Replies

The Newsweek article revealed that Blair is a diagnosed manic depressive (bipolar disorder). IOW, he's legally insane. Is it likely a NYC jury would find him responsible for, say, the NYT's losses?

Manic depression doesn't even come close to fitting the definition of legal insanity. He might as well claim a groin injury.

Manic depression doesn't even come close to fitting the definition of legal insanity. He might just as well have a groin injury."

Don't think so.

Here is the last paragraph of an article written by an expert in this area.

In all cases, there is uncertainty as to the future dangerousness of an insanity acquittee. Consequently, courts often give a great deal of weight to the defendant's insight. Those who are considering employing the insanity defense for a violent defendant with poor insight into his condition, or for a defendant who meets criteria for Bipolar Disorder, should consider this possibility: the very features of the condition may one day lead to a longer confinement than would have been expected with a criminal conviction.

To view Dr. Welner's credentials, click on his name at the above linked page. Bipolar disorder, especially when the patient is non-compliant with treatment, is known to severely distort mood, judgment and perception. It very often forms the basis for an insanity defense at trial.

No, don't thank me. I'm always happy to help.

Ok, ok.

Here's another one, this time from Duquesne University School of Law.

"The psychiatric diagnoses most typically associated with a valid insanity defense include schizophrenia and bipolar disorder."

There are scads more of these online. It's just a fact that bipolar affective disorder (manic-depression) often forms the basis for insanity defense at trial.