http://news.aol.com/article/dc-sniper-john-allen-muhammad-set-to-be/759961 (http://news.aol.com/article/dc-sniper-john-allen-muhammad-set-to-be/759961)
see ya later make the beast with two backsstick
Quote from: bobspapa on November 10, 2009, 04:18:47 AMsee ya later make the beast with two backsstick
Well, we're hoping not, aren't we?
That cocksucker made me stop, drop, and roll every time I put gas in my truck. They were found about 20 miles from my house. Personally, I would rather see him stay in prison and be traded for cigarettes the rest of his life, but this is good too.
I've been researching high profile executions of mentally ill killers in the late 19th century. Muhammad claims to be mentally ill, but I don't really hear that much about it in the press (as far as details, how ill, etc). Given that capital crimes rests on mens rea, I'd be interested in more information on what his damage actually is. If anyone has a link, please...
Didn't Lee Boyd Malvo get life in prison for testifying against Muhammad? Arrangements like that always bother me. I understand the necessity in legal compromises, but not on a capital case. There are times when compromises are too great.
When they say "convicted sniper", that pisses me off. (it's insulting)
How about "Convicted murderer."
Bye bye scumbag coward.
IMO lethal injection is too gentle for this guy...
Quote from: redxblack on November 10, 2009, 07:28:38 AM
I've been researching high profile executions of mentally ill killers in the late 19th century. Muhammad claims to be mentally ill, but I don't really hear that much about it in the press (as far as details, how ill, etc). Given that capital crimes rests on mens rea, I'd be interested in more information on what his damage actually is. If anyone has a link, please...
Didn't Lee Boyd Malvo get life in prison for testifying against Muhammad? Arrangements like that always bother me. I understand the necessity in legal compromises, but not on a capital case. There are times when compromises are too great.
Mentally ill? You betcha! There is a big difference between mentally ill and criminally insane.
Quote from: howie on November 10, 2009, 08:17:31 AM
Mentally ill? You betcha! There is a big difference between mentally ill and criminally insane.
Quote from: Mr. Exact on November 10, 2009, 08:04:00 AM
IMO lethal injection is too gentle for this guy...
+11ty
Quote from: kopfjäger on November 10, 2009, 07:52:41 AM
When they say "convicted sniper", that pisses me off. (it's insulting)
How about "Convicted murderer."
Bye bye scumbag coward.
+1
Those pieces of shit give "shit" a bad name....
The Shell station where the lady was killed as she vacuumed her mini van is literally 1/2 mile from my house. Way too close to home.
Quote from: rgramjet on November 10, 2009, 08:27:38 AM
+1
Those pieces of shit give "shit" a bad name....
The Shell station where the lady was killed as she vacuumed her mini van is literally 1/2 mile from my house. Way too close to home.
If he was aiming at her and hit you 1/2 mi away, that would be the worst shot in the world.
Quote from: redxblack on November 10, 2009, 07:28:38 AMGiven that capital crimes rests on mens rea, I'd be interested in more information on what his damage actually is.
Disclaimer: I used to do forensic psychiatry in the Texas prison system.
Different jurisdictions use different standards for competency to stand trial, competency at the time of the offense, competency for sentencing, and so on. Some use very strict standards (such as not knowing right from wrong) while others use less-strict ones. Mens rea is an element of any crime, AFAIK, not just capital ones.
I think it'd be hard to show that volitional and cognitive components were lacking in a case where a specialized shooting platform was built in the trunk of a car, showing intent, and attempts were made to hide who shot and to evade law enforcement, showing a knowledge that others would view the act as wrong. As I understand it, Virginia also requires that a mental illness must be the primary cause of the criminal behavior, not just a contributing factor. That's a pretty high hurdle to clear.
Let's put it this way: I see mentally ill people all day, every day. Some of them are pretty darned crazy. Only a teeny percentage of them have ever broken a law apart from parking tickets. Those that have usually get in trouble for trespassing or "disturbing the peace." By far the most dangerous patients I've ever worked with are elderly people with dementias such as Alzheimer's.
Bad people are about as likely as the rest of us to have a mental illness. Whether they have one or not doesn't change that they're bad people.
That was really concise, thanks! [thumbsup]
Quote from: desmo_drum on November 10, 2009, 07:00:12 AM
That cocksucker made me stop, drop, and roll every time I put gas in my truck. They were found about 20 miles from my house. Personally, I would rather see him stay in prison and be traded for cigarettes the rest of his life, but this is good too.
I remember deciding where to get gas based on whether there was a clear line for shot or not....I also remember running my 3 year old into her day care center (where they kept the blinds completely down) and trying to explain to her why it wasn't a good idea to play outside right now.
Quote from: kopfjäger on November 10, 2009, 07:52:41 AM
When they say "convicted sniper", that pisses me off. (it's insulting)
How about "Convicted murderer."
Bye bye scumbag coward.
It portrays the gun as a responsible party as well as the operator. That's why it is used that way, whether intentionally or not, by the journalist.
I remember doing the "Radar O'Reilly Sniper Scurry" on more than one occassion while going to/coming from an ATM....
Quote from: mstevens on November 10, 2009, 08:35:34 AM
Disclaimer: I used to do forensic psychiatry in the Texas prison system.
Different jurisdictions use different standards for competency to stand trial, competency at the time of the offense, competency for sentencing, and so on. Some use very strict standards (such as not knowing right from wrong) while others use less-strict ones. Mens rea is an element of any crime, AFAIK, not just capital ones.
I think it'd be hard to show that volitional and cognitive components were lacking in a case where a specialized shooting platform was built in the trunk of a car, showing intent, and attempts were made to hide who shot and to evade law enforcement, showing a knowledge that others would view the act as wrong. As I understand it, Virginia also requires that a mental illness must be the primary cause of the criminal behavior, not just a contributing factor. That's a pretty high hurdle to clear.
Let's put it this way: I see mentally ill people all day, every day. Some of them are pretty darned crazy. Only a teeny percentage of them have ever broken a law apart from parking tickets. Those that have usually get in trouble for trespassing or "disturbing the peace." By far the most dangerous patients I've ever worked with are elderly people with dementias such as Alzheimer's.
Bad people are about as likely as the rest of us to have a mental illness. Whether they have one or not doesn't change that they're bad people.
Thanks. I didn't know what Virginia's standards are today, so that's pretty helpful information. Reuters had this:
QuoteSheldon said that a psychiatrist has diagnosed Muhammad as "psychotic,
delusional and paranoid and that he suffers from schizophrenia."
"This diagnosis" said Sheldon, "is confirmed by objective evidence." Sheldon
said that neuropsychological brain imaging applications have demonstrated that
John Muhammad has neuropsychological deficits that are consistent with
schizophrenia, and point to "brain dysfunction."
That may sustain a detachment from reality, but not a "knowing right from wrong" standard.
Quote from: redxblack on November 10, 2009, 05:34:34 PMThat may sustain a detachment from reality, but not a "knowing right from wrong" standard.
Nor the inability to control one's actions.
Let's stipulate that he meets diagnostic criteria for schizophrenia (which, from what I've read might be a bit of a stretch, but whatever). Neuropsychological testing, imaging studies, etc. are absolutely unable to establish a diagnosis of schizophrenia no matter how "objective" they may be. The reason his attorney comes up with these bits of evidence is that's all they have to go on. The diagnosis has clear and concrete criteria, none of which can be established by the tests mentioned. If he met the actual diagnostic criteria, that's what should be announced, not these irrelevant tests. However, I'm willing to postulate that he might actually have schizophrenia.
Is there any evidence that his acts were the result of schizophrenia or any other form of psychosis? Has he said there were voices ordering him to shoot people? That he believed his victims were demons in disguise and that he needed to shoot them to save the world? I've found nothing that says so. That makes me suspect that, if he is schizophrenic, it has little to do with his murderous behavior. Really psychotic people who have trouble testing reality and controlling their behavior have a hard time getting guns ("I'm going Martian-hunting. What gauge is best for that?"), driving licenses (arguing with invisible forces while waiting in the line at DMV) or recruiting accomplices (people tend to be put off by nut-cases). They often aren't that hard to catch because they look and act weird compared with others.
Yes, a disproportionate number of multiple homicide perpetrators (Mohammad is a spree killer, not a serial killer) carry diagnoses of schizophrenia. There are a few reasons for that. One is that in the past people were practically "schizophrenic until proven otherwise" and easily misdiagnosed by modern criteria. These guys tend to spend lots of time meeting with shrinks of various sorts compared with the general population, so that raises the chance of having a diagnosis assigned. Another factor is that schizophrenia is relatively common, affecting a bit over 1% of the population at any given time. There's also overlap between conditions such as Antisocial Personality Disorder ("sociopathy" or "psychopathy") and schizophrenia in terms of symptoms. Of course, there's also the hope on the part of defense or the accused that schizophrenia will somehow count as a "get out of jail free" card.
Basically, we know full well that having a mental illness does not generally cause people to commit violent crimes except when someone is charged with a serious act of violence. At that point, we're asked to believe nearly 100% of the time that some mental illness or other is to blame ("the debbil made him do it"). I just don't buy it.
Quote from: Mr. Exact on November 10, 2009, 08:04:00 AM
IMO lethal injection is too gentle for this guy...
I dunno...it may be just about right if you consider it in this light...that the injection comes from some big black prison gangster named Tiny with an 11 inch dong while wearing a chain mail condom covered in razorblades and spikes and using rubbing alcohol and habanero pepper juice for lube. Then I think lethal injection is JUST about right.
mstevens -
Thanks for the thoughtful reply. It's helpful insight for sure.
Yep, lethal injection was way too pleasant. >:(
Why it took seven years for us to rid ourselves of this asshole is another topic altogether.....