James Holmes, Insane?

BDBoop

Platinum Member
Jul 20, 2011
35,384
5,459
668
Don't harsh my zen, Jen!
For somebody to do something like that, wouldn't they almost have to be insane? I know the man is brilliant, and that can be just one tippy-toe removed from unhinged. Do you think that's the case here, and should his attorney shoot for an insanity plea?

In other words, how can he have done what he did and be sane.
 
In the sense that only an insane person could do such a thing yes... in the sense he didnt know better... HELL NO!!!
He knew waht he was doing.... evil assclown.

He needs to pay the ultimate price.

Plus, his damn lawyers need to stop drugging him... my opinion, but he is being drugged for affect
.
 
For somebody to do something like that, wouldn't they almost have to be insane? I know the man is brilliant, and that can be just one tippy-toe removed from unhinged. Do you think that's the case here, and should his attorney shoot for an insanity plea?

In other words, how can he have done what he did and be sane.

Of course he's insane. This wasn't a case of someone's greed or ambition overriding their moral compass. He obviously, tragically, came unhinged somewhere along the line.
 
  • Thread starter
  • Banned
  • #4
For somebody to do something like that, wouldn't they almost have to be insane? I know the man is brilliant, and that can be just one tippy-toe removed from unhinged. Do you think that's the case here, and should his attorney shoot for an insanity plea?

In other words, how can he have done what he did and be sane.

Of course he's insane. This wasn't a case of someone's greed or ambition overriding their moral compass. He obviously, tragically, came unhinged somewhere along the line.

That's my perception. And at this early stage of the game, I see a difference between Manson (who I do perceive to be evil), and this guy.
 
In the sense that only an insane person could do such a thing yes... in the sense he didnt know better... HELL NO!!!
He knew waht he was doing.... evil assclown.

He needs to pay the ultimate price.

Plus, his damn lawyers need to stop drugging him... my opinion, but he is being drugged for affect
.

There is no definition of "insanity" in the DSM-IV TR.

In states where the burden of proof is on the defense to prove insanity, the defense is required to show either clear and convincing evidence or a preponderance of the evidence that the defendant is insane.

In states where the burden is still on prosecutors to prove sanity, they are required to prove it BEYOND A REASONABLE DOUBT.

I don't know which side has the burden in Colorado.
 
Depending that he was top of his class in high school and college and was enrolled in a pretty difficult program, I think that there was some sort of underlying mental disorder. No sane person would suddenly drop out and shoot up a movie theater. And the fact that he had been seeing a psychiatrist makes us wonder if there were some mental illness that this man was dealing with. There's a lot of things that we can only speculate about, but of which we will discover more about as the case unravels.
 
For somebody to do something like that, wouldn't they almost have to be insane? I know the man is brilliant, and that can be just one tippy-toe removed from unhinged. Do you think that's the case here, and should his attorney shoot for an insanity plea?

In other words, how can he have done what he did and be sane.




My wife says he either developed schizophrenia disorder (it presents at that age) or he's a sociopath. Either way she says he should never, ever breath open air again. And being the liberal she is, even she says the death penalty, if he's a sociopath, is not inapropriate.
 
In the sense that only an insane person could do such a thing yes... in the sense he didnt know better... HELL NO!!!
He knew waht he was doing.... evil assclown.

He needs to pay the ultimate price.

Plus, his damn lawyers need to stop drugging him... my opinion, but he is being drugged for affect
.

There is no definition of "insanity" in the DSM-IV TR.

In states where the burden of proof is on the defense to prove insanity, the defense is required to show either clear and convincing evidence or a preponderance of the evidence that the defendant is insane.

In states where the burden is still on prosecutors to prove sanity, they are required to prove it BEYOND A REASONABLE DOUBT.

I don't know which side has the burden in Colorado.




Soon you'll have the DSM 5 and it lowers the criteria for all sorts of disorders. My wife feels it's ridiculous, with the DSM 5 almost anyone will be classifiable with some sort of disorder.
 
For somebody to do something like that, wouldn't they almost have to be insane? I know the man is brilliant, and that can be just one tippy-toe removed from unhinged. Do you think that's the case here, and should his attorney shoot for an insanity plea?

In other words, how can he have done what he did and be sane.

Holmes was a very smart man. One would think that only a person who was insane could do such a thing, but then that would mean that every serial killer was insane, when most of them are just evil.
 
For somebody to do something like that, wouldn't they almost have to be insane? I know the man is brilliant, and that can be just one tippy-toe removed from unhinged. Do you think that's the case here, and should his attorney shoot for an insanity plea?

In other words, how can he have done what he did and be sane.


Surely he is nuts.

That isn't the legal (or moral) question though.

The question is did this nutter KNOW that he was killing people? Was he aware of his actions

The answer to that is YES.

There's LOTS of crazy people...not all of them slaughter stangers in a movie theater. CRAZY does not equal KILLER.

CRAZY is NOT an excuse when the crazy person knows what he is doing and understands the outcomes of his actions.
 
For somebody to do something like that, wouldn't they almost have to be insane? I know the man is brilliant, and that can be just one tippy-toe removed from unhinged. Do you think that's the case here, and should his attorney shoot for an insanity plea?

In other words, how can he have done what he did and be sane.

I think he is clearly insane to some degree, but probably not legally insane. In most states, the test for legal insanity is whether or not the person knows the difference between right and wrong. Holmes strikes me as being one of these genius-nut cases. He is very intelligent, which means he probably does know the difference between right and wrong, even though he may have a couple of screws loose.
 
A normal fast execution is too good for this piece of shit. Hopefully soon, he will be burning in hell for what he did.

O'yes, insane as all hell.

How about we draw and quarter him on the 50-yard line at some football stadium that holds over one hundred thousand people? In addition, put it on pay T.V. for about $150 bucks per view. The proceeds could go to the RNC. My God, think of the possibilities here.
 
Holmes can't hurt us anymore. The question is whether Attorney General Holder is insane. Who in their right mind would authorize 3,000 illegal weapons to be shipped to Mexico with a convoluted plan to track them that didn't have a chance of working? Who in their right mind would defend his actions?
 
I had thought that Holmes would not be competent enough to stand trial. However, he appears to have at least temporarily overcome the mental disease that caused him to believe he was the joker enough to participate in his trial and cooperate with his lawyers.

Holmes isn't insane because he committed this act, he's insane because he believes, or believed himself to be a cartoon character. It is not at all unusual for someone under a sudden delusion to come back to reality with no knowledge of what they did while they were under the delusion. People who suffer from multiple personality disorder do it all the time.
 
Holmes can't hurt us anymore. The question is whether Attorney General Holder is insane. Who in their right mind would authorize 3,000 illegal weapons to be shipped to Mexico with a convoluted plan to track them that didn't have a chance of working? Who in their right mind would defend his actions?

Holder is insane. He suffers from the congenital defect of Negroidism.

Someone else suffering from Negroidism might defend Holder.
 
Holmes can't hurt us anymore. The question is whether Attorney General Holder is insane. Who in their right mind would authorize 3,000 illegal weapons to be shipped to Mexico with a convoluted plan to track them that didn't have a chance of working? Who in their right mind would defend his actions?

Holder is insane. He suffers from the congenital defect of Negroidism.

Someone else suffering from Negroidism might defend Holder.

Wrong thread :eusa_eh:
 
There is often a bit of a difference between our normal, everyday meaning and understanding of "insane" and the legal definition of that term.

In a common, everyday way, it sure seems like anybody who would place such great stock in the fictional shit of comic books and then act it out in the horrific violent, deadly way that Holmes appears to have acted would qualify as "insane."

But that doesn't translate into a winning legal defense, necessarily.

In Colorado a person is insane if the person is suffering from a mental disease or defect that makes the person “incapable of distinguishing right from wrong.”
-- Colorado Criminal Law – Understanding Basic Colorado Criminal Defenses - Criminal Attorney Specializing in Sex Crimes Law in Denver, Colorado

It is often very hard to "sell" that a guy who supposedly couldn't grasp the distinction between right and wrong was able to plan out his conduct including efforts to conceal or escape.

My guess (pure guess) is that it is going to be damnably difficult for this "joker's" criminal defense lawyers to make out the claim before a judge or a jury. I suspect the effort will fail.
 

Forum List

Back
Top