Find Your Valentine
Slog
News & ArtsFriday, July 31, 2009
Crime / City Thou Shalt Take Thy Bipolar Medication?
Posted by Eli Sanders on Fri, Jul 31, 2009 at 8:49 AM
There's an intense debate going in the comment thread connected to yesterday's post on how Teresa Butz fought back, and it includes an equally intense sub-debate: If it turns out that Isaiah Kalebu, the man who has been charged with raping and murdering Butz, was off his bipolar medication at the time of the attack, would that make him more or less responsible for his actions?
Posted by Bi-polar is as real as the consequences:
When I went manic, I bought $32,000 worth of items on credit, ruining said credit. All items were repossessed and I still owe about $50,000 with interest.Was I forgiven of my debt by my creditors or the government for things I did while out of my mind?
No.
Neither should this guy.
Kill him.
Posted by Take it all in:
This guy is fucked to the max. This crime is fucked beyond belief. The story made me cry.That said, killing him will not make any of you feel better about what happened to this woman. Nor will it make the world a bright and shiny place with rainbows and unicorns.
Posted by Fnarf:
If I could wish anything for [Butz's] killer, it would be for him to see and understand [the suffering he caused], really understand it. He should be made to go around and share his nightmares, and the ones he has created in others, with at-risk youth like himself who haven't murdered yet. Scare the crap out of them. Make him really PAY, not in more misery but in reducing the misery in others. He'll never balance those books, but he should be made to try.
Posted by Balderdash:
Bipolar disorder, or any mental disorder, is not an excuse for any crime. It's an explanation. People don't commit horrific acts for no reason.Personally I think executing the perpetrator of this crime is a reasonable and efficient way of ensuring that he never hurts anyone again, under the assumption that anyone who could do something like this is beyond repair and will never be safe or sane.
All the same, downplaying or dismissing mental illness as a contributing factor out of a desire to assign blame, responsibility, and punishment - even though that's an entirely natural reaction - only leads us down the path of failing to do whatever we can to prevent things like this from happening in the future.
Posted by not convinced:
it does seem like there are cases where people are just broken beyond rehabilitation. Criminally insane individuals like Kalebu are exactly what swing me towards the death penalty side. (I'm not talking about whether or not his living out his life in prison costs money, or whether or not he will ever contribute to society, or whether or not future murderers are deterred...but just that he cannot be allowed to ever be free and "snap" like that again.) A life sentence also potentially puts the surviving woman through the hell of having to testify at parole hearings every few years for the rest of Kalebu's life
Posted by Theo Magyar:
Why isn't anyone here advocating for the death penalty advocating for increased funding/ assistance for people diagnosed with mental health issues? And just in case that stance isn't clear , Fnarf is correct about a civilized response ..... and yes, I have seen people who had committed terrible crimes reintegrated into society. For example, I know a man with schizophrenia who murdered his son while undignosed and unmedicated who now lives out of prison (on parole) as a fairly normal member of society due to his diagnosis and treatment... [And] NO, I don't know enough about Kalebu to suggest he is treatable. No one else posting here knows that either, though.
Posted by yucca flower:
It's not that he isn't treatable, but [that] he refuses treatment.
2
Good Morning Eli,
Those postings were varied and interesting. Thanks.
My understanding is that KC prosecutor (Satterberg?) indicated he might ask for the Death Penalty should Mr. Kalebu be convicted. I believe he should get it. Especially considering if he is the perpetrator of the arson that killed his aunt and a resident of that house where they were living.
It strikes me as odd that one argument against Capitol Punishment is that "doesn't work as a deterrant against vicious crime". Actually, it does deter. If Kalebu is convicted and executed, he will never commit a crime again. In addition, the family of Butz and her partner will never have to go through the hell of facing Kalebu at parole hearings. The Death Penalty seems to me a fair solution.
Those postings were varied and interesting. Thanks.
My understanding is that KC prosecutor (Satterberg?) indicated he might ask for the Death Penalty should Mr. Kalebu be convicted. I believe he should get it. Especially considering if he is the perpetrator of the arson that killed his aunt and a resident of that house where they were living.
It strikes me as odd that one argument against Capitol Punishment is that "doesn't work as a deterrant against vicious crime". Actually, it does deter. If Kalebu is convicted and executed, he will never commit a crime again. In addition, the family of Butz and her partner will never have to go through the hell of facing Kalebu at parole hearings. The Death Penalty seems to me a fair solution.
4
Way to keep the firestorm whipped up here. I have personal experience bearing on the subject matter: severe mental illness in the family, refusal of treatment, attempted (and successful) double murder, incarceration, institutionalization. But does anybody else look at the comments on the original bloody post and think, maybe this isn't a great place to work this out?
Don't get me wrong. There have been some sublime defenses (Fnarf) against the snarling and ridiculous baying for blood (for example, that one fella with the linked handle, whose real name I'm starting to suspect is actually legion). However, isn't it plain that the baying for blood is the very product of this forum right now?
Thanks to my favorite blog's decision to highlight the hideous details, more than ever I have to talk about all this. But with live friends and surviving family.
In the meantime, I can't wait for a post on something cute and gay, because what I do have to share on Slog is that last night I found the original English version of Queer as Folk has been put on Hulu as part of its summer celebration promotion, and how fun is that?
Don't get me wrong. There have been some sublime defenses (Fnarf) against the snarling and ridiculous baying for blood (for example, that one fella with the linked handle, whose real name I'm starting to suspect is actually legion). However, isn't it plain that the baying for blood is the very product of this forum right now?
Thanks to my favorite blog's decision to highlight the hideous details, more than ever I have to talk about all this. But with live friends and surviving family.
In the meantime, I can't wait for a post on something cute and gay, because what I do have to share on Slog is that last night I found the original English version of Queer as Folk has been put on Hulu as part of its summer celebration promotion, and how fun is that?
5
I spent a year being verbally and emotionally abused by a woman at my office for over a year. No one wanted to confront her about her problems, which probably included bipolar disorder, or to insist that she take her meds (she was supposed to be on a lot of them, by her own admission). The owner of the business just didn't want to hear any bad news for any reason, so he avoided doing or saying anything, and no one else had the authority or the guts, apparently.
I needed the job badly and had trouble getting another for a time. I never knew when she was going to freak out again, but it finally happened once too many, and I set about with a lot more determination to get another job, and succeeded.
Really, in the scheme of things, it wasn't that big a deal. But she made my life miserable, and I'm sorry to say I developed a very low level of what might be compared to PTSD. It's taken me three years to stop being so flinchy at work and waiting for the other shoe to drop (on my head).
So: If these people won't take their meds and can't be trusted to leave other people alone, then I say lock 'em up. Or something. Just saying.
I needed the job badly and had trouble getting another for a time. I never knew when she was going to freak out again, but it finally happened once too many, and I set about with a lot more determination to get another job, and succeeded.
Really, in the scheme of things, it wasn't that big a deal. But she made my life miserable, and I'm sorry to say I developed a very low level of what might be compared to PTSD. It's taken me three years to stop being so flinchy at work and waiting for the other shoe to drop (on my head).
So: If these people won't take their meds and can't be trusted to leave other people alone, then I say lock 'em up. Or something. Just saying.
6
An awful lot of people seem to be inferring a connection between bipolar disorder and "craziness", "insanity" or even occasionally schizophrenia. This could not be further from the truth. Bipolar disorder changes how a person feels, not how he sees and hears reality. Bipolar disorder does not cause hallucinations or paranoid delusions. It is not a psychotic disorder. And most importantly, there is no link between violence directed at others and bipolar disorder reported anywhere in the medical literature.
Additionally, I think you'd be hard-pressed to find any physician or court that would even attempt to force a bipolar patient to take his meds. There's a debate over doing this with schizophrenics, but that's because they usually lack insight (the knowledge that they are suffering from a mental disorder) and thus there is a question as to whether they possess sufficient competency to determine their own medical
care. Not so with bipolar disorder.
Additionally, I think you'd be hard-pressed to find any physician or court that would even attempt to force a bipolar patient to take his meds. There's a debate over doing this with schizophrenics, but that's because they usually lack insight (the knowledge that they are suffering from a mental disorder) and thus there is a question as to whether they possess sufficient competency to determine their own medical
care. Not so with bipolar disorder.
7
I wonder how many people that are screaming for the death penalty in this case were actually death penalty opponents? This crime was truly horrific, but that does not change the fact that the death penalty is not a effective deterrent to rape and murder not to mention vastly more expensive than keeping a prisoner alive in the general population for a life sentence. Opposing the death penalty can be hard especially when faced with crimes of so brutal in nature, but that's what integrity and values are all about and they shouldn't be thrown by the wayside in the face of brutality.
If this man did in fact commit this crime, and let's remember our system of justice is supposed to provide an assumption of innocence until proven guilty, he should face the consequences. Life in prison without the possibility of parole is no walk in the park and would serve justice and society, in my opinion.
If this man did in fact commit this crime, and let's remember our system of justice is supposed to provide an assumption of innocence until proven guilty, he should face the consequences. Life in prison without the possibility of parole is no walk in the park and would serve justice and society, in my opinion.
10
@6 Yes, schizophrenia is one thing (like the woman who ate her baby's brain), but bipolar disorder is no excuse for this crime.
There's enough physical evidence...he deserves to be executed!
There's enough physical evidence...he deserves to be executed!
11
@7 I've always been for the death penalty in cases where there is overwhelming physical evidence.
12
The mentality that bays for blood, Gus, is the same mentality that produced this killer (I refuse to type his name) in the first place. It's the mentality that tortured Jose Padilla and committed the atrocities at Abu Ghraib and elsewhere. Indeed, it's the mentality that caused 9/11 and Auschwitz.
The antidote is civilization. You'll never get rid of killers like these until you get rid of this kind of thinking.
Those of you who have suddenly discovered a blood lust for capital punishment, preferably including torture and dismemberment and triumphant display of his corpse afterwards, head on a pike, are exactly equivalent to him. Both parties make me very sad.
The antidote is civilization. You'll never get rid of killers like these until you get rid of this kind of thinking.
Those of you who have suddenly discovered a blood lust for capital punishment, preferably including torture and dismemberment and triumphant display of his corpse afterwards, head on a pike, are exactly equivalent to him. Both parties make me very sad.
13
what a bunch of bloodthirsty unprincipled commenters. Insanity is a defense and to not recognize that it might apply here is pretty barbaric. Also the fact that everyone's switching their beliefs based on the identity of the victims is pretty apparent.
14
You know, there's a huge body of very accessible writing out there about insanity and the law. If you'd ever read any of it you'd know that A) insanity is treated differently in civil matters (money, property, contracts, etc) than it is in criminal matters; B) the tradition of not holding crazy people responsible for criminal conduct is common to nearly every civilization in the world and goes back hundreds, and sometimes thousands, of years.
In the Western legal tradition, the legal logic here is pretty straightforward: while civil wrongs may occur through negligence or accident, criminal wrongs require criminal intent: understanding that your act is wrong and then choosing to commit that act is actually a baseline requirement for having broken the law. Lunatics and children may not be capable of forming criminal intent; when it is determined that they are not capable of forming such intent, they are essentially incapable of committing crimes.
There are a lot of very good legal tests for determining if someone is capable of forming criminal intent, and many of those tests allow for the prosecution of crazy people. If, for example, a person's insanity causes them to believe that you want to steal their television, and they kill you to keep you from doing so, they may still be found guilty of murder because the situation they imagined they were in would not create a legal justification for what they chose to do.
Different states deal with this issue in different way but, generally, there are good reasons for having an insanity defense, and none of those reasons are mitigated by the severity of the crime.
More...
Was I forgiven of my debt by my creditors or the government for things I did while out of my mind?
You know, there's a huge body of very accessible writing out there about insanity and the law. If you'd ever read any of it you'd know that A) insanity is treated differently in civil matters (money, property, contracts, etc) than it is in criminal matters; B) the tradition of not holding crazy people responsible for criminal conduct is common to nearly every civilization in the world and goes back hundreds, and sometimes thousands, of years.
In the Western legal tradition, the legal logic here is pretty straightforward: while civil wrongs may occur through negligence or accident, criminal wrongs require criminal intent: understanding that your act is wrong and then choosing to commit that act is actually a baseline requirement for having broken the law. Lunatics and children may not be capable of forming criminal intent; when it is determined that they are not capable of forming such intent, they are essentially incapable of committing crimes.
There are a lot of very good legal tests for determining if someone is capable of forming criminal intent, and many of those tests allow for the prosecution of crazy people. If, for example, a person's insanity causes them to believe that you want to steal their television, and they kill you to keep you from doing so, they may still be found guilty of murder because the situation they imagined they were in would not create a legal justification for what they chose to do.
Different states deal with this issue in different way but, generally, there are good reasons for having an insanity defense, and none of those reasons are mitigated by the severity of the crime.
16
Sure, insanity is a defense. Bipolar disorder is a defense. i completely agree with you. I have compassion for those who suffer from such things and I wish them well.
But in the meantime if they can't behave, they better stay the fuck away from me.
But in the meantime if they can't behave, they better stay the fuck away from me.
17
"You'll never get rid of killers like these until you get rid of this kind of thinking"
More accurate: You'll never get rid of killers like these until you get rid of homo sapiens.
More accurate: You'll never get rid of killers like these until you get rid of homo sapiens.
18
@12 and 13
in total agreement.
in addition everyone suddenly switching their views would probably have yet another change of heart were they to actually witness an execution. I hear watching a person actually die (no matter what kind of 'monster' they were in life) is also no walk in the park.
it amazes me that people can so easily wish to inflict harm, torture and death upon any individual and yet still manage to separate themselves from that individual.
how easy it is to dehumanize the "enemy."
Oh and @6
Bipolar disorder actually is not just all about how a person feels. This is why the 'highs' are often referred to as 'mania' ... it can actually be a pretty fucking scary thing. Reality can and does change for them.
in total agreement.
in addition everyone suddenly switching their views would probably have yet another change of heart were they to actually witness an execution. I hear watching a person actually die (no matter what kind of 'monster' they were in life) is also no walk in the park.
it amazes me that people can so easily wish to inflict harm, torture and death upon any individual and yet still manage to separate themselves from that individual.
how easy it is to dehumanize the "enemy."
Oh and @6
Bipolar disorder actually is not just all about how a person feels. This is why the 'highs' are often referred to as 'mania' ... it can actually be a pretty fucking scary thing. Reality can and does change for them.
19
@ 11 What does overwhelming physical evidence have to do with the application of the death penalty? I am not lawyer but my understanding of how capital punishment works in WA state is that it is applied in cases of 1st degree murder, when the murder is committed whilst committing another crime, when a law enforcement officer is killed or in cases of extreme brutality. Overwhelming physical evidence results in a conviction, not a specific sentence.
That being said we can agree to disagree on whether the death penalty is justifiable. There can be no discussion as to whether or not it is an effective deterrent, it's not and even vocal supporters of it admit that. Their argument is that some crimes are so horrific that death is the only just penalty that can be imposed. I disagree with that on intellectual and moral grounds. A just society should not be in the practice of conducting judicial executions. No other Western Democracy imposes the death penalty. It’s costly, ineffective, applied unevenly, applied to racial and economic minorities at a higher rate, and morally wrong.
That being said we can agree to disagree on whether the death penalty is justifiable. There can be no discussion as to whether or not it is an effective deterrent, it's not and even vocal supporters of it admit that. Their argument is that some crimes are so horrific that death is the only just penalty that can be imposed. I disagree with that on intellectual and moral grounds. A just society should not be in the practice of conducting judicial executions. No other Western Democracy imposes the death penalty. It’s costly, ineffective, applied unevenly, applied to racial and economic minorities at a higher rate, and morally wrong.
20
@12 That is ridiculous. Do you think the victim deserves to be forced to confront her attacker and girlfriend's murderer when he comes up for parole? Unfortunately, a life sentence in this country is very often not that. If they appear to be "rehabilitated" they are set free after 20, 25, 30 years. That would give him plenty of time to kill more innocent people.
Compare me to the killer all you want, but those who know me, know me as a very compassionate person. I'm just reality-based, unlike you.
Compare me to the killer all you want, but those who know me, know me as a very compassionate person. I'm just reality-based, unlike you.
21
@ 20 Reality based? No-one convicted of such a brutal crime is offered parole in 20, 25 or 30 years. Not in the state of Washington anyway.
Perhaps you should not take other comments here as a personal attack.
Perhaps you should not take other comments here as a personal attack.
22
Yucca flower's comment about him refusing treatment is interesting, because my understanding is that part of bipolar disorder is that people don't want to be treated. When on their meds, they miss the highs, and I think the vast majority of bipolar people cycle on and off their meds, rendering them as unreliable as if they were getting no treatment at all.
I also had to work with a bipolar person, and it was a fucking nightmare. She got protection under FMLA so she could never be fired for her absenteeism and got away with egregious, awful behavior. The day she quit was the happiest day in my work life. Really.
I also had to work with a bipolar person, and it was a fucking nightmare. She got protection under FMLA so she could never be fired for her absenteeism and got away with egregious, awful behavior. The day she quit was the happiest day in my work life. Really.
23
@19 Eyewitness accounts have been proven to be unreliable and there are far too many unscrupulous cops and prosecutors that would put an innocent person to death. That is my biggest problem with the death penalty.
For all of you who are against the death penalty. If you were in the position of being killed or killing, what would you do? Try to talk them out of it? Offer them a cup of tea? Puhleeease!
For all of you who are against the death penalty. If you were in the position of being killed or killing, what would you do? Try to talk them out of it? Offer them a cup of tea? Puhleeease!
24
@20
What would be so wrong with rehabilitation? I mean, some argue that he should die because there is no possible chance for rehabilitation (I don't know if you do or not), then would they support there being a chance for rehabilitation? And why not support him spending the rest of his life in prison trying to be rehabilitated?
and to your comment @ 23 is not really a valid argument. Having to choose between my life and theirs in an instant, yeah, I would choose mine, but that is not what the death penalty is doing. They are strapping him to a table, putting him to sleep and then poisoning him. That's quite a different situation.
What would be so wrong with rehabilitation? I mean, some argue that he should die because there is no possible chance for rehabilitation (I don't know if you do or not), then would they support there being a chance for rehabilitation? And why not support him spending the rest of his life in prison trying to be rehabilitated?
and to your comment @ 23 is not really a valid argument. Having to choose between my life and theirs in an instant, yeah, I would choose mine, but that is not what the death penalty is doing. They are strapping him to a table, putting him to sleep and then poisoning him. That's quite a different situation.
25
"Those of you who have suddenly discovered a blood lust for capital punishment, preferably including torture and dismemberment and triumphant display of his corpse afterwards, head on a pike, are exactly equivalent to him. Both parties make me very sad."
Just out of curiosity, you have anything to back this up other than your feelings? Because your gut feeling is hardly very convincing.
Just out of curiosity, you have anything to back this up other than your feelings? Because your gut feeling is hardly very convincing.
26
@ 23, don't make stupid rhetorical questions like that. They're beneath acknowledgment.
@ everyone else, I suspect a mental evaluation of this piece of shit (the killer) will reveal a lot more than bipolar disorder. Like psychosis.
@ everyone else, I suspect a mental evaluation of this piece of shit (the killer) will reveal a lot more than bipolar disorder. Like psychosis.
27
@23: What kind of stupid fucking argument is that? If you were "in the position of being killed or killing", would you just say to them that they would get the death penalty if they were caught? How useful is that as a deterrent in the heat of the moment?
28
@20
Life without the possibility of parole is just that, except in the case of having their sentence commuted through excutive authority. If you're going to say its really not, please provide examples of people sentenced to not just "life" but "life without the possibility of parole" who were paroled without the intervention of a Governor or President. Otherwise, leave that "Won't somebody please think of the children!" crap at home.
The death penalty is nothing more than the state claiming moral equivalency as a justification for killing someone. The bottom line is that if it was wrong to kill the victim, its still wrong to visit the same act on the criminal. Whats that saying...something about two wrongs?
Life without the possibility of parole is just that, except in the case of having their sentence commuted through excutive authority. If you're going to say its really not, please provide examples of people sentenced to not just "life" but "life without the possibility of parole" who were paroled without the intervention of a Governor or President. Otherwise, leave that "Won't somebody please think of the children!" crap at home.
The death penalty is nothing more than the state claiming moral equivalency as a justification for killing someone. The bottom line is that if it was wrong to kill the victim, its still wrong to visit the same act on the criminal. Whats that saying...something about two wrongs?
29
@27 I'm just saying that for those of you who think killing is NEVER justified. What about self-defense?
30
Sadly, the real guilty parties here are the healthcare and judicial systems in this country that KEPT RELEASING THIS GUY without supervision or monitoring. He was in custody only a few days before this attack, he was suspected of murdering his Aunt less than a month ago, but he couldn't be kept under lock and key. I haven't heard anyone talk or write about the circumstances that allowed him to remain free. So, now that he has killed everyone starts shouting for the death penalty. Where were those voices when this crime was still preventable. How about we take care of our mentally ill and lock up the dangerous repeat offenders? Before someone dies?
31
@29
It sounds to me like most people are saying that state mandated killing, ie the Death Penalty, is unjust.
Would I feel justified in killing in someone that attacked me? Probably not, I would probably feel horrible and have nightmares about it for the rest of my life, but I would be glad to be alive, and I hope that I am never put in that situation (first of all, I would likely not be equipped to kill my attacker before they killed and/or raped me). And guess what, I would likely still have to go to court to prove that it was self-defense!
@30
IN total agreement. Our system is far more vengeance based than treatment based and it is pretty fucked up.
It sounds to me like most people are saying that state mandated killing, ie the Death Penalty, is unjust.
Would I feel justified in killing in someone that attacked me? Probably not, I would probably feel horrible and have nightmares about it for the rest of my life, but I would be glad to be alive, and I hope that I am never put in that situation (first of all, I would likely not be equipped to kill my attacker before they killed and/or raped me). And guess what, I would likely still have to go to court to prove that it was self-defense!
@30
IN total agreement. Our system is far more vengeance based than treatment based and it is pretty fucked up.
32
@12 You know what else would make society a better place? getting rid of religion... too bad that's never going to happen either.
There will always be deviant people in society, and when it becomes obvious that such an individual is incapable of rehabilitation, than they should be removed. permanently.
I'm not talking about some sort bloodlust revenge- no pikes, no beheadings, no hangings, just give them an injection and put them to sleep. This isn't about revenge, it's about making society a safe place for those who contribute and make it better, not worse.
And @14- seriously? You're saying we should have more leniency for someone killing another person over someone racking up a large dept?
There will always be deviant people in society, and when it becomes obvious that such an individual is incapable of rehabilitation, than they should be removed. permanently.
I'm not talking about some sort bloodlust revenge- no pikes, no beheadings, no hangings, just give them an injection and put them to sleep. This isn't about revenge, it's about making society a safe place for those who contribute and make it better, not worse.
And @14- seriously? You're saying we should have more leniency for someone killing another person over someone racking up a large dept?
33
The things is, we frequently don't have a basis to know that which we think we know. And, while the evidence in this case is likely incontrovertible, our justice system breaks apart when we try to focus on singular events.
Does this killer deserve to die? Of course. But, that's not a sufficient basis for building a moral justice system, nor does it speak to what we aspire to. I fall in Fnarf's camp on this question. I'm curious, were we able to quantify how many people are wrongly convicted of crimes, how many innocent death's would be acceptable to insure that this particular killer is put away? I mean, would a ratio of 3:1 be sufficient, meaning for every 3 guilty people we kill, we're ok if we kill 1 innocent?
Public policy has to exist in reality, not just in theory. Many of you wish for swift, exacting justice; of course you also want guaranteed human rights and due process, right? You can't pick and choose who gets that. So, our system will always be slow and expensive. If your support for the death penalty hinges on swiftness, then you might as well surrender that opinion now.
Finally, whether or not one supports the death penalty, I think both sides of the moral argument (for or against) likely would require the State to fully fund mental health care AND an evidenced-based justice system. Unless and until we get those, I think arguing for the death penalty is exactly backwards.
Does this killer deserve to die? Of course. But, that's not a sufficient basis for building a moral justice system, nor does it speak to what we aspire to. I fall in Fnarf's camp on this question. I'm curious, were we able to quantify how many people are wrongly convicted of crimes, how many innocent death's would be acceptable to insure that this particular killer is put away? I mean, would a ratio of 3:1 be sufficient, meaning for every 3 guilty people we kill, we're ok if we kill 1 innocent?
Public policy has to exist in reality, not just in theory. Many of you wish for swift, exacting justice; of course you also want guaranteed human rights and due process, right? You can't pick and choose who gets that. So, our system will always be slow and expensive. If your support for the death penalty hinges on swiftness, then you might as well surrender that opinion now.
Finally, whether or not one supports the death penalty, I think both sides of the moral argument (for or against) likely would require the State to fully fund mental health care AND an evidenced-based justice system. Unless and until we get those, I think arguing for the death penalty is exactly backwards.
34
@ 6. From the John Hopkins Medicine website: There is some evidence that there might be some common genetic causes of schizophrenia and bipolar disorder. This is not too surprising, since there is symptom overlap between the two disorders as well. Specifically, some people with bipolar disorder experience hallucinations and delusional ideas during mood episodes, while individuals with schizophrenia also can have these psychotic symptoms. Also, many people with schizophrenia experience episodes of manic or depressive symptoms. It is the timing and overlap of mood and psychotic symptoms that differentiate these two diagnostic categories. http://www.hopkinsmedicine.org/epigen/bp…
35
@ 29 As your posts become increasingly juvenile it becomes clear that you are either a fool or a troll or both. Either way your posts don't warrant further response. Please refrain from further comment.
36
It's not about leniency. It's about the social function of punishment and who it can be applied to. So, for example, people in criminal trials are legally entitled to an attorney and people in civil trials aren't. The standard of proof in criminal trials is guilt beyond a reasonable doubt, but the standard or proof in civil trials is based on the preponderance of the evidence. Capital crimes have an automatic recourse to the Supreme Court, civil wrongs don't. You see the trend here? Criminal proceedings have much more serious consequences than civil proceedings, so the mechanisms for prosecuting those proceedings are designed with more safeguards to ensure that the accused is treated fairly. That includes a more circumspect examination of competency and, should the accused be deemed incompetent on the issue at bar, a more lenient treatment.
Criminal prosecution represents a substantial threat to life and liberty, and should only be applied to those who can form an intent to commit wrongdoing. Short of that, we have -- or should have -- other mechanisms in place for protecting society from the insane.
And @14- seriously? You're saying we should have more leniency for someone killing another person over someone racking up a large dept?
It's not about leniency. It's about the social function of punishment and who it can be applied to. So, for example, people in criminal trials are legally entitled to an attorney and people in civil trials aren't. The standard of proof in criminal trials is guilt beyond a reasonable doubt, but the standard or proof in civil trials is based on the preponderance of the evidence. Capital crimes have an automatic recourse to the Supreme Court, civil wrongs don't. You see the trend here? Criminal proceedings have much more serious consequences than civil proceedings, so the mechanisms for prosecuting those proceedings are designed with more safeguards to ensure that the accused is treated fairly. That includes a more circumspect examination of competency and, should the accused be deemed incompetent on the issue at bar, a more lenient treatment.
Criminal prosecution represents a substantial threat to life and liberty, and should only be applied to those who can form an intent to commit wrongdoing. Short of that, we have -- or should have -- other mechanisms in place for protecting society from the insane.
37
@35 Answer the question. Do you think killing is ever justified? And fuck you, I have just as much right to comment as you do.
38
To put it another way, why do we punish people? The three most common answers are:
1) Deterrence
2) Reform
3) Revenge
But in the case of insane people, the first two reasons for punishing them are obviated, because a lunatic who is unaware of the fact that he is committing a crime can't be deterred from doing so nor can he, by extension, be reformed. That basically leaves revenge, and what satisfaction is there in revenging oneself on someone who doesn't understand what they're being punished for.
None of this is to say that the murderer of this woman in South Park shouldn't be punished. He may be perfectly conscious that what he did was wrong, and capable of forming criminal intent. But that determination is a separate issue from the magnitude of the harm he inflicted.
1) Deterrence
2) Reform
3) Revenge
But in the case of insane people, the first two reasons for punishing them are obviated, because a lunatic who is unaware of the fact that he is committing a crime can't be deterred from doing so nor can he, by extension, be reformed. That basically leaves revenge, and what satisfaction is there in revenging oneself on someone who doesn't understand what they're being punished for.
None of this is to say that the murderer of this woman in South Park shouldn't be punished. He may be perfectly conscious that what he did was wrong, and capable of forming criminal intent. But that determination is a separate issue from the magnitude of the harm he inflicted.
39
@32
I don't support the death penalty under any circumstances, but I do have a question regarding this line: "when it becomes obvious that such an individual is incapable of rehabilitation"
What exactly will indicate that a person is incapable of rehabilitation? Especially in a society such as ours where the mentally ill are simply medicated and thrown back on the streets with little to no assistance or guidance, and rarely a chance at rehabilitation.
Or do you define rehabilitation based on how you feel about the situation? IE as soon as someone brutally kills they no longer have a chance at redeeming themselves in societies view and therefore they cannot be rehabilitated. Not because they actually cannot be rehabilitated, but because they cannot be redeemed in societies view point ...
Just curious ...
Because what if he, himself, could be rehabilitated? Then what? Would your views change?
I don't support the death penalty under any circumstances, but I do have a question regarding this line: "when it becomes obvious that such an individual is incapable of rehabilitation"
What exactly will indicate that a person is incapable of rehabilitation? Especially in a society such as ours where the mentally ill are simply medicated and thrown back on the streets with little to no assistance or guidance, and rarely a chance at rehabilitation.
Or do you define rehabilitation based on how you feel about the situation? IE as soon as someone brutally kills they no longer have a chance at redeeming themselves in societies view and therefore they cannot be rehabilitated. Not because they actually cannot be rehabilitated, but because they cannot be redeemed in societies view point ...
Just curious ...
Because what if he, himself, could be rehabilitated? Then what? Would your views change?
40
@4, I'm with you. I need some serious fluff to try and replace the disturbing images from this horrific crime. After reading the account on Slog, I couldn't sleep, checked my windows and doors and held my infant son closer.
If only Fnarf's suggestion of a therapeutic/restorative jurisprudence could be employed, but I wouldn't be sad to see this monster dead.
If only Fnarf's suggestion of a therapeutic/restorative jurisprudence could be employed, but I wouldn't be sad to see this monster dead.
41
Why? It always seems like it's men who say this. That a man who commits rape and murder MUST be crazy, because no man would do this if he were sane. Bullshit. Do you know how many rapes are committed in this country? Do you know how many murders are committed in this country, almost exclusively by men? Are they all insane or is there something wrong with a significant number of men?
You guys protest too much.
@ everyone else, I suspect a mental evaluation of this piece of shit (the killer) will reveal a lot more than bipolar disorder. Like psychosis.
Why? It always seems like it's men who say this. That a man who commits rape and murder MUST be crazy, because no man would do this if he were sane. Bullshit. Do you know how many rapes are committed in this country? Do you know how many murders are committed in this country, almost exclusively by men? Are they all insane or is there something wrong with a significant number of men?
You guys protest too much.
42
@41
So, keshmeshi...
In the United States, men are about 9 times as likely to commit murder as women. So you look at that and say there must be something wrong with men. Fair enough. But as long as we're using that model, I'm just wondering -- blacks are more than 7 times as likely to commit murder as whites. Are there external factors at work, "or is there something wrong with a significant number of [black] men?"
Not only are you a bigot -- you're kind of a boring unexamined chauvinistic bigot. And that amuses me to no end. Except when it bores the shit out of me, which it does right now.
So, keshmeshi...
In the United States, men are about 9 times as likely to commit murder as women. So you look at that and say there must be something wrong with men. Fair enough. But as long as we're using that model, I'm just wondering -- blacks are more than 7 times as likely to commit murder as whites. Are there external factors at work, "or is there something wrong with a significant number of [black] men?"
Not only are you a bigot -- you're kind of a boring unexamined chauvinistic bigot. And that amuses me to no end. Except when it bores the shit out of me, which it does right now.
43
dude's a piece of fucking garbage. take your moral equivalency and shove it up your fucking vaginas.
give me the switch and i'll do him myself.
give me the switch and i'll do him myself.
44
Oh my god, this debate is starting to make me feel like the line "a liberal is a conservative without life experience" is true.
Today on Slog we have a post lamenting the fact that Nicaraguan women can't terminate their pregnancies--which in point of fact is killing a human being regardless of how you try to excuse it away as justifiable AND passionate rejection of the death penalty for someone who is so clearly deserving of it.
So what is it going to be? Where's the consistency? Even the FUCKING POPE has the moral consistency to be against two things that are ultimately the same.
Today on Slog we have a post lamenting the fact that Nicaraguan women can't terminate their pregnancies--which in point of fact is killing a human being regardless of how you try to excuse it away as justifiable AND passionate rejection of the death penalty for someone who is so clearly deserving of it.
So what is it going to be? Where's the consistency? Even the FUCKING POPE has the moral consistency to be against two things that are ultimately the same.
45
Egypt. Saudi Arabia. Iran. Sudan. Afghanistan. China. North Korea. These are some of the countries that share capital punishment with us.
Australia. Denmark. Ireland. Spain. Canada. Costa Rica. These are some of the countries that have abolished it.
You tell me: civilization? Or not? Which do you want?
Torture dehumanizes the torturer, not the tortured. Capital punishment brutalizes the state, not the victim. When you use the state to kill, everyone in that state becomes a murderer.
Australia. Denmark. Ireland. Spain. Canada. Costa Rica. These are some of the countries that have abolished it.
You tell me: civilization? Or not? Which do you want?
Torture dehumanizes the torturer, not the tortured. Capital punishment brutalizes the state, not the victim. When you use the state to kill, everyone in that state becomes a murderer.
46
@39 I'd say this guy killing 2 people, with the irrefutable evidence to prove it, would warrant the death penalty, absolutely.
But I'll bite and play devil's advocate for a second: Let's say there is the remote possibility that he could be reformed... tell me, how many other people's lives would you be willing to throw away in order to find out? We've already seen that his first attempt at returning to society resulted in one woman dead and the another severely traumatized for life... are you willing to even risk more lives? If so, how many? Would you offer up yourself next...?
What is without question is the fact that he barely functions in society, and even then, only if he's on his medication. And that's a pretty big "if". At this point I'd say he is damaged enough, and done enough damage to others, to warrant the death penalty.
But I'll bite and play devil's advocate for a second: Let's say there is the remote possibility that he could be reformed... tell me, how many other people's lives would you be willing to throw away in order to find out? We've already seen that his first attempt at returning to society resulted in one woman dead and the another severely traumatized for life... are you willing to even risk more lives? If so, how many? Would you offer up yourself next...?
What is without question is the fact that he barely functions in society, and even then, only if he's on his medication. And that's a pretty big "if". At this point I'd say he is damaged enough, and done enough damage to others, to warrant the death penalty.
48
@34 & @6
There may be a genetic and symptomatic overlap, but there are differences between bipolar disorders and schizophrenia. Most significantly for @6's argument, bipolar people do not lack empathy.
That said, @6 is also wrong - euphoric upswings of bipolar people may include hallucinations and delusions of grandeur. Exhibiting poor judgement and acting grandiosely (e.g., the quote about someone running $32k of debt) are classic symptoms of mania.
full disclosure: I have been diagnosed as either bipolar II or cyclothymic, do not take meds, and am extremely high-functioning by most measures.
There may be a genetic and symptomatic overlap, but there are differences between bipolar disorders and schizophrenia. Most significantly for @6's argument, bipolar people do not lack empathy.
That said, @6 is also wrong - euphoric upswings of bipolar people may include hallucinations and delusions of grandeur. Exhibiting poor judgement and acting grandiosely (e.g., the quote about someone running $32k of debt) are classic symptoms of mania.
full disclosure: I have been diagnosed as either bipolar II or cyclothymic, do not take meds, and am extremely high-functioning by most measures.
49
@46
His going back on the streets is the fault of our system as a whole. The majority of the homeless are mentally ill, medicated and turned out on the streets without money or guidance. I never said "put him back on the streets" one can be rehabilitated and stay in prison (or a mental facility) for the rest of their lives. That is also cheaper than putting him to death. And technically you did not bite the bullet. You did not answer the question "what if he could be rehabilitated?" you simply posed more questions and tried to pray on my emotions by offering up the possibility of me as his next victim.
So I will pose my hypothetical again, with a little more detail, feel free to bite or no:
What if were on his meds and realized what he did and felt an incredible sense of remorse and wanted to talk to youths or others about what he went through and try to sway them before they meet his same fate. Let's say this rehabilitation were to actually happen. Then what? Then would you still feel okay about killing him?
Now also keep in mind that I don't believe this particular kind of rehabilitation is possible with our current system, but I don't feel that a failing on the part of our corrections/government/health care (wherever the failing happens) is a justifiable reason to put a person to death. Had these parts of the system not failed in the first place Teresa Butz would still be alive.
His going back on the streets is the fault of our system as a whole. The majority of the homeless are mentally ill, medicated and turned out on the streets without money or guidance. I never said "put him back on the streets" one can be rehabilitated and stay in prison (or a mental facility) for the rest of their lives. That is also cheaper than putting him to death. And technically you did not bite the bullet. You did not answer the question "what if he could be rehabilitated?" you simply posed more questions and tried to pray on my emotions by offering up the possibility of me as his next victim.
So I will pose my hypothetical again, with a little more detail, feel free to bite or no:
What if were on his meds and realized what he did and felt an incredible sense of remorse and wanted to talk to youths or others about what he went through and try to sway them before they meet his same fate. Let's say this rehabilitation were to actually happen. Then what? Then would you still feel okay about killing him?
Now also keep in mind that I don't believe this particular kind of rehabilitation is possible with our current system, but I don't feel that a failing on the part of our corrections/government/health care (wherever the failing happens) is a justifiable reason to put a person to death. Had these parts of the system not failed in the first place Teresa Butz would still be alive.
50
As a bipolar sufferer I am as ever appalled by the discussion here. Please have the decency to explain your actions to my wife and son when you come to murder me. I'm sure they'll understand.
Goodbye.
Goodbye.
51
Abortion is murder in self-defense, in circumstances where the killer is defending herself from grievous bodily harm and the decedent is incompetent.
To put it another way: if a woman let a developmentally disabled man into her house and he proceeded to try to do to her the things that happen to a woman's body during the birth process -- even if he had nothing but the best of intentions toward her and had formed no criminal intent of any kind -- she would be justified in killing him merely to prevent the harm to herself that she knew was coming. She is legally entitled to kill in order to protect herself from that level of physical harm, even if she can be said to have done something that made that harm more likely.
However, the state would not be legally entitled to try and execute the developmentally delayed defendant, specifically because he had no criminal intent.
The prerogative of the individual, acting in self-defense, is wider than that of the state, which is merely pursuing certain very narrowly defined collective societal goals.
Today on Slog we have a post lamenting the fact that Nicaraguan women can't terminate their pregnancies--which in point of fact is killing a human being [snip] ...Where's the consistency? Even the FUCKING POPE has the moral consistency to be against two things that are ultimately the same.
Abortion is murder in self-defense, in circumstances where the killer is defending herself from grievous bodily harm and the decedent is incompetent.
To put it another way: if a woman let a developmentally disabled man into her house and he proceeded to try to do to her the things that happen to a woman's body during the birth process -- even if he had nothing but the best of intentions toward her and had formed no criminal intent of any kind -- she would be justified in killing him merely to prevent the harm to herself that she knew was coming. She is legally entitled to kill in order to protect herself from that level of physical harm, even if she can be said to have done something that made that harm more likely.
However, the state would not be legally entitled to try and execute the developmentally delayed defendant, specifically because he had no criminal intent.
The prerogative of the individual, acting in self-defense, is wider than that of the state, which is merely pursuing certain very narrowly defined collective societal goals.
52
Oh for fucksake @50, melodramatic much?
We're debating whether the man should be executed because he brutally murdered someone, not because he's bi-polar.
We're debating whether the man should be executed because he brutally murdered someone, not because he's bi-polar.
53
I can see that this is becoming a discussion of the death penalty. This is really a moot point; we have the death penalty in Washington State, and by any reasonable application of existing law, this gentleman is facing it.
I'm not a fan of the death penalty myself; life without parole is really good enough for me. It would be nice if this guy could be locked up in a prison or a psychiatric institution for the rest of his life. As the law stands however, the appropriate punishment is death. And the appropriate way to fight this is not to be angry at the prosecutors or judges who argue for and order it, but to change the law.
All it takes is money to hire signature gatherers and get an initiative on the ballot. If a jackass like Eyman can do it every few years, so can we all.
I am also not pleased with the judge, Brian Gain, who let him go free just days earlier. He has said bail decisions are "some of the most difficult decisions faced by judges." . We hire judges to make hard decisions, though. Their job is to make the right choice in very difficult situations. This judge made the wrong one. His judgement was just not good enough for the job, I won't be voting for his re-election.
And it's obvious that this never would have happened if we had a decent public health care system to take care of him, but that goes without saying.
I'm not a fan of the death penalty myself; life without parole is really good enough for me. It would be nice if this guy could be locked up in a prison or a psychiatric institution for the rest of his life. As the law stands however, the appropriate punishment is death. And the appropriate way to fight this is not to be angry at the prosecutors or judges who argue for and order it, but to change the law.
All it takes is money to hire signature gatherers and get an initiative on the ballot. If a jackass like Eyman can do it every few years, so can we all.
I am also not pleased with the judge, Brian Gain, who let him go free just days earlier. He has said bail decisions are "some of the most difficult decisions faced by judges." . We hire judges to make hard decisions, though. Their job is to make the right choice in very difficult situations. This judge made the wrong one. His judgement was just not good enough for the job, I won't be voting for his re-election.
And it's obvious that this never would have happened if we had a decent public health care system to take care of him, but that goes without saying.
54
There is no reason for the death penalty except revenge -- to give them what they "deserve" -- and I do not want my government to be in the revenge business, in any context. (Part of) their job is to keep me safe, and do it as efficiently as possible. Life in prison without parole meets both criteria. Bloodlust does not need to enter the picture.
The fact that the same people who don't trust the government to manage health care in any way, shape, or form are perfectly willing to let them try and kill -- on purpose! -- fellow citizens is mind-boggling to me.
The fact that the same people who don't trust the government to manage health care in any way, shape, or form are perfectly willing to let them try and kill -- on purpose! -- fellow citizens is mind-boggling to me.
55
"As a bipolar sufferer I am as ever appalled by the discussion here."
Presumably despite suffering from bipolar you understand that murder is wrong? Just out of curiosity, exactly what set of atrocities would you like to be given a free pass for because of your disease?
Presumably despite suffering from bipolar you understand that murder is wrong? Just out of curiosity, exactly what set of atrocities would you like to be given a free pass for because of your disease?
56
there are so many people with bipolar or schizophrenia that reject medication because their BRAIN is telling them to.
The most unfortunate thing about these diseases and their treatment is that it is entirely up to social-workers, case managers, police, and psychiatrists who have delicate procedural hurdles to committing or medicating a person against their will, to ensure that an individual, who may or may not be homeless and receiving no other care, is not going to hurt anyone.
We have to find a way as a society to hinder the freedom to cause damage to themselves and others that un or under medicated mentally disabled schizophrenic and/or bipolar people without destroying their civil liberties BEFORE they commit some horrendous act..
There will always be rape and murder, but these are common themes for humans who are mentally ill. As are suicide, drug-addiction, and homelessness. It's just unacceptable.
The most unfortunate thing about these diseases and their treatment is that it is entirely up to social-workers, case managers, police, and psychiatrists who have delicate procedural hurdles to committing or medicating a person against their will, to ensure that an individual, who may or may not be homeless and receiving no other care, is not going to hurt anyone.
We have to find a way as a society to hinder the freedom to cause damage to themselves and others that un or under medicated mentally disabled schizophrenic and/or bipolar people without destroying their civil liberties BEFORE they commit some horrendous act..
There will always be rape and murder, but these are common themes for humans who are mentally ill. As are suicide, drug-addiction, and homelessness. It's just unacceptable.
57
I'm with 32 and 53.
It will be for the courts to decide whether or not Kalebu's mental condition should keep him off death row.. But his (alleged) actions (3 people dead) would certainly, absolutely land him squarely there.
And, as 53 states, a death penalty argument is a moot argument. The law exists in this state - Kalebu has (allegedly) opened himself to said penalty. Don't like it? Work to change the law, then.
It will be for the courts to decide whether or not Kalebu's mental condition should keep him off death row.. But his (alleged) actions (3 people dead) would certainly, absolutely land him squarely there.
And, as 53 states, a death penalty argument is a moot argument. The law exists in this state - Kalebu has (allegedly) opened himself to said penalty. Don't like it? Work to change the law, then.
60
@6 you don't understand bipolar illness very well if you think people with the disorder do not have psychotic experiences. moreover, schizophrenia and biopolar disorders share a common pathway and many symptoms can and do overlap. and unmedicated, it's practically a certainty that psychosis will occur.
61
If somebody becomes violent and lands their butt in court, the court should make sure that they are incarcerated until their condition has stabilized. After that if there is anyway to allow them some freedom, they must be monitored in perhaps a group home setting or under house arrest and they must take medication. I don't care if they like the highs of bi-polar. If they can't be trusted to take their meds themselves then we should implant them. If they can make a long-term implant like the norplant/implanon or an IUD for birth control, they can do it for other medications. I don't care if there are side effects like they lose their sex drive. Tough shit. There should be no more "Kalebus".
Most of the time, if someone is found not-guilty by reason of insanity, some shrink in a state-run facility finds them cured in about a year. Which is the main reason getting somebody off with an insanity defense is so hard. Everyone in the court knows they're crazy and they're going to walk. Nobody wants to see someone like Kalebu out on the street ever again, and so the insanity defense won't fly (even though he is indeed crazy).
Most of the time, if someone is found not-guilty by reason of insanity, some shrink in a state-run facility finds them cured in about a year. Which is the main reason getting somebody off with an insanity defense is so hard. Everyone in the court knows they're crazy and they're going to walk. Nobody wants to see someone like Kalebu out on the street ever again, and so the insanity defense won't fly (even though he is indeed crazy).
62
I'm bipolar.
If I ever did something like this, if I ever could do something like this, don't worry about incarcerating me. I'd eat a gun the moment I was lucid enough to do so.
Any bipolar sufferer who thinks that their disease means that they're exempt from the rules that govern everyone else or that the rules should be changed to accommodate them (by which I mean "us") needs to grow a pair, take their meds religiously, and learn as much self-control as they possibly can. Meditate. Exercise. Get good sleep. Whatever.
If this conversation offends you, if you think that being sick gets you or should get you special rights, you're fucked-up. Learn to live in society.
If I ever did something like this, if I ever could do something like this, don't worry about incarcerating me. I'd eat a gun the moment I was lucid enough to do so.
Any bipolar sufferer who thinks that their disease means that they're exempt from the rules that govern everyone else or that the rules should be changed to accommodate them (by which I mean "us") needs to grow a pair, take their meds religiously, and learn as much self-control as they possibly can. Meditate. Exercise. Get good sleep. Whatever.
If this conversation offends you, if you think that being sick gets you or should get you special rights, you're fucked-up. Learn to live in society.
63
@ Keshmeshi,
Are you not familiar with this crime? It wasn't rape, it was multiple rapes, torture, and murder. This guy has a lot more in common with Ted Bundy then he does Kobe Bryant.
Are you not familiar with this crime? It wasn't rape, it was multiple rapes, torture, and murder. This guy has a lot more in common with Ted Bundy then he does Kobe Bryant.
64
@61..EXACTLY! and the problem with BIPOLAR DISORDER is that once the meds are properly adjusted behavior normalizes/stabilizes significantly...which is why the patient thinks..."hmmm... I don't need to take my meds anymore."....which is why they stop taking them and then deteriorate and suffer manic episodes or depressive episodes.
This case seems to have a flavor of psychosis/rage as well as Bipolar and it would seem there could be mandatory life imprisonment stipulated in the sentencing.
This case seems to have a flavor of psychosis/rage as well as Bipolar and it would seem there could be mandatory life imprisonment stipulated in the sentencing.
65
Institutionalize him for the rest of his life. I'm against the death penalty for two reasons: it's too easy to make mistakes and kill an innocent person and death isn't good enough for the folks who we all know to be guilty.
I personally feel that being locked up is punishment enough for criminals, especially criminals who live all the time with that kind of hatred. That must be torture. That you are so disturbed that you choose to murder someone in cold blood must be a hateful existence, no matter how intelligent or lucid you are.
My mother is bipolar, and she's done a lot of really fucked up things because of it (like get into my house, rearrange my furniture) but she's never caused real physical harm to anybody. She always says the problem is that the discussion about manic depressive disorder is always brought up in the context of the whole murder suicide aspect of things. No one ever talks about what it's like on just a normal day to day basis, and they should.
That being said, this guy chose to go off his meds. BPD isn't just a one size fits all type thing, it's very different depending on the person. It can come with all flavours of PTSD, OCD, anxiety disorders, sleep disorders. You have to wonder if he was on the right meds to begin with. It's such a complex illness that it can take years to arrive at a working cocktail. But was he acting on an irresistible impulse? I think he positioned himself to do so. He manifested his hatred on purpose.
I personally feel that being locked up is punishment enough for criminals, especially criminals who live all the time with that kind of hatred. That must be torture. That you are so disturbed that you choose to murder someone in cold blood must be a hateful existence, no matter how intelligent or lucid you are.
My mother is bipolar, and she's done a lot of really fucked up things because of it (like get into my house, rearrange my furniture) but she's never caused real physical harm to anybody. She always says the problem is that the discussion about manic depressive disorder is always brought up in the context of the whole murder suicide aspect of things. No one ever talks about what it's like on just a normal day to day basis, and they should.
That being said, this guy chose to go off his meds. BPD isn't just a one size fits all type thing, it's very different depending on the person. It can come with all flavours of PTSD, OCD, anxiety disorders, sleep disorders. You have to wonder if he was on the right meds to begin with. It's such a complex illness that it can take years to arrive at a working cocktail. But was he acting on an irresistible impulse? I think he positioned himself to do so. He manifested his hatred on purpose.
66
I oppose capital punishment for several reasons (well-stated by others here), but one small reason is that death seems like an easy out to me. I'm always a little angry when really evil villains get to escape a life of potential conscience by getting themselves killed, killing themselves, or being executed. How is that justice?
Also, a determination not to kill is an expression of our collective valuation of human life. This may seem touchy-feely to many who want to justify their blood lust, but, in my opinion, it is a practical matter beyond a moral one: asserting civility (especially as public policy) encourages civility in a broader sense.
Also, a determination not to kill is an expression of our collective valuation of human life. This may seem touchy-feely to many who want to justify their blood lust, but, in my opinion, it is a practical matter beyond a moral one: asserting civility (especially as public policy) encourages civility in a broader sense.
67
@ 41, this is so much more than rape. This is beyond the bounds of normal, or else you'd hear about brutality like this every day. 63 has it right.
69
@ 12 - "The antidote is civilization. You'll never get rid of killers like these until you get rid of this kind of thinking."
I don't know, Fnarf. There are many kinds of civilization, but you seem to have only one in mind. Your argument implies that most African and many Asian nations (notably China, Singapore, Malaysia) are not 'civilized,' since they execute people fairly often. You may be right, but you also have to be prepared to live with the racist implications of that argument.
I disagree with you, of course, and I think that the desire to kill is one of the most essential and (at times) honorable human emotions. I would never remove that desire from humanity, even if I could. That generally gets me a lot of apoplectic stares, but so be it - humanity would be something made of sweet cream cheese without that steam, that desire to kill, and it's not worth giving up. Saying the killer mode can be buried is like saying people can be abstinent. It doesn't happen, and the better way is to find less inappropriate targets. What or who those should be is a whole other discussion....
@ 12 - "The antidote is civilization. You'll never get rid of killers like these until you get rid of this kind of thinking."
I don't know, Fnarf. There are many kinds of civilization, but you seem to have only one in mind. Your argument implies that most African and many Asian nations (notably China, Singapore, Malaysia) are not 'civilized,' since they execute people fairly often. You may be right, but you also have to be prepared to live with the racist implications of that argument.
I disagree with you, of course, and I think that the desire to kill is one of the most essential and (at times) honorable human emotions. I would never remove that desire from humanity, even if I could. That generally gets me a lot of apoplectic stares, but so be it - humanity would be something made of sweet cream cheese without that steam, that desire to kill, and it's not worth giving up. Saying the killer mode can be buried is like saying people can be abstinent. It doesn't happen, and the better way is to find less inappropriate targets. What or who those should be is a whole other discussion....
70
@ 21
I know a guy (was friends with his family) that was sentenced to prison in WA for 15 years. His crime? He, at age 30, "started a relationship" (according to crt docs) with a 16 yr old. He began brainwashing and abusing her. He held her hostage, took all her clothes from her and smeared her body with dog shit, among other torturous events. He held her at gunpoint with a loaded shotgun and threatened her with a butcher knife. That was in 2005. I heard from his sister that he is up for his parole hearing in 2012 due to good behavior and this was his "first violent" offense, despite a well known history of domestic abuse. According to that logic, if just one of his ex-girlfriends would have made a police report he might never had received the chance for parole. His case is here:
http://caselaw.lp.findlaw.com/scripts/ge…
I know a guy (was friends with his family) that was sentenced to prison in WA for 15 years. His crime? He, at age 30, "started a relationship" (according to crt docs) with a 16 yr old. He began brainwashing and abusing her. He held her hostage, took all her clothes from her and smeared her body with dog shit, among other torturous events. He held her at gunpoint with a loaded shotgun and threatened her with a butcher knife. That was in 2005. I heard from his sister that he is up for his parole hearing in 2012 due to good behavior and this was his "first violent" offense, despite a well known history of domestic abuse. According to that logic, if just one of his ex-girlfriends would have made a police report he might never had received the chance for parole. His case is here:
http://caselaw.lp.findlaw.com/scripts/ge…
71
@56 We have to find a way as a society to hinder the freedom to cause damage to themselves and others that un or under medicated mentally disabled schizophrenic and/or bipolar people without destroying their civil liberties BEFORE they commit some horrendous act.
I agree--we need to fix our mental health system. I'm not as worried about civil liberties as I am about safety. There isn't a debate when someone is hit by a car & taken by ambulance for emergency treatment--there's triage and a focus on restoring health and function. Let's raise our mental health practice standards. No one has a right to be chronically homeless, or to attack people trying to help them, or to rape two strangers in their home.
I agree--we need to fix our mental health system. I'm not as worried about civil liberties as I am about safety. There isn't a debate when someone is hit by a car & taken by ambulance for emergency treatment--there's triage and a focus on restoring health and function. Let's raise our mental health practice standards. No one has a right to be chronically homeless, or to attack people trying to help them, or to rape two strangers in their home.
72
If Butz chose to go off his bi-polar medication, that act of chosing to go off his meds means that he is taking responsibility for all that happens afterward, even if he can no longer control himself once off the meds. Also, if Butz annouced to the women that "their ordeal was just beginning," that shows awareness that he was putting them through an ordeal, which is evidence of culpability. ('Ordeal' being the understatement of the year.)
@70 I read your link. It doesn't seem fair that his multiple offenses over many days should count as one offense. At the very least, each day of violent offenses should count as a new offense for sentencing purposes.
I'll go out on a limb and say that I would be in favor of life without parole for the first rape offense. A rapist should never get the opportunity to rape again, or need the testimony of multiple victims in order to get a seriously long sentence.
In general, I also have a problem with the Special Committment Center, and the need for its existence. If the people housed there all gotten life without parole, we wouldn't have to be going through the charade that rapists can be rehabilitated. That it is questionable whether rapists can be rehabilitated does not mean that they should be set free once they have served their assigned debt to society-- it means that their payment to society should be greater, and take an entire lifetime of incarceration to pay.
@70 I read your link. It doesn't seem fair that his multiple offenses over many days should count as one offense. At the very least, each day of violent offenses should count as a new offense for sentencing purposes.
I'll go out on a limb and say that I would be in favor of life without parole for the first rape offense. A rapist should never get the opportunity to rape again, or need the testimony of multiple victims in order to get a seriously long sentence.
In general, I also have a problem with the Special Committment Center, and the need for its existence. If the people housed there all gotten life without parole, we wouldn't have to be going through the charade that rapists can be rehabilitated. That it is questionable whether rapists can be rehabilitated does not mean that they should be set free once they have served their assigned debt to society-- it means that their payment to society should be greater, and take an entire lifetime of incarceration to pay.
74
#4 This is a post about something cute and gay...but she was murdered. The problem with society is everyone freaks out about the topic of what to do with people who are so mentally ill that they are capable of such an act of what happen to cute and gay. Personally I don't have a problem with hanging him. I think it would be the humane thing to do for him in fact. Think about what goes on in that tortured mind everday...once he is gone you can dance around the friggen maypole.
75
Wow. All I can say is that it amazes me how clueless these commenters are about mental illness and the mental health care system. Also pretty clueless about the death penalty. Wow.
76
@ 75, that was completely pointless. If you're so much more enlightened, why don't you share your opinion? We don't need any more judgment here.
78
So - does anyone have the answer to this? I've always struggled with the line between "insane" and "sane" in these situations.
Let's say that someone crawls into an open window, rapes and stabs two women, and then murders one of them. Let's say he is NOT bipolar.
Isn't he still considered crazy anyway? What SANE person would do such a thing? How could anyone sane do that? By definition, such an act should define one as crazy.
So there is also the flip side. If there are supposedly "sane" people out there who could do this, then how can you draw the line and excuse one person as insane, and not the other? One gets life/no parole (or death) and the other gets....counseling?
Let's say that someone crawls into an open window, rapes and stabs two women, and then murders one of them. Let's say he is NOT bipolar.
Isn't he still considered crazy anyway? What SANE person would do such a thing? How could anyone sane do that? By definition, such an act should define one as crazy.
So there is also the flip side. If there are supposedly "sane" people out there who could do this, then how can you draw the line and excuse one person as insane, and not the other? One gets life/no parole (or death) and the other gets....counseling?
79
@15, I was only explaining where I was coming from (@5), i.e. my perspective. As in "jesus, get some perspective." I stated that the events described were not that big a deal (i.e. compared to the incident in question, my experience was nothing), which again was meant to demonstrate that I understood that in perspective, I hadn't suffered much at the hands of a bipolar person.
But I was trying to explain where I developed the opinion I was about to express, which was a desire that people with mental problems get the help they need, whether it's pharmaceutical or psychological or whatever, and stop disrupting the lives of people around them, whether the disruption is murder or daily verbal abuse or whatever. It would seem that @22 TV Dinner had an experience similar to mine, and I'm sure we're not alone.
That I have some admittedly small perspective on the issue at hand, and that I do put my own experience in perspective relative to the issue at hand, is exactly what I was saying.
But I was trying to explain where I developed the opinion I was about to express, which was a desire that people with mental problems get the help they need, whether it's pharmaceutical or psychological or whatever, and stop disrupting the lives of people around them, whether the disruption is murder or daily verbal abuse or whatever. It would seem that @22 TV Dinner had an experience similar to mine, and I'm sure we're not alone.
That I have some admittedly small perspective on the issue at hand, and that I do put my own experience in perspective relative to the issue at hand, is exactly what I was saying.
80
This post is really very appreciable. I think some new things if you add to your post like current affairs will increase It is popularity. your post is very advantageous for me and very good. Thanks a lot.
===============================
Leading Medication
===============================
Leading Medication
Advertisement
Most Commented on Slog
-
SL Letter of the Day: Pill The Homos! by Dan Savage
-
The AP Is Reporting That Whitney Houston Is Dead by Paul Constant
-
Slog Bible Study: Deuteronomy 21:10-14 by Goldy
-
Because Guns Make Us Safer by Goldy
-
SL Letter of the Day: Daddy Loves Who? by Dan Savage
-
Gregoire: "This is signed!" by Eli Sanders
-
Gay Kids Are Still Killing Themselves by Dan Savage
-
Whitney Is Dead, And So Is Hollywood by Kelly O
-
Planned Parenthood Exposed! by David Schmader
-
Stranger Tournament of Dunces, Match 3: Rep. Mark Hargrove vs. Rep. Norma Smith by Eli Sanders
RSS
Facebook
Twitter
Comments (80) RSS