Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

To: Elendur

It’s logically impossible to be competent to commit a murder and at the same time incompetent to stand trial and receive sentence.

The “insanity” defense is a major problem in our legal system.

If one is able to commit a murder one is sane enough for punishment.

And what really gets me is no one seems that outraged.

People were outraged over Casey Anthony being acquitted.

I guess if Jared Loughner was a pretty young white girl who went out and partied after he murdered just the child - not the adults - then there would be public outcry.

Today it was reported in NY - and on Drudge - that a young Hasidic boy was:

ABDUCTED
WHO KNOWS WHAT
MURDERED
DISMEMBERED

Part of his body was wrapped in a plastic bag and put in a nearby dumptser.

The NEW YORK CITY POLICE DEPARTMENT HAS ALREADY ARRESTED AN ACCUSED PERPETRATOR AND SOME OF THE CHILD’S REMAINS WERE FOUND IN HIS APARTMENT.

Ok, everyone, - all together now ———

A LITTLE OUTRAGE PLEASE ?

This way, we can follow the trial ON NANCY GRACE FOR THREE YEARS AND HAVE DEMONSTRATIONS AND GET ALL OUTRAGED.

Eh, nothing to see here, move along...


7 posted on 07/13/2011 8:36:34 AM PDT by PieterCasparzen (We need to fix things ourselves)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 4 | View Replies ]


To: All

all ?


8 posted on 07/13/2011 8:37:41 AM PDT by PieterCasparzen (We need to fix things ourselves)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 7 | View Replies ]

To: PieterCasparzen
I am not a lawyer, but I play one on FR. :-)

If you take a look here, you will essentially find out that if the perpetrator knew the act was wrong and could conform his behavior to the rules of society, then, regardless of any existing mental illness, defect, or disease, whether permanent or temporary, the perpetrator is guilty.

In Mr. Loughner's case, his own actions before and after the shootings demonstrate that he knew he shouldn't have done what he did, and there was probably not a sufficiently-effective state of delusion to excuse his behavior.

All that being said, I think the idea that "not guilty by reason of insanity" should be removed from our justice system takes things a bit too far. Yes, for many obviously-guilty defendants, it provides a last ditch effort to escape punishment, but it is rarely effective.

And what about putting the shoe on the other foot? Suppose someone slipped you a dose of scopolamine and PCP, and you subsequently killed someone, either accidentally or on purpose, due solely to the effects of the drugs you were involuntarily given. You would be in a mental state in which you were not responsible for your own actions; would it be fair to incarcerate you for several decades because of the actions of another?

10 posted on 07/13/2011 8:52:37 AM PDT by ConservativeWebServant (Truth is true, even if you don't believe it...)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 7 | View Replies ]

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article


FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson