Yates not guilty by reason of insanity

**Doug** · 07-26-2006, 10:31 AM

http://www.cnn.com/2006/LAW/07/26/ya....ap/index.html

Fuck her and her insanity. She should be locked up in a small cell for the wrest of her life.

I don't want her getting treatment, I want her getting meals on a tray shoved through a small hole in the door.

**RickM** · 07-26-2006, 10:35 AM

Oh my.

Why can't we come up with some other category, like "Guilty and also insane." Because both are true -- she is guilty, and she has severe mental problems. Can't we recognize both truths?

**Taki Soma** · 07-26-2006, 10:37 AM

Originally Posted by RickM

Oh my.

Why can't we come up with some other category, like "Guilty and also insane." Because both are true -- she is guilty, and she has severe mental problems. Can't we recognize both truths?

good point.

**Jim T.** · 07-26-2006, 10:45 AM

Originally Posted by RickM

Oh my.

Why can't we come up with some other category, like "Guilty and also insane." Because both are true -- she is guilty, and she has severe mental problems. Can't we recognize both truths?

Some jurisidictions have a "guilty but mentally ill" verdict - I kind of recall that's what John Hinckley ended up with. Same result - you go into a mental hospital.

Generic Poster · 07-26-2006, 10:46 AM

Originally Posted by RickM

Oh my.

Why can't we come up with some other category, like "Guilty and also insane." Because both are true -- she is guilty, and she has severe mental problems. Can't we recognize both truths?

Not guilty by reason of insanity does do this, essentially. She'll still be locked up the rest of her life, just in an institution rather than a jail.

**joeyart** · 07-26-2006, 10:48 AM

It's not like she's getting set free...living in a mental asylum can't be a lot of fun...and this is the kind of crime that's gonn make most any judge take a long time to make sure she's actually better.

**Dr. Blasphemy** · 07-26-2006, 10:49 AM

She strap her in a car and drop her in the lake...

**Brian Defferding** · 07-26-2006, 10:51 AM

I don't know how they could find her insane.

**RickM** · 07-26-2006, 10:52 AM

Originally Posted by Generic Poster

Not guilty by reason of insanity does do this, essentially. She'll still be locked up the rest of her life, just in an institution rather than a jail.

Yes, but don't some of them (Hinckley, Mark David Chapman) start making noise years later that they're "cured", and since they're "not guilty," they should go free? I think its that possibility down the road that some judge will say "he/she is fine now, thanks to the meds and therapy" that gets people worked up.

I don't see why you can't help people through mental illness and at the same time hold them responsible. Its only in the last 60 or so years that we've decided some people aren't responsible for their actions.

**Relaunched** · 07-26-2006, 10:54 AM

Originally Posted by Generic Poster

Not guilty by reason of insanity does do this, essentially. She'll still be locked up the rest of her life, just in an institution rather than a jail.

Every three years she'll be up for review by a judge who considers ONLY if she is a threat to herself or other people. Since being institutionalized is not punitive, her past crimes cannot be used against her in this process.

Considering some judges have let child molesters on the streets because they are too wee for prison, it's kind of up in the air on how long she'll actually be in there.