Jared Loughner Ruled Incompetent

Wasn't referring to your post specifically, Dick. Was just making an observation that our overall society in the 21st century is taking on that view more and more as a given.

 

You have to be f---- crazy to shoot so many people, especially kids. Of course he's insane. Always found it odd that courts have to determine this. Doesn't make him not guilty. Lock him away forever.

 

This would all be over, saving money and time, if someone would just let another crazed resident at taxpayer expense into his cell one night with some cutting tools.

 

Are they saying he was insane at the time of the crime or are they saying he's not sane enough to stand trial now? Two different things.

 

They're saying he's not sane enough to stand trial.

 

A jury (for the most part - there are exceptions like a directed verdict, but forget about that for now) has to find him not guilty by reason of insanity (I actually think the Arizona version is "guilty but insane.")

Not fit to stand trial means it never gets to that point. He just bides his time in a mental institution until he is fit to stand trial, if ever.

 

They're saying he's not sufficiently sane to defend himself. He can't take part in his own defense because he's basically incoherent.

From my understanding he would need to improve to the point where he's found competent to stand trial... and at that point they could deal with his mental state at the time of the crime.

(And, I see Dick beat me to it.)

 

I believe one of the most horrifying crimes ever perpetrated was the murder of Bobby Franks by the notorious Leopold and Loeb. Not because of the violence involved or the heinousness of the act, but because of the motive. And those two assholes were as sane as it gets.

 

Well, think of all the gangland/drug/mafia murders and how heinous and brutal they can be. And no one thinks for a second that those perpetrators are not of sound mind.

Although I would never want this to be the actual standard, I think as far as the public goes, the idea about insanity/crime is kind of like Potter Stewart's standard in identifying obscenity: I know it when I see it. Loughner's crime - particularly combined with all the evidence that came out about his mental state the last few years - kind of places him in that bin.

 

What's funny to me about your statement is that Piotr is neither a liberal or a conservative. He's one of the few people who doesn't fall in line with either party. But because he, at some point, probably said (accurately) that W. Bush was not a very good president, this means in your eyes he's a shrieking liberal. Because anyone left of Joe Lieberman might as well be Frederick Engels.

 

I have stated, numerous times over the years on these boards, that I was no Bush fan and thought he was a lousy president. So, uhhhh, sure.

 

Piotr's not a liberal, Dick's not normal, and for every Carlton who makes knee-jerk political assumptions based on flimsy first impressions, there are five posters on the other sideline competing to get there first.