Our society is deep into punishment as a solution for stepping out of
line. Turning our backs on mentally unbalanced people is, to my
thinking, just another part of an insane system. We are conditioned
to see the Law set in place to protect us. But we are learning that
it is, and always has been, a protection of the Elite and their
property. The solution for the insane who break the Law, is to have a
different system in place. And that is a long way down the road of
Justice.
Carl Jarvis
On 8/7/16, Miriam Vieni <miriamvieni@xxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
Jacewicz writes: "In light of John Hinckley Jr.'s release from a
psychiatric
hospital 35 years after attempting to assassinate President Ronald Reagan,
Shots is exploring the use of the not guilty by reason of insanity plea.
We're talking with legal and medical professionals about how the plea
works,
and how it doesn't work."
A prisoner. (photo: Getty Images)
With No Insanity Defense, Seriously Ill People End Up in Prison
By Natalie Jacewicz, NPR
06 August 16
In light of John Hinckley Jr.'s release from a psychiatric hospital 35
years
after attempting to assassinate President Ronald Reagan, Shots is exploring
the use of the not guilty by reason of insanity plea. We're talking with
legal and medical professionals about how the plea works, and how it
doesn't
work. In this fourth of a four-part series, we look at what happens to
defendants when a state has no insanity defense.
On the evening of March 8, 2016, 30-year-old Kyle Odom was arrested in
Washington, D.C., for throwing objects over the White House fence. He'd
traveled from Idaho, where authorities suspected him of shooting and
wounding Idaho pastor Tim Remington in a church parking lot days earlier.
Shortly after his arrest, an Idaho television station released a 30-page
manifesto believed to have been sent by Odom. In the letter, the writer
claims his life was ruined by "an intelligent species of amphibian-humanoid
from Mars" using humans as sex slaves. The manifesto included drawings of
the aliens and a claim that President Obama and Remington were aware of or
involved in the Martians' plot.
Odom was extradited to Idaho, and in early July, mediation of his case
began
before a judge rather than going to trial before a jury. Forgoing a trial
is
typical for cases in Idaho involving mental illness, says August Cahill, a
recently retired chief deputy of the Ada County Public Defender's Office in
Boise, Idaho. The state is one of four, along with Montana, Utah and
Kansas,
with no insanity defense. The cases "don't go to trial because ultimately,
what are you going to say to the jury?" asks Cahill. "You'd say, 'Yes, my
client killed this person....' You don't have a defense."
Because Idaho has no insanity defense, defendants with mental illness
typically plead guilty to lesser charges and rely on judges to take mental
health into account at sentencing. Some lawyers and psychiatrists say this
doesn't provide enough protection against the death penalty or long
incarceration. As professor Aliza Cover of the University of Idaho Law
School explains, "In Idaho, you have the unusual circumstance that someone
who couldn't even be convicted in another state could be executed."
The prosecutor in Odom's case, deputy prosecuting attorney Jed Whitaker,
says he can't discuss the ongoing mediation, but that the state does offer
protections for the mentally ill. "A mental health court is a way that you
can prosecute and help people who have a mental illness without necessarily
sending them to prison for their crimes," Whitaker says.
Mental health courts, which are part of a nationwide network, generally
rely
on volunteer judges, attorneys, mental health specialists and coordinators
to help people with mental illness get mental health care and a plan to
support themselves without crime or substance abuse. Whitaker, who has
participated in his county's mental health court, says the court meets once
a week to discuss each of the 40 to 50 people enrolled, who ultimately
leave
the program in a graduation ceremony.
"At least from my point of view, the mental health court catches a few
people that would otherwise be in prison," says Whitaker. Nonetheless, he
adds, "I still see mentally ill people go to prison here."
Part of the reason for that, according to psychiatrist Camille LaCroix, who
has served as an expert in Idaho cases involving mental illness, is that
the
mental health court typically does not accept violent offenders or people
who committed sex crimes. These people instead end up in prison, where
LaCroix says they receive treatment in an atmosphere that makes progress
difficult: "A prison is not a therapeutic environment. You have been found
guilty. You are being punished."
Having no insanity defense also affects people with mental illness who
don't
commit crimes, LaCroix argues, because it means less money goes into
developing mental health facilities outside of prisons - the typical
destination for people found not guilty by reason of insanity in other
states. "The severely mentally ill end up rotating through jail" in states
without insanity defenses, she says. "If you have the insanity defense,
you're then forced to get appropriate infrastructure."
As of 2012, Idaho had the lowest number of psychiatrists per capita in the
country, and the state has consistently had one of the highest suicide
rates
nationally.
The American Bar Association and the American Civil Liberties Union have
partnered in Idaho to lobby for a law banning the death penalty for the
severely mentally ill. (LaCroix is involved in the initiative.) Kathy
Griesmyer, a policy strategist with the ACLU, says if a law is passed, it
could remove up to two of the nine people in Idaho awaiting the death
penalty from death row. But the initiative would not change the state's
lack
of an insanity defense.
In 2012, the U.S. Supreme Court declined to review a case that would have
forced a consideration of whether or not states without an insanity defense
violate the U.S. Constitution. Justices Stephen Breyer, Sonia Sotomayor and
Ruth Bader Ginsburg dissented from the decision.
Cahill was a defense attorney in the case. Another recent case of his,
which
involved mental illness, is being appealed in Idaho. Cahill hopes that case
will reach the U.S. Supreme Court and that the justices will agree to hear
it, though he knows the odds are not in his favor. "I'm being realistic,"
he
says. "I don't think [the law] is going to change. But if I don't keep
fighting this battle, then it doesn't."
Error! Hyperlink reference not valid. Error! Hyperlink reference not
valid.
A prisoner. (photo: Getty Images)
http://www.npr.org/sections/health-shots/2016/08/05/487909967/with-no-insani
ty-defense-seriously-ill-people-end-up-in-prisonhttp://www.npr.org/sections/
health-shots/2016/08/05/487909967/with-no-insanity-defense-seriously-ill-peo
ple-end-up-in-prison
With No Insanity Defense, Seriously Ill People End Up in Prison
By Natalie Jacewicz, NPR
06 August 16
In light of John Hinckley Jr.'s release from a psychiatric hospital 35
years
after attempting to assassinate President Ronald Reagan, Shots is exploring
the use of the not guilty by reason of insanity plea. We're talking with
legal and medical professionals about how the plea works, and how it
doesn't
work. In this fourth of a four-part series, we look at what happens to
defendants when a state has no insanity defense.
n the evening of March 8, 2016, 30-year-old Kyle Odom was arrested in
Washington, D.C., for throwing objects over the White House fence. He'd
traveled from Idaho, where authorities suspected him of shooting and
wounding Idaho pastor Tim Remington in a church parking lot days earlier.
Shortly after his arrest, an Idaho television station released a 30-page
manifesto believed to have been sent by Odom. In the letter, the writer
claims his life was ruined by "an intelligent species of amphibian-humanoid
from Mars" using humans as sex slaves. The manifesto included drawings of
the aliens and a claim that President Obama and Remington were aware of or
involved in the Martians' plot.
Odom was extradited to Idaho, and in early July, mediation of his case
began
before a judge rather than going to trial before a jury. Forgoing a trial
is
typical for cases in Idaho involving mental illness, says August Cahill, a
recently retired chief deputy of the Ada County Public Defender's Office in
Boise, Idaho. The state is one of four, along with Montana, Utah and
Kansas,
with no insanity defense. The cases "don't go to trial because ultimately,
what are you going to say to the jury?" asks Cahill. "You'd say, 'Yes, my
client killed this person....' You don't have a defense."
Because Idaho has no insanity defense, defendants with mental illness
typically plead guilty to lesser charges and rely on judges to take mental
health into account at sentencing. Some lawyers and psychiatrists say this
doesn't provide enough protection against the death penalty or long
incarceration. As professor Aliza Cover of the University of Idaho Law
School explains, "In Idaho, you have the unusual circumstance that someone
who couldn't even be convicted in another state could be executed."
The prosecutor in Odom's case, deputy prosecuting attorney Jed Whitaker,
says he can't discuss the ongoing mediation, but that the state does offer
protections for the mentally ill. "A mental health court is a way that you
can prosecute and help people who have a mental illness without necessarily
sending them to prison for their crimes," Whitaker says.
Mental health courts, which are part of a nationwide network, generally
rely
on volunteer judges, attorneys, mental health specialists and coordinators
to help people with mental illness get mental health care and a plan to
support themselves without crime or substance abuse. Whitaker, who has
participated in his county's mental health court, says the court meets once
a week to discuss each of the 40 to 50 people enrolled, who ultimately
leave
the program in a graduation ceremony.
"At least from my point of view, the mental health court catches a few
people that would otherwise be in prison," says Whitaker. Nonetheless, he
adds, "I still see mentally ill people go to prison here."
Part of the reason for that, according to psychiatrist Camille LaCroix, who
has served as an expert in Idaho cases involving mental illness, is that
the
mental health court typically does not accept violent offenders or people
who committed sex crimes. These people instead end up in prison, where
LaCroix says they receive treatment in an atmosphere that makes progress
difficult: "A prison is not a therapeutic environment. You have been found
guilty. You are being punished."
Having no insanity defense also affects people with mental illness who
don't
commit crimes, LaCroix argues, because it means less money goes into
developing mental health facilities outside of prisons - the typical
destination for people found not guilty by reason of insanity in other
states. "The severely mentally ill end up rotating through jail" in states
without insanity defenses, she says. "If you have the insanity defense,
you're then forced to get appropriate infrastructure."
As of 2012, Idaho had the lowest number of psychiatrists per capita in the
country, and the state has consistently had one of the highest suicide
rates
nationally.
The American Bar Association and the American Civil Liberties Union have
partnered in Idaho to lobby for a law banning the death penalty for the
severely mentally ill. (LaCroix is involved in the initiative.) Kathy
Griesmyer, a policy strategist with the ACLU, says if a law is passed, it
could remove up to two of the nine people in Idaho awaiting the death
penalty from death row. But the initiative would not change the state's
lack
of an insanity defense.
In 2012, the U.S. Supreme Court declined to review a case that would have
forced a consideration of whether or not states without an insanity defense
violate the U.S. Constitution. Justices Stephen Breyer, Sonia Sotomayor and
Ruth Bader Ginsburg dissented from the decision.
Cahill was a defense attorney in the case. Another recent case of his,
which
involved mental illness, is being appealed in Idaho. Cahill hopes that case
will reach the U.S. Supreme Court and that the justices will agree to hear
it, though he knows the odds are not in his favor. "I'm being realistic,"
he
says. "I don't think [the law] is going to change. But if I don't keep
fighting this battle, then it doesn't."
http://e-max.it/posizionamento-siti-web/socialize
http://e-max.it/posizionamento-siti-web/socialize
