Appeals court: No forced meds for Loughner

[boppers]

Source: Tucson Sentinel

A federal appeals court ruled Tuesday that prison officials can't force accused Jan. 8 shooter Jared Loughner to take psychotropic drugs until the court hears further arguments.

The ruling by the Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals maintains an earlier order that temporarily halted the forced medication of Loughner.

The court said that because Loughner has not been convicted, he is entitled to greater constitutional protections than a convicted inmate. The order, by a three-judge panel, rejected claims by the government that Loughner is a danger to himself.

Loughner is being held at a Missouri prison hospital, where authorities are trying to restore his competency to stand trial.

Read more: http://www.tucsonsentinel.com/local/report/071211_loughner_meds/appeals-court-no-forced-meds-loughner/

---

Our system requires that we make the insane, sane, before punishing them for what they did while insane.

This is not sane.

[laconicsax]

1. Should Loughner avoid recrimination for his crimes?

While I agree that he likely wasn't of sound mind and judgement when he shot up Giffords' rally, it was a pre-meditated act.

[boppers]

2. Well, you can be crazy, and pre-meditated.

I don't see the point of medication to make them sane... they committed the crime.

[atreides1]

4. Yes he committed the crime

But until he does take the medication he remains locked up and isn't a danger to anyone else!

[former9thward]

8. He is a danger to the staff.

His taking the medication has nothing to do with being locked up. He will be locked up whether he takes the medication or not.

[GodlessBiker]

10. Many inmates are a danger to the staff. Should they all be medicated?

[former9thward]

19. Without question if that will solve that problem.

[laconicsax]

24. Wow!

:wow:

[GodlessBiker]

25. That's 1,000s of inmates convicted of violent crimes who have shown signs of violence in prison.

That's a lot of people to medicate.

[former9thward]

26. If they have a mental issue, like Loughner, that can be addressed by medication.

It should be addressed.

[GodlessBiker]

42. Why restrict it to "mental issues"? You mean regular old violent people who are a ...

danger to prison staff shouldn't be medicated?

[laconicsax]

23. Legally, he didn't commit the crime.

He hasn't been convicted. He only stands accused and that's where the problem is.

[boppers]

28. Let me Godwin here:

Hitler did not kill Jews, because nobody saw him kill a Jew, and had that verified by a court.

Hitler has only been accused.

Of 6 million murders.

Never convicted, though.

[No Elephants]

31. No one is arguing that Loughner was not the shooter. "Not guilty by reason of insanity"

is the issue, not whether Loughner killed anyone.

FYI, Godwin intended Godwin's Law as a joke, not anything to be taken seriously.

If the comparison is valid, nothing is wrong with a comparison to Nazis or their behavior, but a LOT is wrong, IMO, with attempting to stifle all mention of Nazis unless someone is actually killing 12 million people.

And, btw, it was 12 million murders, of which six million were murders of Jews.

[boppers]

40. Oh, the numbers.... the numbers....

Six million is one of the few accepted figures. After that, it gets complex.

"Some scholars maintain that the definition of the Holocaust should also include the Nazis' genocide of millions of people in other groups, including Romani (more commonly known in English by the exonym "Gypsies"), Sinti, Soviet prisoners of war, Polish and Soviet civilians, homosexuals, people with disabilities, Jehovah's Witnesses and other political and religious opponents, which occurred regardless of whether they were of German or non-German ethnic origin.<8> Using this definition, the total number of Holocaust victims is between 11 million and 17 million people.<9>"

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

That one paragraph took roughly 3 years to get into a format acceptable to the editors in wikipedia. I know that,, because I was there.

[elocs]

15. Just because one is mentally ill, severely mentally ill, does not mean they are stupid

or incompetent.

I wonder, would we be so quick here at DU to demand the pound of flesh if his victims had been some of the hated Republicans here?

[No Elephants]

32. Your post displays a very low opinion of DUers. Granted, I rarely

venture outside LBN, but I see many posts that do not wish Republicans or anyone else death or physical harm.

[No Elephants]

30. If he meets the legal standard for insanity, he gets put into a mental institution

unless and until he either sanes up or dies.

The legal standard is something along the lines like not being able to distinguish between right and wrong.

[Chan790]

3. The difference seems ethereal at best.

Either he was sane then and insane now...in which case he spends the rest of his life in a mental facility.
or
He was sane then and now...in which case he goes to prison.
or
He was insane then and sane now...okay, that's simply not the case. We can dismiss this one from discussion.
or
He was insane and is still insane...in which case he spends the rest of his life in a mental facility.

I'm not sure why any of these require us to force-feed him pills.

[laser_red]

5. you are forgetting something ... the people are entitled to justice

that is why he should be force fed the meds

the accused is also entitled to justice,
that is why he should be force fed the meds

[Chan790]

7. Clearly the court disagrees with you.

Also he doesn't have to be medicated to receive justice, only be presented with the opportunity to participate in his own defense. He has that, if he'd be more effective in that participation medicated...it lies with the court to see to his needs, but also to protect his rights inclusive of those to refuse medication.

Likewise, the justice of the people only requires that he be given a fair trial and afforded the opportunity to present a robust defense. You've failed to prove that requires him medicated.

Even violent schizophrenics may not forcibly medicated; you have a right to self determination including the right to refuse medical treatment. That right will be abridged of Mr. Loughtner but only after he's convicted or found to be mentally-ill and not competent to make those decisions for himself.

[laser_red]

9. my understanding is.

defense lawyer does not want him medicated,
because he will then be judged sane.

which means he can contribute to his own defense,
which means the trial can go on.
and defense does not want that.

surely this can't be the first time this type
of issue has come up,
how have courts ruled in the past?

[Name removed]

18. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[No Elephants]

34. And force feeding him the meds is just as to him why?

Obviously, his lawyers are arguing against it.

[boppers]

6. Because we (for some reason) require the insane to be sane in courts.

Such a thing doesn't make sense to me.

[former9thward]

27. The "some reason" is so that they can assist in their defense.

Which makes perfect sense.

[No Elephants]

35. Or, in this case, so the jury does not see them as insane as they were when they committed a crime.

As a practical matter, how much can a drugged up Loughner or anyone like him assist his attorneys in his defense?

And if assisting in his own defense were really the issue here, it would be his lawyers arguing that he be given the meds, not the prosecution.

[boppers]

43. His defense knows they have no case.

Their only useful course of action is to prolong the case, if they want to keep him alive. So they have to file lots of motions which result in delays.

He's going to die, it's just a matter of time.

[No Elephants]

33. I'm not sure he would spend the rest of his life in a mental insitution if he were found

not guilty by reason of insanity. At least, that is not guaranteed. If he is found sane and no danger to anyone, he could be released. As a practical matter, though, see John Hinckley.

[former9thward]

39. That is not the law in Arizona.

If you are found insane you spend as long as it takes to get sane. Then when you are sane the state tries you for the crimes and if found guilty you are given your sentence then.

[happyslug]

11. The Article Quoted the actual Court Decision

And since Federal Court decisions are NOT copywriteable, here is the complete Quote:

The Supreme Court has reasoned that "forcible injection of medication into a nonconsenting person's body represents a substantial interference with that person's liberty."
***
Being forced to take medication carrying the risk of irreversible, possibly fatal side effects, no doubt amounts to irreparable harm.
***
He has a strong personal interest in not being forced to suffer the indignity and risk of bodily injury that results from the administration of powerful drugs. The government's interest is no less serious: It seeks both to protect Loughner and those around him from any danger he might represent, and to evaluate whether he can be restored to competency. The government's interest is, however, less immediate. It has managed to keep Loughner in custody for over six months without injury to anyone. We are confident it can continue to do so for the short period it will take to resolve this appeal on the merits. And the record shows that Loughner is not a danger to himself.
***
Finally, there is a strong public interest in preserving the safety and bodily integrity of individuals who are detained prior to trial and thus innocent in the eyes of the law. There is also a public interest in protecting the welfare of those who interact with Loughner while he is in pre-trial detention and in determining whether Loughner can be restored to mental health so he can stand trial for his alleged crimes. While both interests are significant, we conclude that preserving the dignity and bodily integrity of an individual who has not been convicted of a crime is the stronger interest, especially when the government has demonstrated that it is able to prevent that individual from harming himself or others.

In simple terms, the law presumes someone is sane UNTIL a court determines he or she is insane. If a person is sane, he can refuse to take ANY MEDICATION. A person loses that right only if a Court has found the defendant insane. The Trial Court apparently never held a competency hearing, for if the court ruled the Defendant insane, before he can be tried the court has to hold another hearing to show that he is no longer insane. Two hearings BEFORE the actual trial that will determine if the Defendant was insane at the time of the shooting. The Trial Judge appears to want this case off his docket, but given the level of sanity of the shooter, impossible to do in a short time period. What the trial judge needs to do, is hold a Competency Hearing, find the Defendant incompetent, then order the Defendant to take his medication.

The problem with such a finding is the Defense will fight any subsequent ruling that the Defendant is Competent to stand trial once he is compliant with his medication. Furthermore the finding of incompetency to take his medication can be used at trial by the defense to show the Defendant was insane.

What the prosecution should do in this case is schedule a hearing on the Defendant's competency and accept the fact the Defendant is insane, the Defense would agree to such a ruling and this case will be over. The Prosecution does NOT want to agree that the Defendant was insane, but he wants the Defendant to be ruled competent enough to assist his attorney at trial. The only way the Defendant can be found to be that competent is if he is on his medication. The court simply ruled the Prosecution has two choices, first it can accept that the Defendant is insane, OR they can accept that he is NOT even when the Prison Psychiatrists are saying otherwise if the Defendant is off his Medication. The Prosecution see their case going up in smoke under either circumstances, thus the demand that the Defendant be ordered to take his medication. The problem is that the court has long ruled if you are sane you have the right NOT to take your Medication. Since the Prosecution wants to see the Defendant to be found by a Jury SANE, the Prosecution can NOT agree to any ruling that the Defendant is insane. The Court, correctly in my opinion, ruled the Prosecution can NOT have it both ways, the Defendant is either insane and thus can be forced to take his medication OR he is sane and can refuse to take such medication.

In simple terms, the Prosecution should just accept that the Defendant is insane and get the Trial Judge to agree and end this case now.

[boppers]

13. I am glad that I'm not a lawyer.

I will have to read your response a few times to untangle it.

[Chan790]

16. A summary.

The Prosecutor can't have it both ways:

If Loughtner is sane, he can't be forced to take his medication.

If he's insane, he can't be tried until he's sane enough to stand trial or assist in his defense...which will never happen because the Defense is never going to assert the defendant is sane and it'd be difficult for the Prosecution having asserted he's insane (or gotten a ruling to such in a competency hearing) to then assert he's sane without a second competency hearing where the defense would use the initial hearing results and prosecution's assertions to assert he's still not sane.

(End Summary)

[boppers]

17. LOL, and that's a summary,

..which is why I'm not a lawyer.

Here's my summary:
Prosecution: He's sane.
Defense: No, he's not.

[happyslug]

20. And the Court of Appeals said, if he is sane he has the right to say NO to any drugs

Thus the Prosecution has to prove the Defendant is insane to get him to take his drugs, so the Defendant can be sane enough to be tried by a Jury. Furthermore the Jury has to find that the Defendant was sane when he did the shooting, even if the Prosecution said he was to insane to help in his own defense without the drugs.

[No Elephants]

36. How can the prosecution be claiming he's sane AND demanding that he be forced

to take psychotropic medication? That is not the kind of medication any sane person should ever be forced to take.

[PSzymeczek]

12. Over 8,000 pages of documents

from Pima Community College came out today. Looking forward to the 10:00 news on KVOA.

[boppers]

14. KVOA isn't staffed well enough to read 8K pages.

Are the docs public, with a readable URL?

[udbcrzy2]

21. If he were a patient in a mental hospital

Wouldn't he have to be medicated even if he did not want to be? I wonder if he's not being medicated because it's not a mental hospital? I also wonder how he would act if they put into a cell with some really really big bad ass guys.

[boppers]

22. He's a "logic" kind of crazy,

His reality makes sense, his conclusions disagree with those of others.

[No Elephants]

38. When did you examine him?

[boppers]

41. Fair enough question.

I have not met him personally.

I have, however, read all of his known internet posts and videos, as well as all the emails involving him that were released by Pima College. Some 1,200+ pages worth of material so far, which includes different analysis and input from multiple perspectives. There's another 8,000 pages that were recently released that I plan on reading over the next week or so, but I suspect a lot of that will be duplicate information.

I came to my conclusions based on the perspectives from the materials I have read, and based on my past experiences dealing with mentally ill people... I can make sense of his thinking patterns, as least as accurately as they have been documented by hundreds of other people, and even by Loughner himself.

I'm not making knee-jerk judgments based on a few articles, or somebody's random blog post... this asshole tried to murder a girl I had a crush on in High-school (I went to school with Gabby), and ever since then, I have devoured *every* piece of data I can find, trying to make sense of it all.

I have not, however, met him.

Edit: fix number typo

[happyslug]

29. Only after a Judge has determined him a threat to himself or others

That is what the Judge did NOT do in this case, the Judge NEVER ruled that the Defendant was incompetent, thus the law assumes the Defendant is sane and as a sane person he has the right to refuse any and all medications. That is what the Appeal Court ruling states.

In simple terms, the Judge has to determined, after a hearing, that the Defendant is a harm to himself or others (a test similar to the test the Jury must make if this case ever gets to trial) but such a hearing was NEVER held so no such determination could be made. No determination that the Defendant is a harm to himself of others (The definition of Insanity) means the law presumes the Defendant is sane, and ANY SANE PERSON CAN REFUSE TO TAKE ANY MEDICATION.

The Judge does NOT want to make such a finding of fact (i.e. the Defendant is a harm to himself or others without the medication), for the Defense will use such a finding of fact at the actual Murder trial. Thus the Judge did NOT want to find as a fact in this case that the Defendant was incompetent, but under the law the JUDGE must make such a finding of fact order to order the Defendant to take his medication.

In simple terms, the only time a Judge can Order someone to take Medication is if the person is insane. If the Defendant is insane for purposes of taking his medication he is also insane when it came down to the time of the Shooting. Thus such a ruling would kill the Prosecution's case (as it should).

[No Elephants]

37. That may depend on whether he had checked himself in or been committed

via a 3 physician certificate. Neither has happened here. Nor has he been found insane or found guilty.

"I also wonder how he would act if they put into a cell with some really really big bad ass guys."{

So doing would be criminally negligent, both as to him and as to the "bad ass guys."

Will we never get past the belief that insane people need to be punished for being insane, rather than treated?

[boppers]

44. He will be treated for being insane, and punished for his actions while being insane.

Murdering 6 people, and injuring 13 others, isn't quite the same thing as being a confused person suffering from delusions that harm nobody.