My 911 Call, The "Attempted Murder" of My Daughter, & Oppression of the Family Death Penalty

[Land Shark]

61. You have a misunderstanding about insanity and criminal procedure

In the state of Michigan, the only way insanity can be asserted is if the defense pleads insanity. Yet, you appear to believe you are making some sort of point that she pled it. It couldn't be any other way. OK?

The insanity DEFENSE is a legal term of art that differs somewhat from the lay concepts of insanity and insane. But wikipedia has a reasonable introduction that states at the beginning:

"In criminal trials, the insanity defense is where the defendant claims that he or she was not responsible for his or her actions due to mental health problems (psychiatric illness or mental handicap). The exemption of the insane from full criminal punishment dates back to at least the Code of Hammurabi." http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Insanity_defense

The basic definition, in a paraphrase, in Michigan involves these key elements (but the definition is NEVER met if alcohol or drugs are involved, because of an exception): That, as a result of a mental disease or defect, the accused was unable to appreciate the nature and quality of of his acts, unable to distinguish right from wrong, or unable to conform their actions to the law.

Thus, while mental illness must be present, many mentally ill people will be far from legally insane. The key is the proof of the presence of a condition such that the person could not know their acts were wrong, or else could not control those acts (such as a punch from an epileptic seizure).

The judge in his ruling didn't specifically say if he had an opinion that differed from the expert report. But since that report was utilized then presumably the main prong that was triggered was the inability to tell right from wrong (because of the delusion of immediate harm the next morning leading to an action thought to be right under the effect of the delusion, but was not in fact right).

Being wrong is nowhere near good enough. You have to be able to prove, via experts mostly, that mental illness caused your thinking to be wrong in that respect at that time.

Basically, she was found legally "not responsible" (see insanity defense defn above) under the Michigan insanity definition, and that condition of not being able to be responsible definitely does not continue to the present, as I'm informed by the treating doctor, who was present during a visitation that took place in January.