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

[Nage Waza]

Originally Posted by OMG!WTF!

Mental illnesses aren't all the same. Sooooo....there ya go.

Is that your final answer?

[OMG!WTF!]

Originally Posted by Nage Waza

Is that your final answer?

You're suggesting addiction issues and schizophrenia are the same thing. Yeah. We're totally done here.

[afc wimbledon]

Originally Posted by Nage Waza

I know I have said it earlier in this thread, but don't most, or a significant portion of people in jail have mental health issues? Substance abuse would probably describe the other large portion of inmates.

It certainly seems odd to me that if this guy is allowed out of jail as long as he is on his meds, then shouldn't the rest of the people in jail have something similar offered? Why have we gone so far in this case?

You shoplift? Well here is some money. You assaulted someone? Here is some medication. You were on drugs? Well how about rehab or more drugs. Drunk driving but you are an alcoholic? There are absolutely mitigating circumstances with all of the situations.

I still don't see how we made the leap to what is happening with this case.

I worked with a kid that did two and half years in Colony Farm (a contained psyche unit near Vancouver) for pushing a cop, no harm done. just a big slow kid with profound cognative issues (maybe FASD) who got mad at being told he couldn't wait outside the rec center, his lawyer argued he was not competent for a charge that would have got him probation at most if he was 'normal'. Most psyche orders last way longer than the equivalent criminal sentence would for the same action.

Whether you are seen as mentally ill or not by the criminal justice system is pretty much a crap shoot if you're homeless, native addicted etc, most legal aid lawyers will plead you to the lowest sentence they can get, unless you are barking at the moon they don't have the time or facilities to argue you need assessing.

[Snuffleupagus]

Originally Posted by Nage Waza

I know I have said it earlier in this thread, but don't most, or a significant portion of people in jail have mental health issues? Substance abuse would probably describe the other large portion of inmates.

It certainly seems odd to me that if this guy is allowed out of jail as long as he is on his meds, then shouldn't the rest of the people in jail have something similar offered? Why have we gone so far in this case?

You shoplift? Well here is some money. You assaulted someone? Here is some medication. You were on drugs? Well how about rehab or more drugs. Drunk driving but you are an alcoholic? There are absolutely mitigating circumstances with all of the situations.

I still don't see how we made the leap to what is happening with this case.

bleeding heart syndrome? with a good lawyer and the help of a doctor you can commit murder in the most evil of way and use a mental health issue as an excuse, apparently half the population will feel sorry for you and support you to get better.

terrible, the victims family must be going threw hell with this news

[Puddy27]

Originally Posted by rubecube

Yeah, I didn't want to straight up call that post garbage but there's a boatload of misinformation in there.

We'll you and the other dawg sound like the experts so please tell us your takes Doctors. I'm sure you guys work with this stuff everyday too, correct?

[EldrickOnIce]

I absolutely understand anything like this is dealt with on a case by case basis, but is there a precedence in Canada for unconditional release under 'similar' circumstances?
What I would really like was transparency in this. Maybe there is, and I haven't seen it. I'd like to know the specifics of of his treatment/monitoring plan over the last few years. The unknown is always the most disconcerting. I understand we have no real choice but to trust the trained professionals, but more information to the general public would be a really good thing.

[OMG!WTF!]

Originally Posted by Snuffleupagus

bleeding heart syndrome? with a good lawyer and the help of a doctor you can commit murder in the most evil of way and use a mental health issue as an excuse, apparently half the population will feel sorry for you and support you to get better.

terrible, the victims family must be going threw hell with this news

You have literally no idea what you're talking about.

Originally Posted by Puddy27

We'll you and the other dawg sound like the experts so please tell us your takes Doctors. I'm sure you guys work with this stuff everyday too, correct?

Are you a doctor? Or just some guy handing out meds?

[GGG]

Originally Posted by DJones

You'd throw away your life to kill a guy having a mental breakdown?

Seems stupid.

Unconditional release is a bit much but if hes cleared by doctors I don't have a problem with it. Guys in these situations have a near zero failure rate for doing anything criminal again.

Here is from the Brentwood stabbing thread

Originally Posted by Makarov

An interesting study released this year found a serious violent offence rescidivism rate of just 0.6% for persons found to be NCR and then eventually discharged.

Source: http://ontario.cmha.ca/news/landmark.../#.V0g47tSs-rU

So, there is certainly some risk but much less risk than I think most people presume.

Originally Posted by GGG

No, if you read the study only 4/1800 murdered again <.2% over a 5yr period. It does not state of any what kind of monitoring these people were under or state what the initial offense was. So lots of variables in there

http://publications.cpa-apc.org/media.php?mid=1862

Canada has a murder rate of 1.5 / 100k. So over a five year period we'd expect 9/100k. Or about 1/10k compared with a rate from the study of about 20/10k.

So on balance people who are NCRd at trial have a murder rate about 20 times the national average. However still missing is a comparison between NCR individuals and the average mentally ill person. And NCR recidivism rates on people being monitored for medication compliance.

So 20 times the murder rate (I said twice earlier in this thread but had misremembered). Again we likely have other population sub groups with a murder rate 20 times the national average.

[FlamesAddiction]

I have no reason to doubt that Li's intentions and remorse are sincere, but if someone is capable of falling that far out of reality once due to their illness, it seems to me like you need to take precautions with that individual.

Maybe i missed it somewhere, but would he still need to have regular visits or check-ins with a psychologist?

[GGG]

Originally Posted by FlamesAddiction

I have no reason to doubt that Li's intentions and remorse are sincere, but if someone is capable of falling that far out of reality once due to their illness, it seems to me like you need to take precautions with that individual.

Maybe i missed it somewhere, but would he still need to have regular visits or check-ins with a psychologist?

He currently has to under his release and be drug tested for compliance.

If granted an absolute discharge he would not

[CaptainCrunch]

Originally Posted by Puddy27

For some of you in here stating that things will be fine if he just takes his medications....well, it's not that simple. I administer these medications daily to people with schizophrenia/bipolar/schizo-affective disorder and sorry to burst the bubble but most of those medications are a joke. They will turn a lot of people into zombies so they lack motivation to even take care of their own hygiene and they'll give you so may side affects that people would be too sedated to care about much of anything.

People don't realize those medications basically just mask the real problems which is usually trauma of some sort and most of it came when people were children. People hear schizophrenia these days and think of some psychotic monster but all schizophrenia really means broken down in basic terms is "a part of your brain isn't functioning like it should be". There are negative symptoms, positive symptoms and many factors determine people's recovery such as family support, diet, exercise, finances spirituality etc.

So I didn't add much to the actual topic of the thread but I am one of the people who are everywhere in your community helping the sickest of the sick and I just had to clarify that it takes a lot more support than Big Pharma's huge cash cow of sedating cocktails.

Good luck to all of the people involved in this unfortunate incident. Hopefully they are finding more peace with each passing day.

Tom Cruise is a member of CalgaryPuck.

[Oling_Roachinen]

Originally Posted by Nage Waza

I know I have said it earlier in this thread, but don't most, or a significant portion of people in jail have mental health issues? Substance abuse would probably describe the other large portion of inmates.

It certainly seems odd to me that if this guy is allowed out of jail as long as he is on his meds, then shouldn't the rest of the people in jail have something similar offered? Why have we gone so far in this case?

You shoplift? Well here is some money. You assaulted someone? Here is some medication. You were on drugs? Well how about rehab or more drugs. Drunk driving but you are an alcoholic? There are absolutely mitigating circumstances with all of the situations.

I still don't see how we made the leap to what is happening with this case.

Well for one, we can start with the concept of not criminally responsible. Vince Li wasn't found guilty. He was never in prison. So this is a trite slippery slope argument.

[Oling_Roachinen]

Originally Posted by EldrickOnIce

What I would really like was transparency in this. Maybe there is, and I haven't seen it. I'd like to know the specifics of of his treatment/monitoring plan over the last few years.

Ummmm, seriously?

From the article in the very first post:

Baker was originally kept in a secure wing at the Selkirk Mental Health Centre, but the board has granted him increasing freedoms starting with supervised walks on the hospital grounds and eventually escorted trips to nearby communities.

He won the right to live in a group home last year

His medical team is now asking the review board to let Baker live on his own, albeit with several conditions that would include daily monitoring to ensure he continues to take his anti-psychotic medication.

He was granted the request last year, and is now requesting an absolute discharge. We've been updated on him yearly. I'm not really sure what more you could want for transparency outside of them personally coming to ask you for your opinion each year...

[greyshep]

Originally Posted by DJones

Guys in these situations have a near zero failure rate for doing anything criminal again.

Isnt that kinda like saying we should bring back the death penalty because the instances of killing an innocent man are near zero??

[Oling_Roachinen]

Originally Posted by greyshep

Isnt that kinda like saying we should bring back the death penalty because the instances of killing an innocent man are near zero??

Yes, releasing a person who was found not criminally responsible, and despite that has shown absolute remorse for his deeds that he had no control over, who experts have deemed a low threat is exactly like the death penalty.

[greyshep]

Originally Posted by Oling_Roachinen

Yes, releasing a person who was found not criminally responsible, and despite that has shown absolute remorse for his deeds that he had no control over, who experts have deemed a low threat is exactly like the death penalty.

So are you suggesting that because he was found not criminally responsible that means he didnt actually saw a guys head off when completely unprovoked?

The decision of the court is irrelevant to the fact that there is zero doubt that he committed this act.

[OMG!WTF!]

Originally Posted by greyshep

So are you suggesting that because he was found not criminally responsible that means he didnt actually saw a guys head off when completely unprovoked?

The decision of the court is irrelevant to the fact that there is zero doubt that he committed this act.

There's also zero doubt he holds no responsibility for the action. It's hard too get that but it's a fact.

[Oling_Roachinen]

Originally Posted by greyshep

So are you suggesting that because he was found not criminally responsible that means he didnt actually saw a guys head off when completely unprovoked?

No, I'm suggesting that because he was found not criminally responsible he was deemed not criminally responsible.

Originally Posted by greyshep

The decision of the court is irrelevant to the fact that there is zero doubt that he committed this act.

Which has what to do with the death penalty exactly?

Like what's your argument here. Someone posts that a person like this, who experts (you know the guys with education and experience dealing with this) have evaluated as a low threat to re-offend, actually has a low threat to re-offend. And your post was "THAT'S LIKE DEATH PENALTY" what?

How is giving an innocent man, who is not a threat to society according to experts, the possibility a chance of a normal life (or at least the most normal you could have for a person in his situation), like the death penalty? It's almost like those are complete polar opposites.

[greyshep]

Originally Posted by Oling_Roachinen

No, I'm suggesting that because he was found not criminally responsible he was deemed not criminally responsible.


Which has what to do with the death penalty exactly?

Like what's your argument here. Someone posts that a person like this, who experts (you know the guys with education and experience dealing with this) have evaluated as a low threat to re-offend, actually has a low threat to re-offend. And your post was "THAT'S LIKE DEATH PENALTY" what?

How is giving an innocent man, who is not a threat to society according to experts, the possibility a chance of a normal life (or at least the most normal you could have for a person in his situation), like the death penalty? It's almost like those are complete polar opposites.

I suppose my comparison to the "near zero" portion of things was completely missed/ignored by you. If you cant understand that, I guess we shouldnt bother proceeding further.

[Oling_Roachinen]

Originally Posted by greyshep

I suppose my comparison to the "near zero" portion of things was completely missed/ignored by you. If you cant understand that, I guess we shouldnt bother proceeding further.

How is giving an innocent person the possibility to rebuild his life the same as bringing back the death penalty? Most rational people would see these as polar opposite of a society. One is about punishing, pure and simple, and the other is rehabilitating. One is about taking the life of a person, the other is about trying to give it back.

Explain it because, and I don't mean to be rude, but that has to be one of the most stupid leaps in logic I have ever heard.