On a side note, US judges and juries are still willing to...

[minionofmidas]

...murder the patently stark barking insane.

*cough* now that I got the political posturing out of the way...

Story
Stats

Can't help but feel awed by a guy who tears out his own eyes and eats them.

[Franzl]

oh God.

[Holmes]

Gosh, ew. That's all I can say.

[Queen Mum Inks.LWC]

HP.  He's trying to get out of his death sentence.  And drug and alcohol abuse are his own fault - if you abuse drugs/alcohol, you should still be held responsible for your actions.

[minionofmidas]

HP.  He's trying to get out of his death sentence.

What makes you think so?

[Queen Mum Inks.LWC]

HP.  He's trying to get out of his death sentence.

What makes you think so?

By trying to make it look like he was too insane, so he should have been given a verdict of not guilty on reason of insanity.

[Alcon]

HP.  He's trying to get out of his death sentence.

What makes you think so?

By trying to make it look like he was too insane, so he should have been given a verdict of not guilty on reason of insanity.

He's already been convicted and sentenced.  And don't you think there should be a psychiatric evaluation, instead of just presuming he's getting out of a conviction?  By any other logic logic, no one should ever be found not guilty by insanity because they must be faking it.

[minionofmidas]

While you didn't even attempt to answer the question (which wasn't "how could doing this possibly help him if that was his goal". I could figure that one out by myself, thank you very much Note that not only has he been convicted already, but he's likely years away from any actual execution date.) it doesn't really matter as I think I placed the question somewhat wrong anyways.


So here's some further questions for you: "What does wanting to get off death row have to do with sanity?" Seems to me to be a pretty unrelated statement.

"What does wanting to get off death row have to do with being a Horrible Person?" Seems, once again, to be a pretty unrelated statement. Do you want to go on living? If so, does that make you a Horrible Person?

"What does it tell us about a man if (assuming just for argument's sake here) his best idea for getting off death row is tearing his only eye out and (apparently) eating it? What does it tell us about a man if he's actually capable of doing this - twice?"

And last not least...

"Did he also try to commit suicide and then turn himself in to authorities in order to plead insanity and escape death row?"

[minionofmidas]

Here I had originally wanted to not make this a thread about the Death Penalty, but whatev. I can't resist.

My issue here - the part of this story that gets my blood boiling - is not that people with mental health issues may still be sentenced. Very few murderers (very few criminals. Indeed, very few people. But an even smaller share of murderers) are entirely "sane". It's the whole disgusting Catch-22-ish charade (and the hypocrisy) of first, passing laws to make the quite insane (incompetent) ineligible for the Death Penalty, then, trying to nonetheless obtain as many death sentences as juries will allow, and then, thirdly, denying insane murderers like this cat any form of treatment in prison because, in order to be eligible for the Death Penalty, a judge has officially deemed him "sane".
You'd think there wouldn't be any problem - any logistical problem, any logical problem - to storing the man in the closed ward of a psychiatric hospital until the rest of his natural life and/or his execution date, if you must have the Death Penalty. (In the Middle Ages, they'd have recognized this guy to be "possessed" by a "demon", then probably executed him anyways.) The only reason this wasn't done and he was put into a "normal" prison for "normal" people (if he had a "rational" premise in eating his eye out, it was probably to get into psychiatric treatment and away from his current co-inmates, not to escape execution) is basically to save the judge, jury, and prosecutor's face - not forcing them to admit they decided to condemn an insane man.

[Sam Spade]

There needs to be a correction here:

It's *Texas* judges and *Texas* juries, not US judges and juries.  Welcome to my home state.

Of course, naturally I feel that any person who's going to gauge his eye out, regardless of rationale or lack thereof, is a good candidate for quick execution, as he clearly serves no value in society and is, quite frankly, a danger to anyone who interacts with him.

As a compromise, however, I would be willing to lock him up with Bernie Madoff for life.

[Ban my account ffs!]

Here I had originally wanted to not make this a thread about the Death Penalty, but whatev. I can't resist.

My issue here - the part of this story that gets my blood boiling - is not that people with mental health issues may still be sentenced. Very few murderers (very few criminals. Indeed, very few people. But an even smaller share of murderers) are entirely "sane". It's the whole disgusting Catch-22-ish charade (and the hypocrisy) of first, passing laws to make the quite insane (incompetent) ineligible for the Death Penalty, then, trying to nonetheless obtain as many death sentences as juries will allow, and then, thirdly, denying insane murderers like this cat any form of treatment in prison because, in order to be eligible for the Death Penalty, a judge has officially deemed him "sane".
You'd think there wouldn't be any problem - any logistical problem, any logical problem - to storing the man in the closed ward of a psychiatric hospital until the rest of his natural life and/or his execution date, if you must have the Death Penalty. (In the Middle Ages, they'd have recognized this guy to be "possessed" by a "demon", then probably executed him anyways.) The only reason this wasn't done and he was put into a "normal" prison for "normal" people (if he had a "rational" premise in eating his eye out, it was probably to get into psychiatric treatment and away from his current co-inmates, not to escape execution) is basically to save the judge, jury, and prosecutor's face - not forcing them to admit they decided to condemn an insane man.

Well said.

And I must say:  I am from Minnesota, which has banned the death penalty since 1911.

[minionofmidas]

There needs to be a correction here:

It's *Texas* judges and *Texas* juries, not US judges and juries.

I thought of making the title "Texas", but it's not as if Oklahoma (where this guy was incidentally born) was any different. Anyways sentencing rates in Texas have actually declined by a surprising amount over the past five years.

You must be logged in to read this quote.

Yeah, as I think I said... I can perfectly see where you're coming from with that position.