Man who beheaded fellow bus passenger wants to live on his own

[MBates]

Originally Posted by Snuffleupagus

Nice spin at an attempt to answer my question, I'm guessing you're a lawyer or a social worker, those bad asses you weren't scared of was because it was in a controlled atmosphere where little could go wrong, how about trying to stay calm,cool and collect in there environment? I had to in my former life as a cop! out of the drug dealers, likely murderers, bikers and the "crazy's"(schizophrenics) the crazy's were the most feared,turn your back and get stabbed with a pen or hit in the back of the head. and oh do they lie! people think they are stupid but wow schizophrenics are great with lies and deceit.

And you're right Baker(Li) is not a dog, Dogs don't cut of heads with knives and chew on them to freak people out.

I would love to know if Li killed one of your family members would you be ok with this decision but I can tell you wouldn't be honest with the answer.

I'm done with this thread, It's now a waste of time, I have my opinion and it's clearly wrong according to the Canadian courts.

I suppose your policing background assisted you in your guess that I am a lawyer or social worker.

While I am tempted to respond with "oh, haha you are a cop, obviously you think the way you do" instead I will respond to what you are saying.

I am not engaging in the false analogy to a dog. They do not have human cognitive function, verbal or written communication ability, and never mind opening the can of worms that they are property and have no status in law under the Charter of Rights and Freedoms.

My answer to what if Baker killed one of my family? I assume I would be completely filled with hate and anger for a considerable length of time. If despair didn't get the better of me and I managed not to commit suicide, I don't know if I would ever be able to even remotely look at the issue rationally and objectively ever again. I would therefore be glad that in a society governed by the rule of law I would not get to make decisions regarding what should happen to him because I would likely make decisions in self interest and not what makes the most sense for society as a whole.

And I still hold out hope I would be able to get past my grief. I've seen it happen. I've had family members of murdered people speak to me with kindness and thank me for the job I have done...so no matter how outraged you want to be on their behalf, again thankfully they have their own world views.

That's honest. Accept that or don't.

You are not wrong that many of my interactions are in controlled environments, but lots are not. The 'crazies' as you refer to them are sadly often in and out of the criminal justice system. When I encounter them in the streets I often say hello and ask them how they are doing. Haven't been stabbed yet. Could it happen? Sure it could. But again over 400 deaths every year in car accidents in Alberta alone. I roll those dice virtually every single day as well.

[GGG]

Originally Posted by EldrickOnIce

Peculiar statement from Greyhound, made Friday:


http://bloggreyhound.com/news/feb-10-2017-statement/

As much as I favour monitoring of medication I find this type of behaviour by greyhound pretty disgusting and I hope they get sued for it.

[pylon]

Originally Posted by GGG

As much as I favour monitoring of medication I find this type of behaviour by greyhound pretty disgusting and I hope they get sued for it.

Why? Li's actions cost Greyhound millions of dollars in bad press, a lost bus, lawsuits from people on it, and trauma to their staff. There is a saying 'We reserve the right.' And as much as it bunches up people's panties, any business can outright decline to do business with anyone with or without reason if no contract to do so has been put in place.

Obviously citing a hateful reason can lead to a lawsuit, but the damages Li cost the company are still ongoing, and will be for decades. They have a very good reason and case to make sure he never is allowed on their buses again. If he did this again on one of their buses, it would probably destroy the brand. They have all the incentive in the world to assure he never steps foot on one of their buses again, and I believe any court would back them on it.

Even though Li acted in an uncontrollable state, it would be no different if I pulled up to a 7-11, accidentally pushed the gas pedal instead of the brake, plowed through the store and killed someone unintentionally. 7-11 has every right in the world to ban me from their stores. They owe me absolutely nothing, and can decline me as a customer for any reason they see fit as they operate on private property.

[GGG]

Originally Posted by pylon

Why? Li's actions cost Greyhound millions of dollars in bad press, a lost bus, lawsuits from people on it, and trauma to their staff. There is a saying 'We reserve the right.' And as much as it bunches up people's panties, any business can outright decline to do business with anyone with or without reason if no contract to do so has been put in place.

Obviously citing a hateful reason can lead to a lawsuit, but the damages Li cost the company are still ongoing, and will be for decades. They have a very good reason and case to make sure he never is allowed on their buses again. If he did this again on one of their buses, it would probably destroy the brand. They have all the incentive in the world to assure he never steps foot on one of their buses again, and I believe any court would back them on it.

Even though Li acted in an uncontrollable state, it would be no different if I pulled up to a 7-11, accidentally pushed the gas pedal instead of the brake, plowed through the store and killed someone unintentionally. 7-11 has every right in the world to ban me from their stores. They owe me absolutely nothing, and can decline me as a customer for any reason they see fit as they operate on private property.

They are banning him because he has a mental illness. You can't do that.

I don't think you could be banned from a 7-11 for accidenlty driving through it if you had a heart attack that caused your foot to hit the wrong pedal. You can't discriminate based on people's health conditions.

It's also not only the banning it's the implication that they need airport style security because he is such a threat that they need to have constant vigilance if he shows up again.

[PepsiFree]

Originally Posted by GGG

They are banning him because he has a mental illness. You can't do that.

I don't think you could be banned from a 7-11 for accidenlty driving through it if you had a heart attack that caused your foot to hit the wrong pedal. You can't discriminate based on people's health conditions.

It's also not only the banning it's the implication that they need airport style security because he is such a threat that they need to have constant vigilance if he shows up again.

Actually, they can ban him.

They can't ban someone because they have a mental illness, but they can ban someone who was violent or "unruly" on their buses, which is consistent and applicable here.

You can absolutely be banned despite having a mental illness. It's only a human rights complaint if he is banned specifically for his illness in no other context.

[pylon]

Originally Posted by GGG

They are banning him because he has a mental illness. You can't do that.

I don't think you could be banned from a 7-11 for accidenlty driving through it if you had a heart attack that caused your foot to hit the wrong pedal. You can't discriminate based on people's health conditions.

It's also not only the banning it's the implication that they need airport style security because he is such a threat that they need to have constant vigilance if he shows up again.

A business owner can decline to engage in business with someone for any reason they wish. Flat out saying 'It's because they are a certain color, religion, frame of mind....etc.' opens a whole new can of worms. But if you walk into Jims blender emporium and Jim flat out refuses to sell you a blender, he doesn't have to cite a reason. He reserves the right to engage in business with whomever he pleases. He pays the rent, the taxes, buys the inventory.... there is no law saying he has to sell it to you.

And to add. If the general public caught wind, greyhound was allowing this person to ride their buses. It would be damning for their business. Although there is this hug-fest with Li on CP, which has become a major left leaning site. The general consensus and perception is this that Li is a danger to society, and most people don't want him anywhere near him and their families. He's caused Greyhound enough damage. They should, and will not be forced to endure more losses because of this monster.

[Dion]

Chair of Manitoba Review Board talks

John Stefaniuk is the chair of the Manitoba Criminal Code Review Board and he sat on the panel that heard Baker's case. While he can't speak to the particular case, Stefaniuk said the threshold for the board is whether a person poses a significant threat to the safety of the public.

"This is a balancing of rights and interests, but the protection of the public is the paramount consideration," he said.

The panel is made up of three people including a psychiatrist and a lawyer with at least 10 years' experience. The board hears evidence from the accused patient's treatment team including psychiatrists, mental health workers, social workers, family members and sometimes the individuals themselves.

"We weigh all the material on their files, medical reports, psychiatric reports, psychologist reports, and all of that goes into making of the decision," he said

Stefaniuk said he recognizes there is concern about whether any individual who is granted an absolute discharge will continue to follow the recommendations, such as continuing to take their medication, but rates of recidivism are low.

"Rates of violent acts among review board patients is very low — around [the] five per cent mark — much, much less than the general criminal population," he said

http://www.cbc.ca/news/canada/manito...rose-1.3978761

[GGG]

5% rate of recidivism doesn't seem very low to be when the continuous monitoring would be such a minor loss of liberty.

[Dion]

Here are a few facts about schizophrenia:

What is it?

Experts say schizophrenia, which literally means separated from reality, is a blanket term given to a family of mental illnesses. Dr. David Bloom, chief of the psychotic disorders program at Montreal's Douglas Institute, likens the variety of schizophrenias to the various types of cancer that exist. Bloom says not all causes are known, but elevated dopamine levels in the brain are directly involved in most.

How common is it?

The Centre for Addiction and Mental Health says about one per cent of the population has the disease. Schizophrenia affects men and women equally, although symptoms tend to manifest themselves in men somewhat earlier — in their teens and 20s.

What are the key symptoms?

Symptoms tend to be consistent across the various types of schizophrenia, experts say. The Centre for Addiction and Mental Health says there are two categories of symptoms — positive and negative. People showing positive symptoms can experience delusions, hallucinations and disorganized thoughts. Negative symptoms include lack of motivation, loss of interest in the feelings of others and reduced physical activity.

Is there a cure?

Experts agree no cure has been found, but some say medical advances can help keep the condition under control and allow people to lead full lives. They stress, however, that timely treatment is important.

What are the available treatments?

"Three-quarters of the patients will do quite well on quite standard anti-psychotic medications," says Bloom, who adds most of those work by lowering or blocking dopamine in the brain. There are some schizophrenic patients who do not respond to such treatments because their dopamine levels are in check. Patients are also urged to tap into other treatments such as cognitive behaviour therapy and psycho-educational services. Bloom says forgoing psychological services is akin to undergoing a successful hip replacement but declining to follow up with physiotherapy.

Are there side-effects?

Bloom says anti-psychotic medication can have very serious side effects that deter people from continuing treatment. These vary by medication but can include feeling sedated, mentally sluggish or "dead inside." Physical symptoms also include tremors and muscle cramps, as well as sexual side effects.

Can patients stop their medication safely?

Not in most cases. Bloom compares schizophrenics to diabetics who are dependent on insulin for life. "For a schizophrenic-type illness, the chances of relapse are, not perhaps 100 per cent, but pretty close to 100 per cent." -

http://www.humboldtjournal.ca/schizo...ease-1.9804734

[pylon]

Dion. I get you want to educate us all and have sympathy for Li/Baker. It is possible to sympathize with his plight, and at the same time want him locked up. I don't deny he was acting on a force beyond his control. I don't deny he has remorse. But I don't care.

His body, his teeth and his hands still committed this act. And if denying him freedom seems cruel, so be it. I'm cruel.

At the expense of society looking cruel, and backwards, I'm ok in this case. The safety of the general public, the value of Greyhound as a company who employs thousands, and the sanctity and peace of mind of the hundreds of people he has victimized, and will continue to victimize to their grave, trumps any freedom he has earned. I don't care what the experts say, I want him locked away safely. And that's my opinion.

And I am dreading the day they set DeGrood free and the hug-in that arises here starts for him. I had the opportunity to meet the parents of a victim. And they have ZERO sympathy for his plight.

I don't deny mental illness needs to be studied and understood. But I don't believe these potential time bombs should be roaming the streets after they have proven what their minds and bodies are capable of during an episode.

[Red Potato Standing By]

So if he didn't have a mental illness and did his time and he was released you would be ok with it?

[pylon]

Originally Posted by Zethrynn

So if he didn't have a mental illness and did his time and he was released you would be ok with it?

He never did time. And if this was a mentally healthy individual, life would have likely been the sentence. However, this is where NCR is a thorn in my side. ANY human being capable of an act so blatantly evil and horrific, has to be mentally unfit in some way shape or form. No normal human being is capable of such a vile, disgusting, evil act, without some sort of mental illness. The courts seem to pick and choose who they deem should get the free pass. Why not Luka Magnotta? Why not that Military sicko wearing women's underwear. They were all mentally ill.

If it was some drug dealer caught up in a gang shooting, a wife that lost her mind on a mistress. A guy that killed someone in a bar fight.... yes, I am ok with their release once they serve their time. Those are crimes of passion, crimes of oppurnity, accidents.

All it would take is this guy saying F it, I don't need pills. And we could have another massacre without any provocation. To me it's like a vicious pit Bull that's been known to attack. It's ok as long as it has a muzzle and a leash. But let it loose at a dog park with no controls, and you cannot predict the carnage. And neither can the dog. It's an unnecessary risk to take, as nobody can guarantee he will comply with his treatment.

[OMG!WTF!]

Originally Posted by pylon

He never did time. And if this was a mentally healthy individual, life would have likely been the sentence. However, this is where NCR is a thorn in my side. ANY human being capable of an act so blatantly evil and horrific, has to be mentally unfit in some way shape or form. No normal human being is capable of such a vile, disgusting, evil act, without some sort of mental illness.

Yeah this is the thing a lot of people get wrong about mental illness. It's not all the same thing. There's a lot you don't understand. You don't need to understand any of it but you look like a dolt to anyone who does.

[Red Potato Standing By]

So if someone loses their mind and kills some one in a crime of passion you are ok with them being released and are sure they won't lose it again?(even though no one is monitoring them)

[Red Potato Standing By]

After serving their time of course

[pylon]

Originally Posted by OMG!WTF!

Yeah this is the thing a lot of people get wrong about mental illness. It's not all the same thing. There's a lot you don't understand. You don't need to understand any of it but you look like a dolt to anyone who does.

I fully realize they are not the same thing. Yes, Li's condition can take him over and make him commit acts beyond his control. Magnotta was simply a sociopath, but also claims to be a schizophrenic. Russell was likely a sociopath as well.

But to me it seems to be discriminatory to others with mental illnesses that drive them to commit crimes. An addicted gambler who robs a bank to support his family knows it's wrong, but his crime originates from a mental condition. Should he not get a free pass too?

To me the fact that Li can at a moments notice, saw the head off a bystander, and consume their flesh without notice, makes him a danger to society way more terrifying than someone with a mental illness who can at least comprehend right from wrong.

[pylon]

Originally Posted by Zethrynn

So if someone loses their mind and kills some one in a crime of passion you are ok with them being released and are sure they won't lose it again?(even though no one is monitoring them)

Originally Posted by Zethrynn

After serving their time of course

Yes. Because that is typically a one time life event, not likely to be replicated.

Li is a potential terminator level killing machine the second he stops taking his medication.

[GGG]

Originally Posted by pylon

Yes. Because that is typically a one time life event, not likely to be replicated.

Li is a potential terminator level killing machine the second he stops taking his medication.

Are you arguing the recidivism rate for those convicted of murder is higher than the recidivism rate of those who were NCRd?

This has been demonstrated to be false. The comparison is a foolish one to go down by Li is less likely to commit a violent crime then the average murderer that has been released.

[OMG!WTF!]

Originally Posted by pylon

But to me it seems to be discriminatory to others with mental illnesses that drive them to commit crimes. An addicted gambler who robs a bank to support his family knows it's wrong, but his crime originates from a mental condition. Should he not get a free pass too?.

And voila. You've answered your own question.

[pylon]

Originally Posted by OMG!WTF!

And voila. You've answered your own question.

The core condition is not their fault though. Nobody asks for a mental illness. And an argument can be made their actions are of a direct result of it. If Jim wasn't addicted to gambling, he would not have robbed a bank. If Jane wasn't a sex addict, she wouldn't have strangled her lover for leaving her. If Jerry wasn't an alcoholic, he wouldn't have killed that family in that accident.

Those people do not get leniency even though all of their actions are of a direct result of their mental illness. Saying Li had no control is semantics to me. Because in an age of open communication and so much knowledge, the second the Alien Lizard Demons start chanting for you to carve out the heart of a innocent bystander, there had to be some responsibility on the individual to seek help before it spirals out of control. Society as a whole knows this is not a normal condition, or chain of events. And there is without doubt in my mind the individual has enough lucid moments to question it. This isn't the 1800's. And you are not going to be burned at the stake. You will get help.

Let's not forget this guy functioned perfectly fine for many years, and to not question these voices and seek treatment, bears some responsibility on him in my eyes.