Welcome to DU! The truly grassroots left-of-center political community where regular people, not algorithms, drive the discussions and set the standards. Join the community: Create a free account Support DU (and get rid of ads!): Become a Star Member Latest Breaking News General Discussion The DU Lounge All Forums Issue Forums Culture Forums Alliance Forums Region Forums Support Forums Help & Search

turbinetree

(24,709 posts)
Thu Apr 26, 2018, 08:41 PM Apr 2018

Oregon Board Explains Why It Repeatedly Released Killer From Psychiatric Hospital

In response to our questions, the Psychiatric Security Review Board explains why danger alone is not enough to keep violent people with mental illness under state jurisdiction.

by Jayme Fraser, the Malheur Enterprise April 25, 5:29 a.m. EDT

This article was produced in partnership with the Malheur Enterprise, which is a member of the ProPublica Local Reporting Network.

The five members of the Oregon Psychiatric Security Review Board declined interview requests from the Malheur Enterprise and ProPublica. The members instead responded as a board to written questions about their practices and the case of Charles Longjaw. The board manages the custody and care of people such as Longjaw, who have been found guilty except for insanity in felony criminal cases.

How was the PSRB [Psychiatric Security Review Board], OSH [Oregon State Hospital] and state law different from today when Longjaw was found GEI [guilty except for insanity] in 1986?

There are a few differences in the law between 1986 and today. First, in 1986, there was no requirement that an evaluation be performed by a certified forensic evaluator in order to successfully plead GEI. Also, 1986 predates statutory and case law expressly removing personality disorders, sexual conduct disorders and voluntary substance-related intoxication from the definition of mental illnesses that would qualify for the purposes of a GEI plea.

After reviewing your documents about Longjaw’s conditional releases, do you agree with those prior decisions? In hindsight, are there red flags that today’s board might have weighed differently?

The Board grants conditional releases to patients properly under its jurisdiction whom the evidence shows can be adequately controlled within the community. The Board applies this standard on a case-by-case basis based on the facts as they were at the time of the hearing. Knowledge of subsequent facts cannot change the facts as they were at the time of the decision.

https://www.propublica.org/article/oregon-psychiatric-security-review-board-explains-killer-released-psychiatric-hospital




Latest Discussions»General Discussion»Oregon Board Explains Why...