Is the Insanity Plea a legitimate defense?

[ph0b0s123]

Double post

 

[ph0b0s123]

-snip-
And i know this is fiction but i think it fits quite well. Joker has filled several hundred graveyards in his time as a psychotic murderer and after 20 years of putting him in psych wards he has no change. Insanity is no excuse for what youve done.

Yes, why would the Joker never get any better at Arkham Asylum? Is it the Asylum and therefore all metal institutions never reform people, which can be used as a fact to backup your point of view. Or is it that the Joker character is designed that why so he will away be an antagonist. Is it also the case that puting him and other Batman bad guy's in an Asylum is a plot device to keep the Joker, etc on ice so they can keep coming back to give Batman a hard time? That's why fiction is pretty useless to use as fact to backup an argument about real life issues.

 

[emeraldrafael]

I think if you've had a clear and certifiable history, then yes.

 

[Athinira]

With all due respect, you have very clearly spent no time in an actual mental facility.
That is a very good thing. It is probably worth bragging about.

Please, please take my word when I say that the rest of this man's life will be spent very heavily drugged and that he will, not if, not when, will, spend a great deal of time strapped to a bed.

Peace-loving hippies whatever, that is how they treat inmates at their prisons.

That is because at their prisons, they are trying to rehabilitate people to set them on a productive path. Former convicts, unlike in America, are not treated as current convicts and thus can actually get jobs, so that they do not fall back into bad habits.

But they are not putting him into prison.
Prison is not happening to him.
They are not trying to rehabilitate this man.
This man will be in the mental institution for the rest of his life.

They want to make certain he is never again a danger to himself or to anyone else for the rest of his life.

Which means, with respect, drugs that shut most of his brain completely off, a bed with built-in restraints and drool.

Lots and lots of drool.

For the rest of his life.

I'm sorry, but you have absolutely no clue what you are talking about.

Normally i don't want to make any assumptions about which part of the world people are from, but i take it that you're not from Scandinavia at least. We do things QUITE differently over here.

In Denmark, for example, which isn't much different to Norway, going to a closed mental ward does NOT mean that you get drugged up and strapped to a bed (although it CAN, if it is considered necessary to prevent you from damaging yourself). It just means that you can't leave the facility, as well as you might be forced to take medications if necessary (emphasis on 'NECESSARY', as in, if it helps you, not as a sort of punishment or restraining). In fact, there are people on the closed mental ward in Denmark who has internet access. I once read some forum posts from someone who was confined there describing his experience. Sure he said it sucked, but his lifestyle wasn't anything close to what you are describing, and he was even allowed to leave the facility for one day to get some stuff from his real life.

It's true that many patients there are on some kind of drug, however most of those are anti-depressants or anti-psychotic, and not things that hampers your brain or bodily functions in any meaningful way. The scenarios you describe are in fact forbidden by law, since our laws consider such treatment inhumane, and it's only to be applied if ABSOLUTELY NECESSARY (again, like preventing a scenario where you might hurt yourself, although most patients don't do that on a regular basis).

Now it's clear that there is something wrong with Breivik mentally, noone is in doubt there, but at worst his condition causes him to be disillusioned, but he is still intelligent, and it's not in any way in the league that he needs to be strapped down. The man doesn't try harming himself, understands that he needs to work out etc. His problem is his total lack of empathy and his skewered view on the world, and that isn't a disorder that can be treated with medication, hence at worst he will be medicated to keep him in check if he shows aggression. That's it. He isn't going to be strapped down or anything remotely close to it.

You might have gotten your impression of mental wards from 1995, but it sure as hell is in the wrong part of the world. In fact, I'm almost convinced you've played too much Arkham Asylum. Confirm/Deny?

 

[hecticpicnic]

In my opinion prisons should not be about punishment because that accomplishes nothing,they should be either a threat(people should be well aware or their rights so to know if what their doing is wrong, and if they do diced to do something criminal they should have to weigh the probably of going to jail and the sentience),be about rehabilitation ,or to just keep dangerous people locked up.
That's why crimes where people are well aware of what they are doing are punished more then passion crimes,where they were sane at one point and could've stopped themselves.
I do believe that everyone is different mentally in their won way,but someone should not be sentenced for life because of chemical imbalances in their brain.Someone could just need medication.Psychiatric ward can be worse if you aren't actually insane.

 

[Knusper]

Well if they were to put him into a regular prison, he would pose a danger to other inmates and vice versa. Even if they out him in isolation, either way it is unjust to leave anyone with an untreated and/or unsupported mental illness and make them suffer alone.

 

[asinann]

The insanity plea in anything other than death penalty or life without parole sentences is actually a worse plea than just pleading guilty.

If I were to get convicted of second degree murder, I would most likely get about ten years after good behavior.

If I got an insanity plea I would probably end up in a mental institution for at least 30 years.

The man who tried to kill President Reagan would have spent only about 5 years behind bars with a guilty plea if he served his entire sentence, the man is STILL in the nut house (though he does get to go out for visits to his parents of up to two weeks at a time.)

And remember, prisoners in the US are entitled to cable, three meals a day, and shelter(fuck you SCOTUS) while I am not even entitled to eat three meals a day because I do the right thing.

 

[kickyourass]

Given the fact that most psychiatric facilities do not have a set number of years you can spend in them, I'd say it's probably better he go there then prison, I mean I've seen proper HOMES that were less pleasant the Norwegian prisons seems and they don't have life sentences over there (which I think is due to the fact that Norway has one of the lowest violent crime rates on the planet). In a psych ward they can keep him there as long as they fucking like.

As for the insanity plea in general, yes I'd say it's a legitimate defense because I think some people are legitimately insane.

 

[orangeban]

And remember, prisoners in the US are entitled to cable, three meals a day, and shelter(fuck you SCOTUS) while I am not even entitled to eat three meals a day because I do the right thing.

First point: I can understand why you'd mention cable as a something that prisoners shouldn't have (I disagree, but I can see why you have said it), three meals a day seems kinda iffy to me (why is a standard amount of meals (quality not assured) some kind of frivolous luxury for the prisoners?) but shelter? Why would you mention shelter? Shelter is about as basic a need as you get, that's tier one of Maslow's hierarchy basic.

Secondly: Again with the three meals a day thing, perhaps the problem here isn't that the prisoner's shouldn't get it, but that you should. I don't quite understand what you mean by "not entitled", whether that means no-one makes you, no-one encourages you or that you literally can't afford it (or can't have it for some other reason), in those first two cases then there isn't much to say, but in that last case, perhaps society shouldn't deprive prisoners of the food, but get some to you as well.

 

[xvbones]

...In Denmark, for example, which isn't much different to Norway, going to a closed mental ward does NOT mean that you get drugged up and strapped to a bed (although it CAN, if it is considered necessary to prevent you from damaging yourself)...

Please go ahead and look up the medications used to 'treat' paranoid schizophrenia.

I'll wait.

It's true that many patients there are on some kind of drug, however most of those are anti-depressants or anti-psychotic

My turn to say you simply have no idea what you are talking about.

What do you think anti-psychotics do, pray tell?

You might have gotten your impression of mental wards from 1995, but it sure as hell is in the wrong part of the world.

No. I apologize and with respect, I will not back down a single step.

Please, again, look up 'paranoid schizophrenia', the treatments for it, and please speak to at least one person who has been placed on any of those treatments.

Because I am not wrong.

In fact, I'm almost convinced you've played too much Arkham Asylum. Confirm/Deny?

Deny, but thank you kindly for attempting to marginalize and dismiss my life as 'too much video games.'

 

[Chaos1228]

If you chop someones head off and put on display in your house and then invite your neighbors over to see it, id say that calls for insanity. But the insanity plea rarely works actually, and even if they're in the loony bin they're still locked up, they still aren't free.

OT: Although, Breivik shouldn't have gotten off with that. He planned out that car bomb and the shooting, which i wouldn't consider a random moment of psychotic rage.

 

[silverbullet1989]

sorry, call me wrong, or in-human but i STRONGLY believe that if YOU choose to end a person/peoples lives then you deserve to have your life taken away from you... execute the bastard for what he did. Insane or not he took the lives of 77 people! and they want to keep someone like that alive?

 

[Char-Nobyl]

There are a lot of remorseless psychopathic murderers who don't know right from wrong. Doesn't exclude them. ABB had massive delusions of grandeur, but it remains that he knew what he was doing, especially in the act of bombing and killing. Society is just better off without monsters who go around mass murdering others, sane or not. ABB can never be rehabilitated into society.

That's a contradiction of terms. To be remorseless, that implies that you can actually acknowledge that what you're doing is wrong.

Executed murderers have a 0% relapse rate.

And as the Innocence Project has shown us, we've already been wrong about some of the 'murderers' we put on Death Row. That's another thing you have a 0% chance of doing: atoning for murdering an innocent man.

Norway had a lower crime rate in the first place. It's a generally more cohesive society. So maybe they can afford to go soft on crime.

...or, alternatively, their justice system actually rehabilitates criminals instead of taking petty criminals and turning them into hardened ones.

Also you're not saying that there's the slightest chance ABB could be innocent, are you?

Innocent? When was that ever the issue? He already admitted to having done the deed. That's over with. The general problem with having a death penalty is that you're always supposed to have proven the accused guilty beyond the shadow of a doubt, but we still consistently convict innocent men. You either have the death penalty, or you don't. If you have it, innocent men will always get caught in it. If you don't, they won't. It's that simple.

 

[Shifty]

To be honest I am unsure. There is a some mental illnesses in my family (thankfully I seem to be ok) the closest to me is schizophrenia which my uncle has. I can honestly tell you that he is insane, i.e. is unreasonably paranoid among other symptoms(once told me the cosmic clown was after him). He put it to me in a simple way. "imagine the worst things you can think of, now imagine you hear a voice in your head on your bad days constantly telling you to do these things. That's what happens to me" One thing I do know the imagination is a powerful device.

Now I know if he did something bad (not murder something less) I do believe he should be punished the same as the next man however does punishing a man who is insane and believes he is right work as punishment?

Would not curing them, letting them know what they have done and possibly then punishing them seem better?

In any case people should be accountable for their actions although I do not study in the given area and so cannot give a fully informed opinion. If someone is studied in this area and not just shouting on the forum please let me know.

 

[hooksashands]

Psych wards can be just as bad, if not worse, as prison.

Very true. Being diagnosed as irrevocably crazy is almost no different from being sentenced to life in confinement. Anyone who has watched or read One Flew Over the Cuckoo's Nest can get an idea.

 

[ConstantErasing]

Obviously this has been said a hundred times but being thrown in the loony bin is essentially just prison with a slight twist. I would say that in the case of a truly psychotic person, prison is a bad idea because the way prison operates would be almost certainly bad for the person as well as the other prisoners. In a way you could argue that this man did nothing "wrong" he just simply operates differently than the rest of us. In that case how about putting him in with people that operate in a similarly off manner while you attempt to synch him in with the world as other people see it. A case like this seems mostly straight forward. If this was a temporary bout of insanity brought on by some extenuating circumstances, however, this would be a much more complex issue.

 

[electric_warrior]

I think that insanity should be a defence. If, for example, you cut your mother's head off because the devil told you to so you can stop world war 3, then you probably aren't really in control of your actions. It seems to me, though, that Breivik is wildly delusional, but fully aware of his actions and his surroundings and his motivations. He is sane. It is also true, however, that Norway could only sentence him to a maximum of 30 years behind bars, so they've clearly found him insane so they can lock him up forever. I think they played this just right, I mean, there was a serial killer in Colombia (Pedro Lopes or Luis Garavito, I forget which) who killed 200 kids but was only in prison for fifteen years or so because that was the maximum allowed under Colombian law. In those circumstances they probably would have been better off declaring him insane and carting him off to some loony bin for the rest of his life.

But back to the point. The thing is that insane people aren't necessarily bad or evil, they're ill. They aren't prisoners, they're patients and deserve to be treated as such.

 

[gizmo2300]

Nah, if you're able to kill 77 people without feeling bad about it, I'm actually considering why you don't just make him lawless. He's obviously not capable of acting like a human being, so why should he have the rights of one?

But since we're not barbarians and this is not the middle ages, I guess an insane asylum is a better solution.

 

[Something Amyss]

The US goes to some pretty crazy ends to make damn sure that the person is crazy, and stays crazy.

We have a punishment fetish. Plus, it's good business.