Tweet
Why are prosecutors bothering to treat Jerrod Lee Loughner’s mental illness in order to ready him for trial? Doesn’t this constitute an admission, and hence proof, that he was insane when he shot Gabby Giffords?
Duh? |
|
| By: glossolalique Thursday July 19, 2012 12:32 pm | |
Why are prosecutors bothering to treat Jerrod Lee Loughner’s mental illness in order to ready him for trial? Doesn’t this constitute an admission, and hence proof, that he was insane when he shot Gabby Giffords?
About MyFDL
MyFDL is the community site of progressive political blog Firedoglake. Anyone can participate by writing a diary, commenting on others’ diaries, or joining groups to find other people in your area. Content posted to MyFDL is the opinion of the author alone, and should not be attributed to Firedoglake.
News. Community. Activism.
Firedoglake is a member-supported organization.
Help us continue our work for as little as $45/year.
5 Comments
Competency and sanity are different, so,
1. To get him competent to stand trial, and
2. No, because insanity and competency are different, from a legal perspective.
Thanks, C-S, this is a puzzler for us on-legal types. Can you (or anyone) elaborate?
Mason coming over to explain more in a minute on the specific differences and on why they are waiting for Loughner (sp?) to be competent.
The answer to your question is “No.”
Competency to stand trial and legal Insanity are completely different concepts.
To be competent to stand trial, a defendant must be able to:
1. perceive what is going on in his environment in a non-delusional manner;
2. recall what he perceived going on in his environment and the circumstances of the offense that he is alleged to have committed;
3. understand the legal jeopardy he is in;
4. communicate with and assist his lawyers to represent him;
5. make decisions with the advice of counsel; and
6. understand the difference between the truth and a lie and accept the duty to tell the truth, if he should testify.
Jared Loughner has not been competent to stand trial and lately the prosecutors and defense attorneys have been arguing about whether he can be forcibly medicated to make him competent.
Insanity is not a medical diagnosis. It’s defined as follows:
A person is legally insane if, as a result of a mental disease or defect, they are unable to tell right from wrong and conform their conduct to the requirements of law.
This is the M’Naughten test that was developed in England in the first half of the 19th century.
At trial, the defendant will have the burden of proving insanity.
Many people who commit crimes while in a delusional psychotic state will nevertheless fail to satisfy the test, if their conduct exhibited an awareness that what they were doing was against the law. For example, hiding a body, fleeing the scene of a crime, disposing of a weapon, or attempting to evade police are acts that exhibit an awareness that they committed a crime. That means that, despite their delusional state, they could tell right from wrong and were not legally insane.
Very few “crazy” people can satisfy the requirements of the M’Naughten test.
In the Loughner case, the government has to get him competent in order to start the trial because he cannot be tried until he is competent. That usually involves administering anti-psychotic medication.
Whether he was insane at the time of the shooting is an entirely different question.
OK, makes sense as you explain it. Thanks.