“I would also point out that those closest to a mentally ill person are often the ones least willing to admit that there may be a problem.”
Perhaps, but they are also more likely to actually spot symptoms than people who know him only through Facebook postings. They would know his normal behavior previous to to onset of the illness, and the contrast, in a case like schizophrenia would not usually be very subtle. It seems very unusual to me that, after his detention and the case becoming news, the media can’t find one person who actually knew him who says “He began acting strange a few years ago”, or “He was a loner”, etc. The media seems to always be able to dig up those witnesses within a day of any kind of story like this, when it is legitimate.
“While it is possible that he has no problem, I’m not sure how you arrive at “more likely.””
I say more likely, because mental illness that would rise to the level of requiring a forced mental evaluation by the state is rare, and not something that I think you would be likely to be able to spot simply from someone’s internet postings. Ordinary, sane people post so many seemingly deranged statements on the internet, if they actually managed to find a real crazy person in all that chaff, I would be pretty amazed.
“How have they “failed” exactly? What did they need to do that they did not do?”
This:
“The law requires that within four hours of detaining someone, you have to have a magistrate write a petition for a temporary restraining order,” said John Whitehead, an attorney with the Rutherford Institute, the Virginia-based civil rights firm that is defending the ex-Marine. “They didn’t do that. That didn’t happen.”
I haven't seen any quotes from family or friends saying "He is totally normal and together" either.
Not a lot of data for or against on that point.
I say more likely, because mental illness that would rise to the level of requiring a forced mental evaluation by the state is rare, and not something that I think you would be likely to be able to spot simply from someone’s internet postings.
If the Facebook screen capture I saw is authentic, he threatened federal employees.
That would occasion a visit. Apparently, when the police spoke to him they interpreted his responses as being symptomatic of mental illness and brought in an evaluator.
So it wasn't just posts but also an interview.
“The law requires that within four hours of detaining someone, you have to have a magistrate write a petition for a temporary restraining order,” said John Whitehead, an attorney with the Rutherford Institute, the Virginia-based civil rights firm that is defending the ex-Marine. “They didn’t do that. That didn’t happen.”
According to his attorney's filed motion, the TRO was not provided in four hours but in nine hours. So he is arguing a technical point - that they followed procedure but that it took too long.
There will be a hearing on that technical point today.
In practice, there are frequently arguments in court about timing, and typically judges will allow parties leeway on timing if they can demonstrate best efforts. As in "the ADA was waiting there for the TRO to be signed, but the presiding judge was busy and made her wait three hours" etc.
But as the motion concedes, the police brought in a county evaluator and an independent evaluator, did get a TRO and then did get a proper warrant for involuntary commission.
His attorney's argument is not based on a failure to undertake the legally necessary steps, but on their tardiness.