Defense: Shooting suspect was seeing psychiatrist

View Comments (24)

• Too many questions, not enough answers and it all comes on the heels of the UN Gun Ban Treaty. And yes, they want ban guns in the US.

  Questions:
  -More than one gas mask found at the scene of the crime?
  -TN license plate on the car of the 'perpetrator'
  -Multiple witnesses stated that a second individual purpously left an exit door open
  -'Perpetrator had $26,000 worth of weapons, ballistic armor and explosive devices
  -Ballistic armor is not only hard to obtain legally, you cannot obtain it illegally
  -Military grade gas grenades, again, impossible to obtain legally
  -A sophisticated array of explosive devices littered throughout 'perpetrator'
  apt

  Research MK Ultra. The guy is a patsy and this is a totally false flag staged event to destroy the 2nd Amendment. What's a false flag? You ever hear of Fast and Furious? Fuck the MSM and this globalist crime syndicate we all call the US Govt.

  Yeah, I said it!!!!

  F the bastards.

  • It does make one wonder in the context of Fast and Furious and how convenient some of the "facts" are regarding the prefabricated psych defense etc.

• Paranoid Schizophrenic: BS. This dispicable man and his cohorts have been planning and providing funding for this event for months. This includes planning for his defense. It was nothing less than a home grown terrorist attack which will be white washed if this line of defense is allowed to stand.

  Do not be distracted.

  • I can't remember who, so please I can't verify the credibility of the report, but he studied mental illness pretty extensively in his undergrad work. His graduate program looked at the biomedical causes of mental illness, the chemical imbalances, etc that are suspected. Maybe this is all a crock. Time will tell.

    • Neurological transmitters seem to be the problem. Psycho-pharmacology can be a highly effective treatment, but every person is different and there is no magic bullet. Rest assured there will be plenty of posts about "faking schizophrenia". That never happens when working with psychiatric/psychological professionals. Competent professionals know what to look for, and unless you are an Academy Award winning actor 24/7, it "ain't happening".

      • Agreed. But he could certainly carry it off for short periods and overall for a few days or maybe even a couple of weks. Still, I think it likely he DOES have a mental illness, if only the mental illness that makes you think it is ok to gun down60 people in a theatre! The media is throwing out a bunch of theories, but I'll wait to see what the shrinks who are actually examining/treating him have to say. I live about a 15 hour drive from there, and I have never been great at long distance diagnosis!

        • Thank you for passing up the Kool Aid. I think the magnitude of the tragedy makes people want even more to blame the obvious person responsible. There are many good reasons we should be thankful were are a nation who respects the Rule of Law and not simply follow the rules of men. Let's not return to the days where the likely suspect is immediately hanged at the scene, or anyone who didn't look or act like "us" was imprisoned. I will have no hesitation going after any "professional" who did not correctly discharge his or her duty under the law, especially if it were due to political correctness. Lets not forget Major Hassan, the "work place" violence guy. There is the true BS.

        • Amen to that! You have heard his trial has been postponed repeatedly because he won't shave, right? Last week (or so) a judge informed him that he would shave his beard or it would be shaved for him. Since he is technically still in the Armed Forces, he is required to follow their Uniform Dress Code. Full beards are not allowed, soo......

  • Wow. What's your favorite flavor?

    • Right: Like the taste of the BS you are swallowing? One used to be able to say that time will tell...not to sure of late. The comment from the police that they are interested in finding out what his movements and contacts were prior to the event appear to have been glossed over.

• There is certainly a good, compelling reason to honor patient confidentiality, but exceptions to that rule includes such subjects as child abuse, and planned criminal behavior. In Tarasoff the therapist told campus P.D., but not the potential victim or her parents, and of course she was murdered. The Doc and school were held responsible. Although not black letter law, the caselaw follows Tarasoff in every state I practiced law in. Money is little consolation for a lost loved one, but may cause some prophylactic effect for future cases. I predict the facts will show this could have been prevented but wasn't.

  • I yield to your superior legal knowledge sir. However, I am still uncomfortable with the notion that a psych might have a positive duty to report, for reasons already stated.

    Don't remember studying Tarasoff in school, but it's been a while , and have not had much substantive work in the field.

    Just looked it up on Wiki, and found this: "Justice Mosk wrote a partial dissent.... psychiatrists (should notify) the police, who were presumably in a better position to protect Tatiana than she would be to protect herself."

    Except we now also know that the police, contrary to what one might expect, have NO positive duty themselves to protect any individual -- something we've discussed around here a number of times in the context of 2nd Am rights. You've ended up with the psych having more of a duty to protect an innocent 3rd party than the cops!

    • IF the shrink can document a situation where the patient is a danger to himself or others, he can order a temporary committal to a psychiatric facility. At leas in my state, that's how it works. They can then keep them in the facility for a few days to a couple of weks, to try and regulate their medications, etc to get them out of that mindset. After that? Boom! Out on the street again, with a plan for outpatient follwo-up. Which may or may not be followed. You call the police, they are going to take them to a facility for admission.

      • I was thinking more along the lines of duty to warn and not involuntary commitment. After all, Cho at VT was committed and as you say, even though he was determined to be a danger to himself or others, was released with no after care plan and we all know the results.

        • That is the catch 22 about care for the mentally ill. Ever since some moron decided they could ALL care for them selves outside an institutionalized setting, this in and out revolving door has gotten a lot of use. And if a Physchitrist or Psychologist DID break confidentiality and report him the the police, the police will ask is he a danger to himself or others? If so, Lock him up.

• Shrinks are still bound by professional ethics of confidentiality. They may not be made to testify in court against a patient and to the best of my knowledge are constrained ethically (not legally) from acting on information they have been entrusted with under a doctor/patient relationship.

  It varies state to state of course, but here in Mass. even regular medical doctors don't have the same immunities as psychiatrists/analysts.

  Believe it or not, despite situations like this, I think it is right. Psychs of course are dealing with crazy people. How many patients do you imagine they hear talking about some violent fantasy like this, and how many do you think actually do anything? I they were permitted -or REQUIRED- to report every possible threat like this, it would end up as crying wolf to the police, the patients shutting up if they knew the doc was a fink, and then the doc would be able to do absolutely nothing in the way of help or prevention -- at least if you know your patient is potentially dangerous, you can treat him appropriately and hopefully keep him from acting out his impulses.

  I get the feeling this is going to go a bit against the grain around here (I know I sometimes do), but remember I'm a lawyer and just can't help some things -- it's just the way I am (LOL).

  I would ask you to think of this as something of the way we consider firearm freedom -- yes, sometimes bad things like this happen because of it, but the alternatives are much, much worse....

• Well, I hate it when I am prophetically correct (PC?) and stated on a earlier comment that I felt the evidence pointed to him probably being a paranoid schizophrenic and was being seen by university health services. The legal case on point is Tarasoff v. Regents of UC Berkley. This one is going to make the plaintiffs' lawyers a bundle of money. No one can predict future behavior, but this guy fits the classic case history of a paranoid schizophrenia, and probably could have been avoided but for some politically correct form of PC. Truly sad and probably disgraceful. We'll see.

  • Had the Doc received the diary he sent, he could have been confined due to posing an immediate danger to others (and himself as well, in theory.) As it was, if they had no real evidence of his plans and fantasies, no confinement would be allowed. Thanks all you PC folk who gave mentally ill rights to refuse treatment!

• "Dudes evil...death penalty.
  Gee we need more psychiatrist with your attitude. You sure you're not R. Lee Ermey? http://goo.gl/a3rxa

  • I love that guy.

• Than that, not then that.

  • What the heck happened to the post this was response to? I didn't actually get that lost in here, did I? It might get a little labyrinthine looking for a lost post now and again, but this one looks like a genuine orphaned type of comment.

    • He deleted it within the 30 minute window.

      • Must have been John. Than and then are interchangeable in what passes for a mind in his skull.