The National Forum   Donate   Your Account   On Line Opinion   Forum   Blogs   Polling   About   
The Forum - On Line Opinion's article discussion area



Syndicate
RSS/XML


RSS 2.0

Main Articles General

Sign In      Register

The Forum > General Discussion > It appears one can pretty much do as they like, provided they take their ILLEGAL drugs.

It appears one can pretty much do as they like, provided they take their ILLEGAL drugs.

  1. Pages:
  2. 1
  3. 2
  4. 3
  5. ...
  6. 5
  7. 6
  8. 7
  9. All
How on earth can that woman, after having slaughtered seven of her own children, be let off simply because she was under the influence of illegal drugs.

Have we gone completely mad!
Posted by rehctub, Thursday, 4 May 2017 7:46:09 PM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
No, rechtub, she wasn’t let off “simply because she was under the influence of illegal drugs”. She wasn't let off at all. And whether marijuana played a role in her mental illness is a side issue.

http://www.brisbanetimes.com.au/queensland/schizophrenia-at-its-very-depths-drove-mother-to-kill-eight-children-20170503-gvyf42.html

Six psychiatrists determined that she was psychotic. Insanity is an extremely difficult plea to achieve, and it is by no means a way of getting off the hook. This woman will be locked up indefinitely (probably for the rest of her life) in a mental institute.

The only thing a person gains by pleading insanity (Or should I say, “gets to keep”?) is their last remaining shred of dignity. Other than that, pleading insanity has far worse consequences than standing trial as a sane person, as it means you’ll probably never be free again and you will spend the rest of your days locked up with dribbling loonies.

Give me 20-30 years, with people who might still be worth talking to, any day.

So, have we gone completely mad?

No, we haven’t. We just have a very ignorant and angry public who don’t understand the justice system and, therefore, assume that the country must be run by out-of-touch elites.
Posted by AJ Philips, Friday, 5 May 2017 8:16:35 AM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
I suppose some might compare and contrast the media's (and the chattering commentariat's) treatment of other murders of children and family, where for instance the media sensationalises the weapon (and 'mass murder'), or blast men as constant threats to women, children and society.

Negative stereotyping usually takes pride of position in sensationalising many media reports. It sells.

Thankfully the media have not trawled the usual gutters as they usually do. But IMHO through lack of constraint the media have still abused this awful calamity. The media puts their own needs first. I will leave it at that after saying once again on this forum that so often the media treatment does more harm to victims.

For now there should have been simple, factual reporting and the media and the public should allow the families, friends and the community the time to grieve and recover.

Later, after the evidence is in and analysed there needs to be further examination of the solutions, resources and facilities available for the sufferers of mental conditions and for their families.
Posted by leoj, Friday, 5 May 2017 9:40:52 AM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
Thanks AJ, the ignorant think "Not guilty on the grounds of insanity" means the perpetrator simply walks out of the court as if nothing had happened. Nothing could be further from the truth. There are no winners in all this.
Posted by Paul1405, Friday, 5 May 2017 10:16:10 AM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
What a pile of garbage AJ Philips. "Six psychiatrists determined that she was psychotic" & she'll never be out again. What twaddle. Those same six psychiatrists will at some time claim to have cured the killer, first to justify the thousands we will pay them, & secondly to try to pretend that psychiatry is actually some sort of discipline, rather than witchdoctory for the modern world.

Of course she should never be out again. Being under the influence of drugs including Alcohol should bring a heavier & longer sentence, as the offender is much more likely to reoffend when they indulge again.
Posted by Hasbeen, Friday, 5 May 2017 10:26:30 AM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
How do you know that, Hasbeen?

<<Those same six psychiatrists will at some time claim to have cured the killer, first to justify the thousands we will pay them, & secondly to try to pretend that psychiatry is actually some sort of discipline, rather than witchdoctory for the modern world.>>

Wow. A legitimate field of medicine written off as "witch-doctory"? Now I've seen it all.

You're just annoyed because I've demonstrated how foolish and ignorant your frequent claims regarding so-called out-of-touch elites is.

It must be comforting to just believe whatever you want and to hell with the evidence.

"We don't need none of that there book learnin'!"
Posted by AJ Philips, Friday, 5 May 2017 11:00:46 AM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
G'day there HASBEEN...

A terrible case for sure. The deaths of eight vulnerable little children, at the hand of Raina THAIDAY, mother of seven of the victims, will always beguile and fascinate public attention. One area I thought I might reassure you - These six psychiatrists would take quite a bit of convincing by this women, to back her Counsel's Defence. And I'd doubt very much if she was to see the light of day for a very long time, if ever. My 'direct experience' with 'forensic psychiatrists', they're a tough lot and not easily taken in by either rhetoric, spin or undertakings, believe me. In the medium term this women will have gallons of 'Largactil' (the Psychiatrist and Psycho. Nurses friend) injected into her, reducing her to a very compliant state indeed.

Someone made a comment they'd rather be locked up for 20 or 30 years with people who might be still worth talking to, I take it, it was a 'throw away line', gaols are notoriously tough places in which to survive, even a female boob, with racism and violence being predominant?

I'm not entirely sure what Defence her Counsel employed as to her alleged culpability to eight counts of murder. I've not followed the matter. My initial thoughts were they invoked the 1843 McNAGHTEN Rule as their primary Defence to murder? There are several Defence's to Criminal Capacity on the grounds of Mental illness; such as, Insanity, Automatism and Intoxication. A Defence to Criminal Capacity, is a very difficult Defence to mount. The burdan lies entirely with the accused, to prove that at the time of the murder; 'he was labouring under such a defect of reason'...? I'll not bore the readers by citing the entire 'Rule' but it is the judicial 'test' if you like, used in Australia's adversarial system of criminal jurisprudence.

Yeah I know, the law 'seems' to be an ass, but it's the best we've got!
Posted by o sung wu, Friday, 5 May 2017 3:04:12 PM
Find out more about this user Visit this user's webpage Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
o sung wu wrote: “One area I thought I might reassure you - These six psychiatrists would take quite a bit of convincing by this women, to back her Counsel's Defence. And I'd doubt very much if she was to see the light of day for a very long time, if ever. My 'direct experience' with 'forensic psychiatrists', they're a tough lot and not easily taken in by either rhetoric, spin or undertakings, believe me.”

Thank you!

The idea that everyone working in the public service is interested only in how they can keep their jobs alive and continue to suck on the public teat, even to the detriment of the public’s safety and the course of justice, is absolutely nuts.

Anyone who thinks that such a shoddy system could exist has absolutely no idea of how it actually works.
Posted by AJ Philips, Friday, 5 May 2017 4:01:04 PM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
Hi there LEOJ...

I too share your obvious derision for all branches of the media, especially when there's an inadvertent assignation between the media's 'Front Page' and the truth. Years back I always perceived journalism to be a noble profession, even a 'calling' if you like, for some idealistic people?

Today, I look upon the media and many of those in it, to be substantially flawed and utterly fallacious. Both from a moral perspective, and their apparent inability to tease out the real facts and details of a newsworthy occurrence or incident, in order they may be accurately recorded, and disseminated to the public at large, in a timely manner.

And very recently, I understood, there were approximately 110 or so journalists, retrenched from both the Sydney Morning Herald, and the 'Melbourne Age'. Ostensibly because of falling circulations? Or are the public just fed-up with some of the rubbish that hitherto, now passes as 'quality journalism' complete with inaccuracies and errors in the reporting of important news items?
Posted by o sung wu, Friday, 5 May 2017 9:26:03 PM
Find out more about this user Visit this user's webpage Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
Nothing new with the media...this American case from the late 1800's.

http://murderpedia.org/female.B/b/borden-lizzie.htm

The case was memorialized in a popular skipping-rope rhyme:

Lizzie Borden took an axe

And gave her mother forty whacks.

When she saw what she had done

She gave her father forty-one.

Folklore says the rhyme was made up by an anonymous writer as a tune to sell newspapers. Others attribute it to the ubiquitous, but anonymous "Mother Goose". In reality, Lizzie's stepmother suffered 18 or 19 blows; her father, 11 blows.

The Electronic Whorehouse has never let truth get in the way of a good story. But 6 psychiatrist...that sounds like the opening line of Monty Python sketch on the Spanish Inquisition.
Posted by Albie Manton in Darwin, Saturday, 6 May 2017 10:44:18 AM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
G'day there ALBIE...

I've repeated this little quote previously, apropos the efficacy and probity of the media - The former Commissioner of the Federal police, Major General Ronald GRAY/GREY, a decorated Vietnam veteran and by all accounts a staunch disciplinarian, was quoted saying (publicly); he'd rather face a Bn of NVR's than speak with the media, because with them, (the NVR's in combat) were very much a known quantity. Speaks volumes I reckon. I bet the weather, up there in fantastic Darwin would be terrific at the moment?

Cheers...Sung wu.
Posted by o sung wu, Saturday, 6 May 2017 11:41:30 AM
Find out more about this user Visit this user's webpage Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
Well, conceivably, this particular individual could be stabilised, within about 3 months.

Alternatively, she may suffer until the day she dies.

However, since the advent of 2nd generation anti-psychotics in the 90's much can be achieved to restore a significant measure of good health to people who suffer from some form of psychotic disorder.

So, if the individual concerned is able to be stabilised, one of the first things that she is going to have to deal with is what she has done (with a more lucid mind-set)

..

The key to understanding this is to understand the nature of altered states of consciousness, and how in such states the mind interprets in a very different way to that which we consider to be "normal."

So for example, in a paranoid state of altered consciousness, an individual may be watching television, and hear a noise from the neighbours at the same time a crackle of interference comes over the tv screen. The mind then "reasons" that the cause of the interference occurred as a result of the neighbour.

Now, as confident you all are of your own thought processes as you read this, know that in altered states that the compulsion to accept what one's own mind is telling you is equally if not more profound. One of the reasons for that is is that with the advent of some altered states of consciousness comes also a significant failure of the so-called "executive functions" of the mind.

Then, usually consistent with the individual's own personal upbringing and beliefs, with the mind perhaps desperate to provide an explanation for the seemingly "paranormal" activity, a delusional belief may develop.

So for example, I'm under surveillance and my neighbour is with the CIA, or the neighbour has supernatural powers etc.

It reminds me of the Ancient tale of Hercules, who apparently under the influence of enchantment by an Evil Goddess, hallucinates and misperceives his family confusing them for the enemy and puts them all to the sword, leading to the "Trials of Hercules" as he attempts to atone for his misdeeds.
Posted by DreamOn, Sunday, 7 May 2017 2:38:53 PM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
AJ Philips
rehctub,
I am glad you posted this item. It saves me doing so. I happen to live very close to where this incident took place and see the person said to be the "grandfather" of the 'murdered' children although I believe the definition of his relationship is a little stretched. He is supposed to be a preacher of some sort again a loose definition since he seems to spend a lot of time on poker machines in the local football club.
This women,because of her indigenous status, was afforded the accommodation of being assessed insane in a place called the "Mental Court"
This is not a court as we know it. It is not public and information is hidden from the public.
The court consists of one judge and two psychiatrists (government appointed and paid). On their advice the judge declares the defendant "Not fit to Plead" and commits the person to a secure hospital for an indefinite period.
There is a large two page outrage in the Sunday Mail today (7.5.17) calling for more disclosure of the procedures involved.
Posted by chrisgaff1000, Sunday, 7 May 2017 8:08:03 PM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
AJ Philips
rehctub,
cont.
What you say (AJ Philips) is a throwback to the dark ages where a plea of insanity did indeed culminate in what was called "Queens Pleasure" and meant incarceration in a secure psychiatric center for the rest of a persons life (which usually wasn't very long because of the drug regime}
This person was assessed by only two government psychiatrists whose qualifications would not be that great given the huge financial rewards in the public sector as opposed to the government pay.
Additionally there was the influence of the Aboriginal Legal Service (public funded) who would be pushing for a insanity plea since there are quite a few of their clients (murderers etc.) living free in the public domain thanks to insanity pleas and the involvement of the "Mental Court"
Today a 'committal; is general and the duration of incarceration is entirely up to the assessments of the clinical staff of the hospital. If and when they assess the person as being fit to live in the community (with care) they are released, given a pension and a new life and the public never know.
I have an indigenous murderer living next door to me undergoing a sex change program and being medicated daily by the Wuchopperen Health Service. He was declared unfit to plead after killing his male partner because he had no more money (stolen from his employer) to give him for drugs, grog and poker machine playing.
The "Mental Court" found his insanity to be directly attributed to his sexual identity confusion.
There are dozens of these released killers wandering the streets in Queensland and the public is none the wiser.
Posted by chrisgaff1000, Sunday, 7 May 2017 8:56:10 PM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
AJ Philips
rehctub
Cont.
Coming back to the marijuana induced psychosis that seems to be at the heart of this "Mental Court" decision,
any copper of the old school will tell you that:
"Intoxication is a complete defense to any crime" primarily because there is no deliberate intent to commit a crime.
This is why you always let drunks and drunken offenders sleep it off before you charge them with an offense.
If this woman was suffering from psychotic incident induced by habitual substance abuse and that was the forensic
state she was found in there is no possible chance of a conviction for murder.
It might be morally wrong but that is the law we live with.
It is up to the public to hound their MP's to change the way we allow the psychiatric culture rule our day to day lives.
Posted by chrisgaff1000, Sunday, 7 May 2017 9:30:10 PM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
chrisgaff1000,

Thank you for taking the time to explain.

Your explanation confirmed and enlarged what I have been told a number of times in the past and relating to different matters.

rehctub,

Thanks for posting the thread. It has given me things to think about.
Posted by leoj, Sunday, 7 May 2017 9:34:59 PM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
Hi there CHRISGAFF1000...

Surely they'd apply the standard 'Unfit to Plea', pursuant to the McNAGHTEN Rule, where the burden shifts from the Crown to the accused?
Being an indigenous individual, does she also enjoy the added protection(s) of the 'Annunga' Rules as well as the usual Judges Rules et al?

Queensland is a Codified State, not common law? I can only imagine the the noise emitting from Chambers occupied by those learned SC's and QC's as they argue the toss?
Posted by o sung wu, Sunday, 7 May 2017 9:35:52 PM
Find out more about this user Visit this user's webpage Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
o sung wu,
Hi ole matey.
I wasn't going to dig into the bone of the legalities herein involved.
A simple enlightenment of the structure of 'intent' as it applies to mental incompetency
and the "Mental Court" which has about the same or less credibility as the Family Law Court.
Just bought my wife a Lexus RX Hybrid for Birthday/Mothers Day and 40th Wedding Anniversary.
Putting up with a soldier/copper for more than 40 years I think she earned it.
Posted by chrisgaff1000, Sunday, 7 May 2017 9:55:12 PM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
Yes, sad to say racism is alive and kicking. Had this woman no been indiginous, i would suggest she would have had to fight tooth and nail to prove her point. Its a slippery slop out there.
Posted by rehctub, Sunday, 7 May 2017 9:58:33 PM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
Hi again CHRISGAFF1000...

Soldier/copper, you've done us all proud looking after your beloved Wife to the extent of a Lexus RX Hybrid, for her Birthday and/or Mothers Day. The law's an ass, but it's the best we've got I suppose. Still I've often wondered whether we'd be better off served, under the 'inquisitorial' process than our 'adversarial system that we've got now. Especially in highly topical matters as those that've currently prevailed now, in Queensland?
Posted by o sung wu, Sunday, 7 May 2017 10:57:58 PM
Find out more about this user Visit this user's webpage Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
" Coming back to the marijuana induced psychosis that seems to be at the heart of this "Mental Court" decision, any copper of the old school will tell you that:

"Intoxication is a complete defense to any crime" ... "

Intoxication is not the same thing as being in a psychotic state of consciousness, though as you say there is some commonality in the manner in which the legal system treats this kind of defence.

These cases to me are more about a failure of governance than anything else. Specifically, a failure to identify early enough that this person suffers from a psychotic disorder of some sort.

And here again, this is likely because the people surrounding this individual were never taught how to identify the signs of mental health crisis.

I believe that First Aid training should be compulsory and should include the teaching of a broad brush identification technique of what the signs of mental health issues are and what to do if you have concerns about anyone.

I suspect that contrary to what Chris has said that it is most likely that what is at the "Heart" of this decision was a diagnosis of a psychotic disorder.

And, whilst as best I know there is no evidence to support the hypotheses that marijuana causes psychotic illness it is certainly recognised by conventional medical wisdom that marijuana and other contraindicated substances can most certainly induce a fully blown psychotic episode in the case of those who are already psychotically latent.

So, again, the trick is an early identification (which also hails the greatest hope for a recovery for the person afflicted) in the interests of everyone's safety.

Here in Australia, we live with many dangers. But say in the case of say red back spiders, do we not teach our children about them? Do we not show them the peculiar type of web? Do we not show them the ominous glaring red on the abdomen of a large poisonous female with eggs? Do we not teach them to quickly move away and alert an adult to the danger?
Posted by DreamOn, Monday, 8 May 2017 1:55:11 PM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
I wonder if this Raina THAIDAY having been found; not guilty of murder, by virtue of the McNAGHTON Rule - a 'disease of the mind'. If one day she's released from a secured hospital, as being cured. Does anyone believe, this woman will ever manage to become a functioning member of society again?

Firstly; from a community and societies point of view, will anyone give her a job? If not will she always remain a beneficiary of the generous Australian Taxpayer?

Secondly; from a personal and emotional point of view, would 'anyone' ever wish to be (personally) close to her, or be able to form a natural union with this lady, a killer of eight vulnerable little children?

Initially, I reckon there'd be many members of the media and a few writers, after her to obtain some sort of scoop on the why's and wherefores of this woman's life. Perhaps a few 'do gooders' might wish to 'cure' her of the internal evils that have somehow 'taken her over' and caused this mass killing of children?

Other than that - I wouldn't think anyone would wish to form any sort of relationship with her. She is after all, a mass killer of the very worst kind - that of eight innocent little children. Personally I hope she doesn't have a moment of peace until she herself leaves this mortal coil.

In my 32 years in the police, I've known and spoken to many killers and murderers. But this Raina THAIDAY is among the most reprehensible that I know. Moreover, I'd like to be having a beer or two with the principal homicide detective, to hear of the real facts surrounding this individual? Often it's the lead detectives of any squad who manage to tease out the real truth (admissible or otherwise) of a job.
Posted by o sung wu, Monday, 8 May 2017 3:19:17 PM
Find out more about this user Visit this user's webpage Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
Indeed, whilst I do not know if it is true or not, I have certainly read that individuals with a psychotic disorder of one kind or another have a well-deserved reputation for the most unspeakable of crimes. But that in itself is indicative of a wholly other state of mind wouldn't you say?

And, of course, one of the reasons that these individuals are subjected to forced treatment if they don't co-operate is precisely because the condition is well recognised as bringing about a state of mind where one no longer recognises friend from foe.

And that is why in my view it is wholly inappropriate to describe these acts as reprehensible as it carries with it the implication that the individual concerned should have known better regardless of the extent of her illness. But the medical evidence does not support this.

..

So, for all you "Holier-than-Thous" if we were to deprive you of your liberty and give you a hot shot to induce a psychotic state of mind and then dropped you out amongst the people with practically no support or guidance, one wonders how you would fair? Would you have sufficient strength of mind to control your rage and your fear, or would your mind shatter and be overwhelmed, resulting in you killing someone unwittingly?

Hmmm .. whose to say, but I think its fanciful for any of us to believe that we could know with certainty the outcome in advance.

..

It ought come as no surprise though that there is compassion and understanding built into the system on this, both because of the scientific understanding and also our Judeo-Christo roots, as JC was seemingly fond of seeking out maddies or those possessed by "Evil Spirits" and healing them and making them whole again.
Posted by DreamOn, Monday, 8 May 2017 4:21:39 PM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
chrisgaff1000

thanks for the facts and some reason. Something AJ is incapable of due to his dogmas. I noticed how quick he jumped to the defence of smoking weed. Oh well 8 lives but the warped dogma seems more important.
Posted by runner, Monday, 8 May 2017 4:59:12 PM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
runner, when did you last get your mental health checked?

I ask because you appear to be experiencing delusions.
Try rereading what AJ actually said. He neither defended nor attacked smoking weed; he merely pointed out that it was a side issue - not (as it appeared to rehctub) the reason why she was found not guilty.
Posted by Aidan, Monday, 8 May 2017 5:08:55 PM
Find out more about this user Visit this user's webpage Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
What an interesting take on things you have there 'DREAMON', perhaps your epithet speaks more loudly than you might think? A killer is a killer, whichever way you cut it my friend! Perhaps a dose of pragmatism might help you better understand. Alternatively, you could juxtapose the events surrounding Raina THAIDAY with Archibald Beattie McCAFFERTY, murderer of four innocent individuals. Also claiming he was just another innocent casualty of the audacious and intrepid McNAGHTON Rule, except Archie missed the boat?
Posted by o sung wu, Monday, 8 May 2017 5:17:03 PM
Find out more about this user Visit this user's webpage Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
Thanks for that, Aidan.

runner,

What on earth is wrong with you? I never expect you to understand what I say - and, indeed, you never do - but that last misinterpretation was just downright offensive.
Posted by AJ Philips, Monday, 8 May 2017 5:32:13 PM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
A.J.PHILIPS...

On this Topic I believe you've explained the position rather well, I thought. Many people who through no fault of their own, when they hear or read an accused person is either unfit to plead, or 'not guilt by reason of insanity' - well they tend to see somewhat myopically, only the bit that states, 'not guilty'. Therefore they may become a little angry, as it's perceived to be an outright acquittal.
Posted by o sung wu, Monday, 8 May 2017 6:45:23 PM
Find out more about this user Visit this user's webpage Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
OH! sung Woo:

" ... A killer is a killer, whichever way you cut it my friend! ... "

Well, plainly, if one "kills" in self-defence that does not make one a murderer does it?

Thus it begs the question of motive, does it not?

Did she perhaps think that her children were invaded by fell Spirits intent on harming her for example?

Did she believe that they were beaming telepathic messages into her head?

You can bet if the case got up in the maddies' court that the motive would have been out there and by definition it would have to be. .. which makes me recall that often times in cases like this the media gets to announce the perpetrator's motive

(and a number of american shooting masssacres come to mind)

but as I haven't been following any of this particularly in the media I am unaware. Perhaps if someone knows they may care to inform us?

..

Coming back to it, I sense a few of you are struggling with the most profound nature of what it is to be in an altered state of consciousness and why such cases are handled in a special way by the law.

Perhaps for the finer thinkers amongst you, those who take a keen interest in martialling their own thoughts, the associations and interconnections between them, when considering altered states it becomes plain that the very cohesion or linkages between thoughts and ideas fundamentally changes. The person you used to think you were, the way you used to be able to think and feel, is no more.

So, as an individual descends deeper and deeper into mental unhealth, one of the things that can happen is that the associations in writing become increasingly distant, such that to read this kind of material it is if the writer is jumping all over the place.

When an individual becomes acutely unwell and descends into thought form disorder, what we get in writing is the so-called "word salad."
Posted by DreamOn, Monday, 8 May 2017 6:55:16 PM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
Hi again DREAMON...

I didn't actually use the word 'murderer', nor was there evidence given proving, 'Malace aforethought', one of the constituent Criminal Proofs necessary in the charge of Murder. Nor was a Defence raised, claiming 'Self-Defence taken in evidence. So, with respect I've no idea what it is you're referring too DREAMON?

Furthermore you speculate that; '...did she perhaps think that her children were invaded by 'fell'(sic) Spirits intent on harming her for example...'? None of these scenarios were taken in evidence. Therefore they're not relevant either.

You further go on to state words to the effect; '...you've not been following any of this particularly in the media, I'm unaware...'

That's quite apparent DREAMON, as you again launch into some other speculative process, concerning 'altered states' and 'linkages between thoughts'. and claiming; '...so as a person slips deeper and deeper into mental unhealth'...' and '...one of the things that can happen is the associations in writing become increasingly distant, such that to read this kind of material, it is if the writer is jumping all over the place...'? That my friend is undeniable? Emmmmmm.

Indeed DREAMON. To be very candid with you, I've no idea what it is that you're trying to say to the readership herein? I cannot even follow your syntax, let alone what the general import is, of that particular message. You're trying so hard to convey to us all.

You then went on to say; '...When an individual becomes acutely unwell and descends into thought form disorder, what we get in writing is the so-called 'word salad'...'? Of course we do 'DREAMON'? That's precisely what we get, a 'word salad'? Just another version of good ol' Aussie gobbledygook!

Have a very good evening DREAMON.
Posted by o sung wu, Monday, 8 May 2017 9:34:14 PM
Find out more about this user Visit this user's webpage Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
[Deleted for abuse.]
Posted by DreamOn, Monday, 8 May 2017 10:45:55 PM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
[Deleted for abuse.]
Posted by DreamOn, Monday, 8 May 2017 10:59:41 PM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
Hi AJ Philips, Thank you so much for elaborating more on these.
Posted by rollyczar, Wednesday, 10 May 2017 12:01:53 AM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
the point is, how does taking an illegal drug give grounds to grant leave from facing the real penilty for such horrifit crimes.

Assuming this person was not 'force fed' her drugs, then there is no excuse for her taking same and ironicly, it would appear that her seven childrens only crime was to provide suficient welfare to afford the drugs in the first place.

Sorry folks, but the time has come for people to remove their heads from their asrses and take a good look around at what is going on in this place and where our taxes are being wasted.
Posted by rehctub, Wednesday, 10 May 2017 1:15:58 PM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
The simple answer to your question, rehctub, is that it doesn’t.

<<how does taking an illegal drug give grounds to grant leave from facing the real penilty for such horrifit crimes.>>

The mental illness was the grounds for finding this woman not competent to stand trial, not the fact that she had used drugs. The cause of her mental illness is no longer relevant because she is still incompetent to stand trial regardless.

I’ve already addressed this above.

Justice is about a lot more than simply satisfying the public’s lust for revenge. There are five different sentencing aims which need to be balanced. Retribution is only one of them.

If she WERE to stand trial, from what I gather, she would probably sit there in court wavering between inappropriate fits of giggling to bouts of extreme confusion and panic, and everything in between. She wouldn’t even know why she was there most of the time.

What kind of backwards and archaic society puts some like on trial? One led by a populist government, probably.
Posted by AJ Philips, Wednesday, 10 May 2017 2:52:22 PM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
AJ Philips;
I know/knew the people in question in this horrific affair.
I also know the idiocy of the judicial system which is permeated by the psychiatric
so called specialists on the government payroll.
I suggest you look up the role of the Taverstock Institute out of London for some
insight into the power these people wield in the socio/judicial system in the western world.
Why do you think there only a limited number of practicing psychiatrists when the remuneration is so lucrative.
Its because their trade is controlled by the Royal Collage of Psychiatry as an annex of the Tavistock Institute.
Read about Harry Bailey and the Deep Sleep killings.
Psychiatrists are the real "gremlins in the woods" in all matters dealing with criminals, crime, prisons and parole.
Posted by chrisgaff1000, Wednesday, 10 May 2017 6:54:42 PM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
AJ, the original news report stated that she was not of sound mind due to being effected by an illicid drug.

Thats good enough for me until someone can show otherwise.and as has been said in a round about way, professionals being employed by governments are usually selected from those who the real work rejected, hence the dramatic reduction in renumeration.
Posted by rehctub, Thursday, 11 May 2017 9:20:38 AM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
chrisgaff1000,

I’m not sure what to say to your claims other than they contradict what I’ve observed, which is closer to what I quoted of o sung wu.

With regards to your previous posts (which I somehow missed, sorry), this is not true:

<<"Intoxication is a complete defense to any crime" primarily because there is no deliberate intent to commit a crime.>>

Section 28 of the Queensland Criminal Code prevents an intoxicated accused relying on their intoxication as a defence. Sub-section 28(1) provides an exception where the accused did not knowingly consume the substance, but sub-s 28(2) eliminates intoxication as a defence when the substance was knowingly consumed. The only leeway a judge has in considering intoxication as a defence (which has been clarified and expanded on in case law) is provided in sub-s 28(3), but this is only applies in cases where there was specific intent. It does not absolve the accused of intent (See Crump v R and R v Box & Martin).

http://www.austlii.edu.au/au/legis/qld/consol_act/cc189994/s28.html

--

rehctub,

See above. What you’re claiming happened is not possible under Queensland law. I don’t know where you read that this woman was let off because she was intoxicated, but the article I linked to above contradicts that claim. Indeed, so does s 28 of the Queensland Criminal Code.

<<the original news report [is] good enough for me until someone can show otherwise.>>

Resisting news that you were wrong about something that you think is a bad thing in the first suggests your reasoning here is entirely motivated.

<<and as has been said in a round about way, professionals being employed by governments are usually selected from those who the real work rejected, hence the dramatic reduction in renumeration.>>

Said by whom? Conservative folk wanting to justify their conspiracy theory regarding a sinister class of ruling elites, I’ll bet. It’s mere paranoia. The forensic psychiatrists I’ve known of do what they do because they’re passionate about medicine and the law, not because they weren’t good enough to have their own practices.

You are making things up to suit your worldview.
Posted by AJ Philips, Thursday, 11 May 2017 10:37:44 AM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
  1. Pages:
  2. 1
  3. 2
  4. 3
  5. ...
  6. 5
  7. 6
  8. 7
  9. All

About Us :: Search :: Discuss :: Feedback :: Legals :: Privacy