Loughner's "Not Guilty" plea

[Sheldon]

Mental illness =/= Legal insanity

Legal insanity =/= Mental incompetence

If he decides to plead not guilty by reason of insanity there will be a long process to determine if he was, in fact, legally insane. That is unknown at this time.

But legal insanity is not the same as being unable to plan, or incompetent to think at all. It means lacking the capacity basically to know right from wrong. If the exhaustive examinations make it pretty clear he is, in fact, legally insane, usually the prosecution will deal. If it goes to trial, he will have to convince the jury. Less than 20% of attempts are successful.

I'd say if he does turn out to be not guilty by reason of insanity, it's a pretty reasonable assumption it's warranted.

If he's sane, he needs to be locked away forever or killed as a mass murderer

If he's insane, clearly he can never be safely let back into society, and he should be locked away forever or killed like a wild beast

I don't think there's much of a chance he'll be released.

My understanding of how insanity convictions work is that they are locked up in a mental institution, and if they are ever determined to be "sane" then they get to go to prison.

Either way, they're locked up. Where things get messed up is when they are transferred to facilities that allow "outings"...

That made me think of the creepy bug-eyed guy from ConAir.

 

[Cecilie1200]

Is there any doubt now that they will use the insanity defense?

He will not be put to death, and as much as I support the death penalty, I believe in this case it is not appropriate. This young man is insane, and cannot comprehend what he has done, or even what is real and what is not.

I must disagree. While I don't think anyone argues that he's mentally ill, it does not automatically follow that he doesn't comprehend what he did. I have yet to see anything to suggest he doesn't understand the nature of death or of his actions.

I wish someone had been there that day with a sidearm and a clear shot at him. It is amazing to me that in Arizona, there was not a CCW user present with the training to react, unconsciously, to the present threat of a violent lunatic, and put a bullet through his head to stop the threat.

Apparently, there WERE people there who were armed. I'm told the man who tackled him was armed, but no one knew there was any reason to shoot him until he had already fired at Representative Giffords. It's not like he was running across the parking lot, waving his gun for all to see.

And before you ask, yes, had I been there and had the opportunity, I would have undoubtedly used my sidearm to stop the lunatic. Probably without much conscious thought at all (if any), until the threat had been stopped.

That would only apply, again, if you knew there was a need to shoot.

I wonder about the timeline. 19 shots, and 18 hits. 9 seconds total? 9 seconds in which his attention would have been focused in one direction only

Enough time to react and possibly save a life or two, if you're within 20 yards or so of him when he starts his rampage.

I do love people who want to play armchair quarterback without all the facts.

But now he will sit on a ward for the remainder of his natural life.

I also love people who want to jump straight to the jury decision and sentencing without even having the trial and hearing the evidence first. Possibly you could at least let us get through the voir dire?

That isn't justice, in my mind. At the same time, I don't think he would understand why we are putting him to death if we did level that sentence on him. He truly is insane.

It really is very interesting that you're willing to pronounce with such certainty about what he does and doesn't understand without ever speaking to him or hearing him talk about what happened.

His crime is the perfect argument FOR the death penalty.

His mind is the perfect argument AGAINST it.

And this post is a perfect argument against putting the cart before the horse, and trying cases in the media. I'm guessing that's why we still stick to the old-fashioned method of trying them in a courtroom before a jury.

Vigilante justice was appropriate here. Its a shame we didn't have that opportunity.

Seems to me like the appropriate response to what happened was made, given the circumstances as presented.

 

[Cecilie1200]

I f he does get away with insanity plea and avoids the needle.... we can surely blame one law enforcement officer for sure.... that would be Sheriff Dufus.

He came right of the box claiming the kid wasnt to blame.

Well, one good thing that came out of all this is that my neighbors FINALLY seem to have woken up to what an ignorant dumbass they keep electing as sheriff. My God, what an embarrassment to the office.

 

[Cecilie1200]

He didn't say he wasn't guilty by reason of insanity. He said he didn't do it.

As I understand it, he just pled "not guilty". Which only means he wants a trial, not that he's trying to claim they have the wrong guy.

 

[Cecilie1200]

The most ignorant assumption you can make is that all seemingly insane crimes are committed by insane people. It's not true. If it was, Bundy and Gacey and Dahmer would be resting comfortably, enjoying prescription medication and watching cable TV today.

While I agree with your post (although I do think Loughner is insane), to play devil's advocated Dahmer was killed by another inmate-not the death penalty. Had nothing to do with his trial.

Yes, but he WAS put in prison, rather than a mental hospital.

 

[Cecilie1200]

Is there any doubt now that they will use the insanity defense?

He will not be put to death, and as much as I support the death penalty, I believe in this case it is not appropriate. This young man is insane, and cannot comprehend what he has done, or even what is real and what is not.

I wish someone had been there that day with a sidearm and a clear shot at him. It is amazing to me that in Arizona, there was not a CCW user present with the training to react, unconsciously, to the present threat of a violent lunatic, and put a bullet through his head to stop the threat.

And before you ask, yes, had I been there and had the opportunity, I would have undoubtedly used my sidearm to stop the lunatic. Probably without much conscious thought at all (if any), until the threat had been stopped.

I wonder about the timeline. 19 shots, and 18 hits. 9 seconds total? 9 seconds in which his attention would have been focused in one direction only.

Enough time to react and possibly save a life or two, if you're within 20 yards or so of him when he starts his rampage.

But now he will sit on a ward for the remainder of his natural life.

That isn't justice, in my mind. At the same time, I don't think he would understand why we are putting him to death if we did level that sentence on him. He truly is insane.

His crime is the perfect argument FOR the death penalty.

His mind is the perfect argument AGAINST it.

Vigilante justice was appropriate here. Its a shame we didn't have that opportunity.

From what I've read, he plead not guilty just to get the case going. If he had plead guilty, it would all just be over. It's a strategy. He could plead for insanity, I think he's insane but I also realize that people want him dead for his crimes so I hope he isn't actually ruled to be insane.

I hope they make a reasoned, logical decision based on the evidence presented, whatever that might require. If he really is incapable of understanding the nature and quality of his actions, then I hope they put him in a very secure mental facility. If he knew what he was doing, then I hope they convict him and the judge sentences him to the maximum appropriate to - again - the evidence presented.

 

[ABikerSailor]

You know, I don't usually watch the news on the weekends, I've got better things to do, but I found out about this story from reading it here on USMB. Since then? I've been following this story closely.

Interestingly enough, on the Ed Schultz show on MSNBC, Ed interviewed a guy who had a CCW license, who DID react by putting one of the hero's on the ground. He'd also said that if the crowd hadn't stopped him and pointed to Laughtner, he'd have probably shot an innocent man.

No. Vigilante justice isn't always right, and in this case, thank Father (that's what I call God, because I learned to pray saying the "Our Father") that he DIDN'T pull his gun.

Now......this morning on the news (yeah......I watch a lot of it on the weekdays), they'd reported that after examining his computer, he'd been researching stuff like "needles" "death penalty" and "assassination", which means that he knew exactly what he was going to do, as well as weighed the possible consequences of his actions, and decided to do it anyway.

My whole beef with this idiot? Simple.......he killed a 9 year old little girl who had just started her life, and with the path that she'd ALREADY put herself on, who knows? She could have been the first female President of this country, and may have even done a great job of making this country great again.

For the one reason above, I'm hoping that Laughtner gets exactly what he'd researched on the internet, and receives the death penalty via injection.

Was Laughtner insane? Possibly, but in the commission of his crime, he knew the risks, knew that there was a very good chance of being executed, yet chose to do it anyway. That shows motive, premeditation, realizing the consequences of his actions, and finally, the shooting.

Nope. Put the fucker to death.

 

[DiveCon]

You know, I don't usually watch the news on the weekends, I've got better things to do, but I found out about this story from reading it here on USMB. Since then? I've been following this story closely.

Interestingly enough, on the Ed Schultz show on MSNBC, Ed interviewed a guy who had a CCW license, who DID react by putting one of the hero's on the ground. He'd also said that if the crowd hadn't stopped him and pointed to Laughtner, he'd have probably shot an innocent man.

No. Vigilante justice isn't always right, and in this case, thank Father (that's what I call God, because I learned to pray saying the "Our Father") that he DIDN'T pull his gun.

Now......this morning on the news (yeah......I watch a lot of it on the weekdays), they'd reported that after examining his computer, he'd been researching stuff like "needles" "death penalty" and "assassination", which means that he knew exactly what he was going to do, as well as weighed the possible consequences of his actions, and decided to do it anyway.

My whole beef with this idiot? Simple.......he killed a 9 year old little girl who had just started her life, and with the path that she'd ALREADY put herself on, who knows? She could have been the first female President of this country, and may have even done a great job of making this country great again.

For the one reason above, I'm hoping that Laughtner gets exactly what he'd researched on the internet, and receives the death penalty via injection.

Was Laughtner insane? Possibly, but in the commission of his crime, he knew the risks, knew that there was a very good chance of being executed, yet chose to do it anyway. That shows motive, premeditation, realizing the consequences of his actions, and finally, the shooting.

Nope. Put the fucker to death.

yup, his internet postings also show he knew what he was doing was wrong and asked for forgiveness

 

[Flopper]

Popular opinion shouldn't enter into it. Most people are educated by Hollywood on insanity and don't fully understand the insanity defense, how difficult it is to actually be found legally insane, the actual result or the reason why it upholds justice. They think it's "getting off", and it is nothing of the sort. It usually means indefinite incarceration in a government mental facility. And while some may eventually be freed many stay for life - even if life is not the sentence they would have received under a guilty verdict.

All that matters is the actual facts, which are not yet known, and how the law as it is written applies. We have courts, rights and the guarantee of due process specifically to keep law and order in a civilized and just manner, and so that we aren't all at the mercy of roaming vigilantes and lynch mobs deciding on their own and off the cuff what is and is not "justice".

Yep. Most people seem to think that when the mentally ill commit crimes they end up in a mental institution. Nothing could be further from the truth. Prisons are filled with people as nutty as a fruitcake. They just don't happen to be criminally insane. In the 1990's mental hospitals were closing faster than paint dries on a summer afternoon. Today, there are three times as many mentally ill people in prisons as there are in psychiatric hospitals.

Had Loughner been arrested for a lessor felony, he would most likely have gone to prision and received the normal treatment the mentally ill get in prison, punishment and isolation which of course just makes them crazier and more dangerous to themselves and others.