General Hospital Discussion Group
Message Responses
Subject: This is exactly what I am trying to say./countess2
Response Posted by: countess2
Date Posted: Fri May 2 7:13:56 2008
Message:
Subject: Oh yeah, I realized that Countess. Sorry if I sounded like I was arguing with you, lol. 100% agreement.
Response Posted by: Luke's Fan
Date Posted: Fri May 2 7:22:53 2008
Message:
.
Subject: Actually, the opposite is true. Either you are competent at the time of your crimes and able to appreicate right from wrong or you are not. You can be incompetent to stand trial and aid in your defense at the time of trial but still competent when you committed them. Here, he was incompetent when he committed them (per the soap) so he is either locked up for treatement or free to go once he's competent. We cannot have it any other way.
Response Posted by: LilaRae
Date Posted: Fri May 2 14:26:38 2008
Message:
EOM
Subject: Well tell that to the families of the VICTIMS. That theory offers NO JUSTICE for them at all. That's like saying....as long as a person is sane and safe NOW, it doesn't matter what they did before, BULLSH*T! The insanity plea is a way OVER-USED excuse so that the murderous trash of the earth can escape TRUE punishment for their heinous crimes. The legal system as is.....is too full of bleeding hearts to be effective. The trouble is that the bleeding hearts are too busy feeling for the perpetrators of crimes but seem to not care at all about the victims of crime.....till it affects them or theirs....then it's another story.
Response Posted by: San Jose
Date Posted: Fri May 2 15:02:22 2008
Message:
.
Subject: San Jose, you brought up an interesting point about the bleeding heart justice system. The way I see it, the legal system has become 'devoid of caring', where the victim's rights are concerned. The insanity plea is definately overused. For example, you have a animalistic killer and all the psychiatrists look at it like 'we got a real, live specimen here to study. Imagine what we could learn from this!!!' They look at it as some kind of science project but, how often do they take into consideration the massive destruction done by these people and the heartbreak that they caused other innocent people? Do they even care? Who knows. The victims are the ones who should be 1st priority, not the criminal....and not the doctor's 'need to study'
Response Posted by: Luke's Fan
Date Posted: Fri May 2 15:23:31 2008
Message:
.
Subject: Well, that's because today's system has become too clinical, imo. I suppose in past times, the law could have been accused of rushing to judgement or being barbaric, perhaps. But the pendulum has swung too far in the other direction and now we are bending over BACKWARDS to *understand* the criminal mind. In the midst of all this, victim's rights have been put on the back-burner or, at times, even forgotten. Personally, I'm not so interested in understanding or diagnosing the criminal mind. The lions-share of attention should be on the victim....afterall....they didn't HURT ANYONE.
Response Posted by: San Jose
Date Posted: Fri May 2 15:41:54 2008
Message:
.
Subject: While the 'insanity defense' is often used, it very often doesn't work! Many (if not most) juries don't buy it & it is pretty tough to convince judges that a defendant IS legally insane. A lot of times the defense strategy backfires. It isn't just about the insanity defense, IMO. It is about how all convicted criminals are treated. We have a case locally where a rapist was released early, to a homeless situation. His parole officer put an ankle bracelet on him, releasing him to live under an overpass within blocks of his rape victim--without notifying her! The guy cut off the ankle bracelet & has now disappeared! The corrections dept. 'appologized' to the rape survivor for not informing her of his release, but their system is new. Not good enough of an excuse, IMO. I guess our system doesn't remember the convicted rapist several yrs ago, who was put into a work release program, walked away & ultimately returned to the scene of his crime to murder his rape victim, a neighbor who testified against him in court & the daughter of his rape victim--who had been an infant at the time of the rape. eom
Response Posted by: Rosebud1
Date Posted: Fri May 2 21:16:01 2008
Message:
eom
Subject: Sorry, per the legal system: You must first be judged competent to stand trial. This has to do with aiding in your own defense--not whether you knew right from worng. Then, if you finally get adjuducated 'competent,' the JURY or JUDGE are the ones to condier the insanity defense, not the doctors determining if you're competent to stand trial. You must stand trial, if competent. You don't get sent home. That is civil commitment./countess2
Response Posted by: countess2
Date Posted: Mon May 5 7:21:56 2008
Message:
