he’ll probably kill someone again. the judge was wrong to not allow a MH conviction to go forward, but ultimately that puts the jury in the position to let out a seriously mental ill murderer with no consequences or not.
If your only definition of “mentally stable” is “they don’t murder again”, then I guess you could make that argument, but it is ok to just acknowledge the fact that murder is not a healthy behavior. Like you don’t have to fight fact on that one. It’s just a known truth about the human condition. You can want Luigi out while acknowledging that murder is unhealthy and wrong.
Prosecutors hate this one trick! No murderer is competent to stand trial due to being mentally unstable! What’s their diagnosis? Who knows! Who’s your expert witness? Some random asshole on lemmy? Perfect!
I think the assessment of “just crazy enough” to step past that boundary is spot on, but to say that the man is batshit? Not at all.
This is a man who looked at a complex societal problem and chose a path, very deliberately. He didn’t just snap and walk into a building, guns blazing.
He also very deliberately limited his damage to one guy. A woman with coffee walked right up to what was happening, he looked right at her, she left, he let her.
His mental health declined until he murdered someone. It’s not that he is “batshit”- he had a very serious issue that he could not manage on his own. When you isolate from others, can’t work, and only focus on your own pain and violently hurting others until you do it- you are not a healthy person who can mange your own affairs. To me, it’s no different from saying someone “deliberately” slammed their head into the wall, so they don’t “need” a room with cushioned walls.
he’ll probably kill someone again. the judge was wrong to not allow a MH conviction to go forward, but ultimately that puts the jury in the position to let out a seriously mental ill murderer with no consequences or not.
Gotta love armchair psychologists
yeah, I know so many mentally healthy people who murder all of the time.
All of the time? He allegedly did one murder. Plenty of mentally stable people only do the one. Don’t be ridiculous.
If your only definition of “mentally stable” is “they don’t murder again”, then I guess you could make that argument, but it is ok to just acknowledge the fact that murder is not a healthy behavior. Like you don’t have to fight fact on that one. It’s just a known truth about the human condition. You can want Luigi out while acknowledging that murder is unhealthy and wrong.
So, killing someone in a war, automatically mentally ill?
Prosecutors hate this one trick! No murderer is competent to stand trial due to being mentally unstable! What’s their diagnosis? Who knows! Who’s your expert witness? Some random asshole on lemmy? Perfect!
I think the assessment of “just crazy enough” to step past that boundary is spot on, but to say that the man is batshit? Not at all.
This is a man who looked at a complex societal problem and chose a path, very deliberately. He didn’t just snap and walk into a building, guns blazing.
He also very deliberately limited his damage to one guy. A woman with coffee walked right up to what was happening, he looked right at her, she left, he let her.
This is not the action of a batshit person.
His mental health declined until he murdered someone. It’s not that he is “batshit”- he had a very serious issue that he could not manage on his own. When you isolate from others, can’t work, and only focus on your own pain and violently hurting others until you do it- you are not a healthy person who can mange your own affairs. To me, it’s no different from saying someone “deliberately” slammed their head into the wall, so they don’t “need” a room with cushioned walls.
Fair. Even so. To what degree that was the case, or not, is anyone’s guess. They’ve not pulled the trigger on a mental health defense, last check.
This was a serious question, stop being silly.
… I think I shall start disregarding you, disregardable. Goodbye.
username checks out