February 12, 2007
Carte Blanche For "Mentally Incompetent" Perps?

Citing the defendant's mental incompetence to understand charges and assist her defense, King County Superior Court Judge Helen Halpert recently dismissed a dual murder rap against a woman who drank herself stuporous while two of her kids died of starvation and dehydration. She claims to think they're still alive. So, Leemah Carneh will have company at Western State Hospital. More uplifting news: Judge Halpert today ordered a mental competency hearing for a man who set a woman's hair afire in downtown Seattle, with lighter fluid and matches. He too may be unable to understand what he did. Apparently, it is possible to dreamily set a stranger's head aflame, and evade responsiblity.

It gets better. An Olympia man charged with raping an 11-year-old girl was acting strange at his arraignment, and - imagine - will be sent to Western State for a mental competency evaluation. Although if he is found not capable of understanding the charges against him, it will be difficult to explain why he allegedly wrote in his journal that he wanted to kick his "child hunting" habit.

A Clark County judge has also ordered to Western State for a mental competency evaluation a defendant charged with two counts of first-degree murder, who matter-of-factly phoned in his confession to 911.

Meanwhile, a Vancouver, Washington man has pled guilty to Social Security fraud for falsely pretending to be mentally ill. The Columbian reports that for two decades, at his mother's direction, he sat in the corner and picked his nose when social service workers visited, helping her scam Social Security of $220,000 for her two "disabled" children. His sister is believed to have put on a similar act, but cannot be located. It turns out the man - supposedly unable to drive - was working at an auto body shop, had Oregon, Washington and Alaska drivers licenses under false names, and lived with a girlfriend and her two kids. He was finally busted when caught on court video cogently enough appealing a traffic offense.

At least the government, nearly a quarter-million dollars later, did due diligence on this man's claims of mental incapacity. Some people will try to get away with whatever they can. Whether they are stealing money from taxpayers, killing, raping, or setting pedestrians afire, defendants need to be held accountable by facing trial. The increasingly utilized "mental competency" evaluation represents a disturbing trend, in which perpetrators become classified as victims and sidestep criminal justice.

A colleague of the sidewalk arson attack victim asks, "What is going on downtown?"

Is it open season for the mentally incompetent?

I blame society.

Posted by Matt Rosenberg at February 12, 2007 06:06 PM | Email This
Comments
1. It isn't so bad if they are mentally incompetent to stand trial. They get locked up in a mental institution indefinitely -- i.e. until they are competent to stand trial. If they are never found competent, they basically can stay locked up forever. If they are found competent, they can they be tried.

Not guilty by reason of insanity is another thing altogether. Maybe she would raise this defense if she was tried. But for now, she won't be tried and will stay locked up in the mental hospital.

The main downside is that she is still eligible to vote, if she cares to.

Posted by: Richard Pope on February 12, 2007 05:54 PM
2. A legally insane person cannot be held reponsible for crimes he commits, simply because he is not responsible. Proposals to eliminate the insanity defense should be resisted.

However, there is nothing preventing a legislature from passing a law which says that anyone acquitted of a violent crime by reason of insanity shall be confined in an institution for the mentally ill for the rest of his natural life.

Posted by: ScottM on February 12, 2007 06:17 PM
3. I nominate her for the Dem presidential candidate. Better then Osama Obama.

Posted by: Manco_Dollars on February 12, 2007 07:15 PM
4. Yeah, if she just apologizes, maybe she can get away with homicide like Ted Kennedy?

Posted by: Jeff B. on February 12, 2007 09:05 PM
5. ScottM, I disagree. I think that not-guilty by the reason of insanity should be abolished. I will accept guilty as charged and insane at the same time, and this may be the difference whether one gets a capital punishment or not. not-guilty and insane can walk free after treatment, but guilty and insane will get treatment and could get the punishment he/she deserve after the treatment (if curable).

Posted by: DopioLover on February 12, 2007 10:48 PM
6. Competency hearings are reasonably routine. Better ot have one nas CYA. If you don't an appeals court cna overturn and force a retrial if there are grounds to beleive on was warrented. A comptency hearing doeas not mean that the judge believes the person insane, onyl that there is some indicatino they may be and its best to knowfor sure.

As for insanity. Putting the mentally ill in prison is not good idea. They tend not to fair well. We would not incarcerate someone who suffered a medical illness that lead to a crime i.e. sudden onset epilepsy leading to a car accident or the like. However while I am not sure it would pass constitutional muster it would not be a bad idea to set minimum times for psychiatric confinement.

By the way most insanity verdicts are in much less serious crimes then murder and the defendants often wind up staying longer then they would in jail. For example lighter fluid guy would probably not see much jail time, but could be committed for quite a while. We are generally talking about the paranoid and the schizophrenic not Hannibal Lecter.

Posted by: Giffy on February 13, 2007 06:49 AM
7. Stay away from downtown, as much as possible. this is sick stuff.

Posted by: Michele on February 13, 2007 11:53 AM
8. Convicted or Committed?

The Dangerously Mentally Ill should be committed for a time equal to a conviction.

Surprise! WA State really doesn't have facilities for this as both Eastern & Western State Hospitals are in reality revolving doors.

Go ask anyone in Lakewood.

Posted by: Jack Burton on February 13, 2007 02:56 PM
9. Attention "Deliverance" wing members of a once proud and honest Republican Party:

Keep talking. You put up an easily defeated face on today's Republicans.

Your wing took down some good Republicans like Dave Schmidt, my former Senator.

Posted by: Jim on February 13, 2007 03:48 PM
10. Years ago Michigan passed legislation that allowed people such as this miserable excuse for a "mom" to be tried by giving the jury the option of providing a "guilty but mentally ill" verdict. This meant the perp would be locked up until the experts determined the mental problem was solved and then the lowlife would be remanded to the corrections system to serve out the sentance for the crime.

Of course this had all the "feel sorry for the criminal" crowd upset, but it helped take care of the automatic insanity plea when horrific crimes were comitted.

It is way past the time for the loony left to realize there are terrible people in the world who need to be locked away forever. No amount of social engineering or rehabilitation will work with these scumbags. How many more kids or innocent bystanders need to be killed or brutally attacked before the leftist wussies admit some people are beyond help?

Posted by: Burdabee on February 13, 2007 04:48 PM
11. Hi ScottM,

I would be interested in why you suggest that "Proposals to eliminate the insanity defense should be resisted."

While you are correct that other measures might be taken by lawmakers I don't see why they should. A violent felon should be executed so as not to re-offend. Why even consider their mental state?

Posted by: M167A1 on February 13, 2007 06:32 PM
Post a comment
Name:


Email Address:


URL:


Comments:


Remember info?