Man stabbed, then decapitated on grey hound bus

[sec304]

Update: "A Criminal Code Review Board is being asked to give Vince Li unsupervised passes to Winnipeg and allow him to live in a group home.'

https://ca.news.yahoo.com/review-boa...192803772.html

"Psychiatrist Dr. Steven Kremer told the review board in Winnipeg on Monday that Li, 46, has had no hallucinations in over a year, he takes his medication, and he has had "profound improvement" in his mental status."

I personally don't care is he's "all better" with his medication, he should not be unsupervised.

[Daradon]

On the fence about the group home thing, but definitely don't think he should be unsupervised.

Though I guess a group home would be kinda unsupervised at times?

[dissentowner]

nm

[Locke]

Theres a joke to be made here about how hes going to get to Winnipeg, but I'm going to keep my head on straight and let it slide this time.

[Bill Bumface]

Originally Posted by dissentowner

The system is broke. This guy should never be free, mentally not guilty be damned. Now that he is mentally sound on meds he should stand trial for murder. I understand about mental health but the bottom line is this guy murdered a young man and his family has to live with the fact there is zero justice for him.

Going on a lot of assumptions here, but lets say doctors are 100% certain he is mentally ok now and committed to his regimen of medication which will 100% prevent any future decapitation episodes.

What is the benefit of putting him in prison? Will the victims family feel better about their missing family member? Will they sleep easier at night? Luckily I have no first hand experience with this, but I kind of doubt it. I don't think there is any way to have "justice" for the family members. You put Vincent Li to death, you put him in prison for life, it doesn't bring back the victim. There are no pros to imprisoning him.

So if there is certainty he's not going to reoffend we save a bunch of money, we give a human a chance at some form of meaningful life, and maybe even bring a tax payer back into the system.

I just don't see, given my possibly wild assumptions, any positives of throwing the guy in jail for the purpose of "justice".

[Daradon]

Originally Posted by Locke

Theres a joke to be made here about how hes going to get to Winnipeg, but I'm going to keep my head on straight and let it slide this time.

Perhaps his first job when integrated into society will be at WEM?

[OMG!WTF!]

Originally Posted by dissentowner

The system is broke. This guy should never be free, mentally not guilty be damned. Now that he is mentally sound on meds he should stand trial for murder. I understand about mental health but the bottom line is this guy murdered a young man and his family has to live with the fact there is zero justice for him.

That makes absolutely no sense at all.

[polak]

Originally Posted by hulkrogan

Going on a lot of assumptions here, but lets say doctors are 100% certain he is mentally ok now and committed to his regimen of medication which will 100% prevent any future decapitation episodes.

What is the benefit of putting him in prison? Will the victims family feel better about their missing family member? Will they sleep easier at night? Luckily I have no first hand experience with this, but I kind of doubt it. I don't think there is any way to have "justice" for the family members. You put Vincent Li to death, you put him in prison for life, it doesn't bring back the victim. There are no pros to imprisoning him.

So if there is certainty he's not going to reoffend we save a bunch of money, we give a human a chance at some form of meaningful life, and maybe even bring a tax payer back into the system.

I just don't see, given my possibly wild assumptions, any positives of throwing the guy in jail for the purpose of "justice".

I don't know. To me, when it comes to MURDER, "justice" is quite a valid reason to keep someone locked up for the rest of their lives. He 100%, without doubt killed somebody on purpose and quite brutally and now there is a chance he will be free. That is not okay in my books regardless of sanity.

Plus, he's living in a group home and has to be heavily medicated for the rest of his life. It's not like society is missing out on much.

But then again, in situations like this, where there is zero doubt of who comitted the murder and why, I'm A-OK with the death penalty, so I'm biased. I just don't see how he deserves to be free in any way.

If I was the family of his victim I'd be devastated. How has justice been served? Their son/sibling/boyfriend/husband is gone, by virtue of public decapitation, and this guy gets to have any semblence of freedom? The system failed.

[undercoverbrother]

Originally Posted by dissentowner

The system is broke. This guy should never be free, mentally not guilty be damned. Now that he is mentally sound on meds he should stand trial for murder. I understand about mental health but the bottom line is this guy murdered a young man and his family has to live with the fact there is zero justice for him.

Originally Posted by hulkrogan

Going on a lot of assumptions here, but lets say doctors are 100% certain he is mentally ok now and committed to his regimen of medication which will 100% prevent any future decapitation episodes.

What is the benefit of putting him in prison? Will the victims family feel better about their missing family member? Will they sleep easier at night? Luckily I have no first hand experience with this, but I kind of doubt it. I don't think there is any way to have "justice" for the family members. You put Vincent Li to death, you put him in prison for life, it doesn't bring back the victim. There are no pros to imprisoning him.

So if there is certainty he's not going to reoffend we save a bunch of money, we give a human a chance at some form of meaningful life, and maybe even bring a tax payer back into the system.

I just don't see, given my possibly wild assumptions, any positives of throwing the guy in jail for the purpose of "justice".

I am torn on this story.

I can see and relate to both these posts.

Had he gone off his meds when this happened or was this a new episode for him.

My concerns isn't about him being out and on his meds....it is if he goes off his meds.

My buddy's wife has serious mental health issues. When she is on her meds you would never ever know about them. She is completely normal and presents no issues at all.

The trouble is after 6 months or so on her meds she thinks she doesn't need them (apparently this is part of her mental health issues). He has to have a discussion with her and once showed her a video of herself off the meds (no idea if this was a good idea, but it worked).

So my concern is, will he believe he is doing better and then not take his meds.

[Daradon]

Originally Posted by dissentowner

The system is broke. This guy should never be free, mentally not guilty be damned. Now that he is mentally sound on meds he should stand trial for murder. I understand about mental health but the bottom line is this guy murdered a young man and his family has to live with the fact there is zero justice for him.

While it doesn't seem fair, justice is not really the point. Is there justice when an earthquake swallows someone up? That's kinda the way you need to look at it (whether you agree or not). He was found not criminally responsible. That means he's not a criminal. So it shouldn't matter if he is well now. You don't go from being not guilty to guilty just because things are getting better for you. He didn't know what he was doing when he did it (say the experts and the ruling, and yes some people will want to argue that, but that's where we are right now). The incident falls under 'crappy things that happen sometimes that are nearly impossible to prevent'. Not murder, and not a case of justice.

Now yes, it's natural to feel that way, because it does involve another person's actions. But say you could prove without a shadow of a doubt it wasn't Li's fault and he was really a victim too (say a alien mind control ray in a sci-fi setting) how does putting him in jail equal justice for the family? For Li? For society?

The question here should be, 'does he pose further risk?' I'm no expert, and I've been saying listen to the doctors for most of this saga, but this feels WAY too early for me, if it should happen at all.

[Daradon]

Originally Posted by undercoverbrother

I am torn on this story.

I can see and relate to both these posts.

Had he gone off his meds when this happened or was this a new episode for him.

My concerns isn't about him being out and on his meds....it is if he goes off his meds.

My buddy's wife has serious mental health issues. When she is on her meds you would never ever know about them. She is completely normal and presents no issues at all.

The trouble is after 6 months or so on her meds she thinks she doesn't need them (apparently this is part of her mental health issues). He has to have a discussion with her and once showed her a video of herself off the meds (no idea if this was a good idea, but it worked).

So my concern is, will be believe he is doing better and then not take his meds.

Exactly! Was involved in a similar, probably less dramatic situation myself with someone I dated.

[Murph]

Originally Posted by hulkrogan

Going on a lot of assumptions here, but lets say doctors are 100% certain he is mentally ok now and committed to his regimen of medication which will 100% prevent any future decapitation episodes.

What is the benefit of putting him in prison? Will the victims family feel better about their missing family member? Will they sleep easier at night? Luckily I have no first hand experience with this, but I kind of doubt it. I don't think there is any way to have "justice" for the family members. You put Vincent Li to death, you put him in prison for life, it doesn't bring back the victim. There are no pros to imprisoning him.

So if there is certainty he's not going to reoffend we save a bunch of money, we give a human a chance at some form of meaningful life, and maybe even bring a tax payer back into the system.

I just don't see, given my possibly wild assumptions, any positives of throwing the guy in jail for the purpose of "justice".

There's nothing "possibly wild" about the assumption that a group of psychiatrists could be 100% certain he's better or going to stay on his meds.

I look at it the same way as I look at home insurance. It's very unlikely that your house is going to burn down, isn't it? But you pay for the insurance anyways. Same thing here. The price of incarcerating Vincent Li is a small price for society to pay to ensure he doesn't cut off someone else's head.

Further, until the science/medicine progresses to the point where we can be 100% certain he won't reoffend, guys in his situation should be kept away from the general population.

[Igottago]

I tend to think that once you've murdered someone, especially in such a gruesome manner, there is no real return to normalcy. The doctors can't be 100% certain of anything. Justice isn't just about prevention of future incidents, its also about punishment for crimes already committed.

Understanding the role that mental illness played here is great, but at the end of the day another's man life was brutally ended. Maybe its not a normal prison life sentence, but you can't just let Li go as a normal member of society now. There has to be some punitive measure for the action he committed.

[Daradon]

For all those who keep using the word murder, the point is that is was decided it wasn't a murder. Or, that he wasn't criminally responsible for Tim McLean's death. Like I said in a previous post, a better way to look at it based on the medical knowledge we have and evidence in the case is 'crappy things that happen and are nearly impossible to prevent', like so many other tragedies in the world.

Now you may have feelings against that ruling (which are human and normal) and you may want the system to change back to a more dated system of justice, but as we stand now, it's not considered a murder, so arguments using that logic and the need for justice aren't really sound.

[polak]

Originally Posted by Daradon

For all those who keep using the word murder, the point is that is was decided it wasn't a murder. Or, that he wasn't criminally responsible for Tim McLean's death. Like I said in a previous post, a better way to look at it based on the medical knowledge we have and evidence in the case is 'crappy things that happen and are nearly impossible to prevent', like so many other tragedies in the world.

Now you may have feelings against that ruling (which are human and normal) and you may want the system to change back to a more dated system of justice, but as we stand now, it's not considered a murder, so arguments using that logic and the need for justice aren't really sound.

So what do we do if he stops taking his meds or has another mental episode and hurts somebody else?

[Matata]

The 'rehabilitation' model (ie - Finland) of criminal justice is simply much better for our society as a whole then the 'revenge' model (ie - USA). The 'rehab' model is cheaper, reduces crime and gives criminals a far greater opportunity to reintegrate and be productive members of society. Taxpayer >>> Tax burden.

Even though the rehabilitation model provides little satisfaction in cases like this, I accept it as a necessary part of a system that values fixing people over punishing people.

[Daradon]

Originally Posted by polak

So what do we do if he stops taking his meds or has another mental episode and hurts somebody else?

As I already wrote in one post, and agreed with in another response, I don't support him being unsupervised at the moment.

I do believe there is still a public safety issue here.

However, he doesn't suddenly become guilty because his life is going better.

[undercoverbrother]

Originally Posted by polak

So what do we do if he stops taking his meds or has another mental episode and hurts somebody else?

Good question.

What if he continues to take his meds and never has an episode again?


Is there a way to ensure he takes his meds forever.....I don't know.

I do know that this isnt' black and white.

[polak]

Originally Posted by Matata

Even though the rehabilitation model provides little satisfaction in cases like this, I accept it as a necessary part of a system that values fixing people over punishing people.

So you don't think people who committed serious, violent crimes deserve punishment? As long as we're fairly confident they won't reoffend, we should let them go?

Screw. That.

[undercoverbrother]

Originally Posted by polak

So you don't think people who committed serious, violent crimes deserve punishment? As long as we're fairly confident they won't reoffend, we should let them go?

Screw. That.

Punishment will only create more of the same actions that landed the person in jail.


To be clear, in this matter we are dealing with an individual that didn't knowingly commited a crime.