or become a ward of the state and cannot make legal or treatment decisions for yourself).
A lot of people might be alive today if these inexplicable female addlepates had the spine to follow through with their complaint.......and not only in Virginia.
I've seen cops on the "bad boys" program literally beg some women to press charges against vicious perpetrators only to be rebuffed.
I wonder if the VT women who dropped their complaints are having some pangs of conscience right now.
Leni
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.