James Brady's Death Was a Homicide, D.C. Medical Examiner Rules

[alp227]

Last edited Fri Aug 8, 2014, 06:46 PM - Edit history (1)

Source: NBC Washington (WRC)

The death of James Brady -- President Ronald Reagan's press secretary who was wounded in the attempt on Reagan's life in March 1981 -- was a homicide, the District of Columbia medical examiner ruled Friday.

The medical examiner said Brady died as a result of the grevious injuries he suffered 33 years ago, which means that gunman John Hinckley Jr. could be charged with Brady's murder in federal court.

Brady was 73 when he died earlier this week. He had been partially paralyzed and in a wheelchair since the shooting, and his speech was slurred. He used his own example to launch a campaign against gun violence that led to groundbreaking gun control legislation signed into law in 1993.

The medical examiner's ruling has the potential to open the door to federal murder charges against Hinckley, who is now a mental patient at St. Elizabeth's hospital in suburban Washington.

Read more: http://www.nbcwashington.com/news/local/Jim-Brady-Death-Was-a-Homicide-DC-Medical-Examiner-Rules-270522411.html

---

Edit: Washington Post reports, James Brady’s death ruled homicide by Virginia medical examiner

[bigworld]

1. He was found not guilty by reason of insanity

for shooting President Reagan and there was talk then of trying to implement a "guilty by reason of insanity" option... did that ever happen?

[happyslug]

12. Passed in some degree by some states, but restricted by US Supreme Court.

The US Supreme Court, even the conservative one we have at present, have imposed restrictions on such moves, basically saying you can NOT convict someone of a Crime if he or she had NO criminal Intent to commit that crime or a related crime. By definition an insane person has no criminal intent for such insane person is incapable of any intent. Remember intent requires knowledge that what you are doing is WRONG, and in cases involving the insane, they think what they doing is RIGHT.

Now, Juries are much more hostile to the concept of non guilty on grounds of insanity and you see people convicted of crimes that 40 years ago would have been committed to an mental institution.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Insanity_defense

One of the first reforms was the Federal Insanity Defense Reform Act of 1984. That Act shifted the burden of proof from the Federal Government to the Defense, but also REDUCED the the burden of proof to one of "Clear and convincing evidence" instead of the previous "Beyond a Reasonable Doubt". The Courts have upheld it, for while it shifts the burden of PROOF to the Defense (previously it has been on the prosecution to show that the Defendant was sane, if insanely was claimed), it also REDUCED the burden of Proof to "Clear and Convincing evidence" so that if someone has no "Evil Mind" and that can be shown, then the Insanity defense is still permitted in the Federal System.

http://www.cengage.com/resource_uploads/downloads/0495809810_213582.pdf

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Insanity_Defense_Reform_Act_of_1984

Some states have adopted the Federal Rules, Four states have outlaw the defense, some states retain the older laws on the Insanity defense.

As to the states that have abolish the Defense the Federal Courts have ruled that while such states can abolish the test, they still can not convict someone who is insane for that would mean convicting someone who could NOT have any intent to do the crime, of the the crime for the simple reason any crime not only includes some act BUT THE INTENT TO DO THE CRIME.

The States that have abolished Insanity as a defense generally adopted the concept of "Guilty but insane" which amounts to the same thing as being ruled Not Guilty on Grounds of Insanity in most other states, i.e. you go to the Mental Hospital not a conventional prison. If that is the case, the Federal Courts have no problems with such sentences, but if actual jail time is involved, then the Federal Constitution and the concept of Due Process, which includes Intent as an element of any crime, comes into play.

List of States and their position on the Insanity defense:

http://criminal.findlaw.com/criminal-procedure/the-insanity-defense-among-the-states.html

[Jackpine Radical]

19. There are essentially 2 standards among state laws re: criminal responsibility.

The older one, from British law, is the M'Naughten Standard, which permits the finding of NGRI if the person is deemed unable to understand the wrongness of his/her action. The more recent standard is based on the recommendations of the American Law Institute (usually referred to as ALI Standard). This standard retains the provision of the M'Naughten rule but adds a prong: Inability to refrain from committing the offense even though one knows intellectually that it is wrong; I.e., a person who meets this criterion is deemed unable to resist the impulse to offend. Meeting the criteria of either prong is sufficient for an NGRI finding under the ALI Standard.

[MADem]

15. Well, he was never convicted of murdering James Brady....but now he is open to prosecution on that

charge.

[FarPoint]

2. Let's do it!

Prosecute Hinkley now. Didn't a Secret Service Agent die in that assignation attempt?

[happyslug]

4. No one died, Bradley was the worse casualty.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Attempted_assassination_of_Ronald_Reagan

Reagan passed right in front of Hinckley. Believing he would never get a better chance Hinckley fired a Röhm RG-14 .22 long rifle blue steel revolver six times in 1.7 seconds, missing the president with all six shots.The first bullet hit White House Press Secretary James Brady in the head. The second bullet hit District of Columbia police officer Thomas Delahanty in the back of his neck as he turned to protect Reagan. Hinckley now had a clear shot at the president, but the third bullet overshot him and hit the window of a building across the street. As Special Agent In Charge Jerry Parr quickly pushed Reagan into the limousine, the fourth bullet hit Secret Service agent Timothy McCarthy in the abdomen as he spread his body over Reagan to make himself a target. The fifth bullet hit the bullet-resistant glass of the window on the open side door of the limousine. The sixth and final bullet ricocheted off the armored side of the limousine and hit the president in his left underarm, grazing a rib and lodging in his lung, stopping nearly 1 inch (25mm) from his heart. Parr's prompt reaction saved Reagan from being hit in the head.

[FarPoint]

7. Ohhj. thank you,..

I was going to look it up later....

[big_dog]

11. werent they just recently start giving him passes to go see his mother before she died?

[FarPoint]

14. I believe so...

Maybe even a release in the works. So, yes...prosecution for Mr. Brady would be with exploring.

[AngryAmish]

23. Ours is a merciless nation.

The guy has been locked up for over 30 years. No says he is a threat now.

Let it go, but it won't because some hard on of a prosecutor wants a name for themselves. If charges are filed you will automatically consider the persons oking it an asshile and unfit for public service.

[onecent]

3. What is the point of having a costly trial for

hinckley after 33 years????????? The people pay for that, do we not????? If he's a mental patient he probably doesn't even remember doing it...I can tell you with all the shit in the news lately I really don't want to hear BREAKING NEWS about Hinckley and have to go through the crap on fox news about gun control for the next 2 years.

[Bonhomme Richard]

5. +1..grandstanding. n/t

[barbtries]

10. easy.

don't watch fox news.

[bigworld]

16. Ask Sarah Brady what the point is.

[MADem]

20. People seem to forget the "enduring" victims. James Brady's life was RUINED....and his wife's

life, which should have been a DC round of parties and socializing and "good works," was forever changed. She had to get tough and hard in a hurry. She has my admiration, but she didn't ASK for that.

You are quite right.

[rhett o rick]

22. I would guess that she has let it go. I doubt she would like to drag it all back

into the limelight. I am a strong believer in justice but think we must be careful when it starts to become revenge or retribution.

[MADem]

25. Are you kidding me? Do you have any idea what she's been doing with her life since this happened?

[JI7]

27. yes, people act like it was just that moment in 1981

but it became their life.

[MADem]

36. She didn't ask for it, but she's done a great job.

http://www.bradycampaign.org/

[rhett o rick]

32. Yes, and I doubt that dragging this back up will make her feel any better.

It most likely would turn into a circus with the courts possibly deciding he can't provide for his own defense anyway.

What he did was horrific, I just don't think further attempts at punishing him will bring her peace of mind.

[MADem]

34. Probably a good thing you're not the publicist for her cause of choice.

It wouldn't be a "circus." It would be a cut-and-dried murder trial.

Even if he was unable to defend himself, it gives the court standing to lock him up and not be wandering about collecting pictures of Jodi Foster, like he did several years back.

I think another trial will keep others safe from his disordered thinking, AND it will give Sarah Brady a new platform to prosecute in the minds of the public what has sadly become her life's work. She can make the rounds of the news magazine programs and the talk shows, and gather support.

It's not about her "peace of mind" or "making her FEEL better" --she's well past that--it's about making CHANGE.

That is how a trial would serve HER goal.

[rhett o rick]

39. I support her cause, I just don't think having a trial will help her cause. nm

[MADem]

43. Yes, it will. It will cause the crime to be discussed, and it will create an opportunity to

talk about the Brady Campaign. During the trial, the pundits will mention it, after the trial, Sarah or one of her surrogates can make the rounds to talking head shows, news magazines, morning shows and talk shows.

His death is having a similar effect. See? I'm talking about it.

You can take as many bites out of that apple as the media will give you. They won't give them to you without a story to go with them.

[rhett o rick]

44. I wish I was as dead certain as you are. I think defense attorneys will make it

look like poor mentally ill Hinkley is being picked on. The public is fickle.

[MADem]

46. He's a florid, creepy, "deceptive" late middle aged guy who is STILL fixated on Jodi Foster.

I don't think he'll get any sympathy--I think that when people are told that he got jacked up for trying to smuggle pics of her back into his mental ward, they'll say "Lock him up" too.

Compare that cretin to this poor woman, fighting lung cancer, yet persevering:

[GP6971]

48. I agree

the defense will pour it on and create a show. But OTOH, that would create high visibility of the issue / Brady initiative which I'm all for.

[rhett o rick]

49. I am all for it also, but there are cases everyday that would get more attention, if America

cared.

[GP6971]

51. All too true

if Ametica cared.

[MADem]

55. Do you have sympathy for a guy who, as late as this new century, was caught

smuggling pictures of Jodi Foster into his room at the mental facility after being given a pass to see his mummy?

This guy is DRIVING around Wiliamsburg, VA these days, for weeks at a time. His jailer is his elderly mother. If your child or grandchild looks at all like Jodie Foster, a woman he started stalking in the SEVENTIES, give her karate lessons and stay the hell away from that area.
http://www.usatoday.com/story/news/nation/2014/08/04/james-brady-john-hinckley/13598699/

Now 59, Hinckley remains confined to St. Elizabeths Hospital in Washington, D.C., where he was sent in 1982 after being found not guilty by reason of insanity. He was not allowed outside the psychiatric facility until 1999, and since then judges have gradually expanded the time he is allowed off-campus. In 2009, a judge allowed him to drive while being tracked by GPS.

Last December, a federal judge extended from 10 days to 17 days the time he's allowed to visit Williamsburg, Va., where his mother lives. His first supervised visits there were approved in late 2005, and his doctors hope he'll eventually be allowed to live there. They have pushed for longer releases so he can better integrate and adapt.....Judge Paul Friedman ruled that Hinckley would "not be a danger to himself or to others" and would provide "new opportunities for employment and structured community activities than are presently available to him because of his sporadic presence there."

But Friedman balked at doctors' request for a 24-day pass, saying Hinckley "continues to exhibit deceptive behavior even when there are no symptoms of psychosis or depression" and had "not cultivated any friends or established ties to any groups of people in Williamsburg."

....Hinckley, who was born in Oklahoma and raised from age 4 in Dallas, first sought occasional home visits in 1987, but a judge rejected that after hospital staff found photographs and letters revealing he was still obsessed with Foster. In addition, he had corresponded with notorious serial killer Ted Bundy and had tried to write to Charles Manson, the cult leader behind the 1969 mass murders of pregnant actress Sharon Tate and several others.

In 2000, a year after his initial supervised visits were allowed, he was granted longer releases that were monitored but unsupervised. He lost those privileges for four years after authorities found he had smuggled materials about Foster when he returned to St. Elisabeths.

Continues to exhibit deceptive behavior--that's enough for me, sorry. People don't have to be mean to him, but they don't have to allow "deceptive" Hinckley to run around willy-nilly for a half month or more at a time, minded only by an old woman.

[GP6971]

62. None what so ever. n/t

[Gore1FL]

50. How would a show trial help her past that? n/t

[MADem]

53. It would put the BRADY cause back in the news.

We'd be hearing about that, not this bullshit with idiots carrying ginormous semiautomatic weapons in Target and Chipotle.

[MADem]

17. To let people know that trying to kill Presidents is frowned upon.

The guy is getting out on a regular basis, and there's talk about freeing him.

Regardless of my opinion of Reagan as a PRESIDENT, no one deserves to get shot at in their job....and I really have more empathy for the people getting gunned down than the assholes wielding the weapons--regardless of their mental state.

I didn't think this guy should be getting "passes" in any event. http://www.usatoday.com/story/news/nation/2014/08/04/james-brady-john-hinckley/13598699/

In February, Friedman spelled out the strict conditions for Hinckley's expanded freedom, including his travels, therapy, medication, volunteer work and even the walks he takes with his mother in her subdivision. When unsupervised, Hinckley must carry a GPS-enabled cellphone, stay clear of governmental centers in Richmond and avoid places where the president or members of Congress might be. He can't talk to the media.

At least once a day, he and his mother must also check in with St. Elisabeths, 150 miles away.

Hinckley, who was born in Oklahoma and raised from age 4 in Dallas, first sought occasional home visits in 1987, but a judge rejected that after hospital staff found photographs and letters revealing he was still obsessed with Foster. In addition, he had corresponded with notorious serial killer Ted Bundy and had tried to write to Charles Manson, the cult leader behind the 1969 mass murders of pregnant actress Sharon Tate and several others.

In 2000, a year after his initial supervised visits were allowed, he was granted longer releases that were monitored but unsupervised. He lost those privileges for four years after authorities found he had smuggled materials about Foster when he returned to St. Elisabeths.

[tavernier]

30. I would think trying to kill anyone

should be "frowned upon".

I will never understand the necessity of guns in our culture. I'm a home health nurse and I've gone into the worst neighborhoods all over South Florida. I'm white, fairly attractive (or certainly used to be in young and middle age) and I have never carried a gun or been threatened. I keep my head down, my mouth shut, and 99 percent of the time the family and neighbors of my patients are expecting me and look out for me. I don't wear jewelry or carry a purse, but I am aware that I could be victimized. But what good would a gun do besides shooting off my foot or somebody else's?

Yup, I know that I'm taking a higher level of risk, but that's my choice. But why, WHY, do people who are under no risk feel that they have to "PACK"?

A real estate broker staying at the Marriott? A CPA having lunch at Red Lobster???

Give me a ;&);@ break!!

Their lives are not in danger... They only "PACK" to compensate for lack of other "stuff".

[MADem]

38. Well, I won't argue with that, but from a practical standpoint, many more people

are impacted, at enormous expense, too, when a world leader is gunned down. It's easier to replace an office worker or other private citizen than a public figure. The families are equally gutted, no doubt, but there's no national agita when a private citizen dies, usually. Perhaps there should be, but there isn't.

Aside from the national mourning, loss of business while people sit in front of TVs watching the funeral and not working/shopping, then there's the whole "replacement" effort which can get sketchy if the deceased was getting ready to run for a second term.

I am not a fan of the "packers" either--of course I live in MA where there's less of that bullshit.

[former9thward]

58. Another 2nd amendment hater obsessed with penis size.

That seems to be universal. I wonder why ....

[tavernier]

63. Oops

Touched a nerve

[aikoaiko]

66. And the jury results are in...

AUTOMATED MESSAGE: Results of your Jury Service
On Sat Aug 9, 2014, 05:48 PM an alert was sent on the following post:

Another 2nd amendment hater obsessed with penis size.
http://www.democraticunderground.com/?com=view_post&forum=1014&pid=866344

REASON FOR ALERT

This post is disruptive, hurtful, rude, insensitive, over-the-top, or otherwise inappropriate.

ALERTER'S COMMENTS

Calling a user "2nd amendment hater" in response to a very innocent post merely criticizing gun culture (not the 2nd amendment at all) is over the top.

And the snide remark about "obsessed with penis size" is also rude, when the user never showed an explicit obsession in the first place.

You served on a randomly-selected Jury of DU members which reviewed this post. The review was completed at Sat Aug 9, 2014, 06:00 PM, and the Jury voted 1-6 to LEAVE IT.

Juror #1 voted to LEAVE IT ALONE
Explanation: The post this person did bring it up ("stuff&quot .
Juror #2 voted to LEAVE IT ALONE
Explanation: No explanation given
Juror #3 voted to LEAVE IT ALONE
Explanation: No explanation given
Juror #4 voted to LEAVE IT ALONE
Explanation: Meh.
Juror #5 voted to LEAVE IT ALONE
Explanation: Gender-based slurs should be called out for what they are. Tabernier's post is the one that should be hidden.
Juror #6 voted to HIDE IT
Explanation: Agree with the alerter
Juror #7 voted to LEAVE IT ALONE
Explanation: 2nd amendment hater is a bit of hyperbole, but the last line in tavernier's otherwise reasonable post was clearly about penis size. This post merely makes it explicit. I don't like dancing around edge playing ms innocent, and I'm not going to hide this slightly hyperbolic response for a mildly holding tavernier accountable.

Thank you very much for participating in our Jury system, and we hope you will be able to participate again in the future.

[Starry Messenger]

18. The point is justice.

[Brickbat]

45. It's called justice and the rule of law, you might have heard of it.

[Treant]

6. That's a stretch. --EM

[Comrade Grumpy]

47. You took the words right out of my mouth. n/t

[Politicalboi]

8. Hinckley should be in jail for life

But to charge him with murder seems a bit much. Why don't they charge Poppy Bush with murder too. Hinckley's were friends with the Bushies.

[MADem]

21. The bullet he fired was the cause of death. I think it's fair.

If someone is gunned down in the street, and is taken to the hospital, and dies of their wounds, the perp is charged with murder.

Why should the aspect of time impact the crime? If the coronor determines that the bullet killed the person, then the person firing the bullet is to be called to account.

This isn't about Poppy--it's about a dead man and the guy who fired the instrument of his death.

[smiley]

42. They don't mention that very much in the media do they?

A while back I read an interesting article about this connection. It's been awhile since I read it, but the author essentially claimed Hinkley was a "manchurian candidate".

Whether that is true, I have no idea, but I always found the connection between the Bushes and Hinkleys interesting.

[KinMd]

54. He's been in St Elizabeth's psychiatric hospital in Washington since the shooting

he has been allowed supervised and unsupervised visits to see his parents

[MADem]

56. Not entirely. He's allowed to drive around now, and his unsupervised visits are lasting

SEVENTEEN days at a crack. He's more a commuter than a confined individual...and he's still "deceptive."

See post 55.

[barbtries]

9. i wondered about that.

now i know.

[Spitfire of ATJ]

13. Gives DC a chance to relive those thrilling days of yesteryear by saying, "Reagan"....

Makes them all weak in the knees, ya know.

[Callmecrazy]

24. Nevada state Law held that

If a person was mortally wounded but in a coma, if the victim lived 366 days, murder charges could not be pressed on the attacker.

[broadcaster75201]

26. I was a Prosecutor for 25 years and

I would be SHOCKED if a Court ultimately permitted a murder charge to proceed. Way too much time has passed. Proximate cause is an issue.

[Callmecrazy]

28. Proximate cause...

That's the term I was looking for. Thanks.

[Warren Stupidity]

64. yeah, it seems a huge stretch to claim a direct cause of death.

[happyslug]

57. That was The Common Law rule.

Many states have changed it to no limit.

[rocktivity]

29. So the strategy is that it's taken 33 years for him to die

from gunshot wounds inflicted by Hinckley?


rocktivity

[QuestForSense]

31. A homicide. Really?

[tclambert]

33. He died at 73 years old. Would he have lived longer if he hadn't been shot?

There's really no way to tell. Statistically, he might have died of other causes anyway. Legally, that shooting already resulted in a Not Guilty by Reason of Insanity verdict, so any prosecutor should expect the same outcome in another trial. Why go to the expense?

[onehandle]

35. Gun culture is guilty. nt

[swilton]

37. Making Hinkley the scapegoat

is a big distraction that lets those responsible for gun violence in this country off the hook.

[MADem]

40. Scapegoat? He SHOT that guy. That's not "scapegoating."

It's not an "either-or" proposition, here.

Bringing him up on charges is one way to keep the work of the Brady Campaign front and center.

Doesn't seem like a distraction to me--sounds like a decent goal.

[TBF]

52. I have to agree -

and he's been getting long breaks to go home to Williamsburg. Maybe if they pressed charges he wouldn't be roaming around freely.

[krispos42]

41. What happened to the "year and a day" standard? n/t

[Nye Bevan]

59. Here:

The rule's status in the United States is less clear: many states have abolished it completely, and in 2001 the Supreme Court held that a Tennessee court's retroactive abolition of the rule was constitutional.[2] However, the rule's common law status has been successfully used by defendants to overturn convictions as recently as 2003: the Supreme Court of Wisconsin upheld the year and a day rule in the case before it, but simultaneously abolished the rule for any later cases, noting the modern circumstances of homicide cases, in which there is "the specter of a family's being forced to choose between terminating the use of a life-support system and allowing an accused to escape a murder charge" and the court's finding that it is "unjust to permit an assailant to escape punishment because of a convergence of modern medical advances and an archaic rule from the thirteenth century".[3]

In California, the "year and a day" rule has been changed to a "three years and a day" rule.[4] If a death occurs more than three years and one day after the act alleged to have caused it, there is "a rebuttable presumption that the killing was not criminal", but the prosecution may seek to overcome this presumption.[5]

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Year_and_a_day_rule

[JohnnyRingo]

60. Get ready for republicans to fall over each other shilling for...

...the guy who shot Ronald Reagan. There's no one the right hates more than Jim Brady.

Strange world we live in.

[BainsBane]

61. Prosecute the NRA

If corporations are people, then they should be help responsible.

[awoke_in_2003]

65. ridiculous. nt