<p>The guy is a psychiatrist, he knows what insanity is. Wouldn’t it be easy for him to make himself look insane, and in doing so get out of the death penalty (or prison entirely)?</p>
<p>Sounds like the stuff of pulp novels. I believe it’s far from easy to pretend to be crazy, and even harder to establish a pattern of insane behavior for years leading up to the crime. And the details coming out now suggest that this guy didn’t just snap; he seems to have exhibited symptoms of psychosis for years beforehand (if NPR’s Morning Edition is to be believed).</p>
<p>You don’t have to establish a pattern of psychosis or insanity for years beforehand. You just have to show that at the time the crime was committed, the perpetrator did not understand that his actions were legally wrong. It’s a tough defense to win, but a few have claimed temporary insanity and gotten off. The laws are different from state to state, but it’s not an easy defense to win.</p>
<p>In this case, I’m sure they will focus on the computer trail i.e. terrorist leanings and that will pretty much negate a temporary insanity defense. Of course, I’m not a lawyer, so who knows. Also, he will be tried in military court, and I don’t know what the standards are for an insanity defense.</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>Right. What I meant was that this guy does seem to have a history of mental illness, which is almost certainly not faked, and so, if he uses the insanity defense, he’s probably not faking. I don’t think I stated that clearly the first time.</p>
<p>They are charging him in a military court for premediated murders. So the death penalty will be an option.</p>
<p>What evidence was there of mental illness?
I haven’t heard of anything like that about him, just extreme views on political and religious subjects.</p>
<p>The evidence is pretty damning, and the monitoring of his communications with other extremists will almost certainly be used.</p>
<p>There was a long story on NPR this morning about how many of his psychiatrist colleagues long suspected he was mentally ill but it was ignored by brass because “it’s too hard to get rid of military doctors” so they just passed him along from place to place until he finally was sent to Ft. Hood and, well, you know the rest of the story.</p>
<p>If this is true (and I think it is) it makes the events at Ft. Hood criminal . . . committed by Army brass. Doubly sad.</p>
<p>An insanity defense requires way more than mental illness. They have to prove that they did not understand that their actions were legally wrong. That’s how it goes in Texas anyway, though again, I don’t know the standard in military court.</p>
<p>Some of you may remember the Texas Mom who drowned all five of her kids in her bathtub. She was clearly psychotic, not just mentally ill, and her insanity defense was rejected. She ultimately won a new trial and was acquitted with her insanity defense. That case just proved how really difficult these insanity defenses are to win.</p>
<p>Texas is notorious for the difficulty of mounting an insanity defense. That is one reason that I personally oppose the death penalty - states are too varied in their insanity defense laws. I am not sure how the military treats this line of defense.</p>
<p>Having had a sibling with adult-onset psychosis, I am very aware that people with this problem can move back and forth between lucid and hallucinatory states very quickly (and in fact, can be in both states at the same time, just depending on the question asked or external stimulus). It will be interesting to see the evidence presented here… communications with jihadists doesn’t necessarily mean that he was not mentally ill. But mental illness also does not necessarily mean he could not distinguish right from wrong, or reality from hallucinations, when he committed these acts.</p>
<p>I’m having a hard time with the proposition of this thread. Keep in mind that Nidal will endure a court martial, which is very different from U.S. civil authority justice. I sincerely doubt that he “will get off,” as he violated more than Army code in committing his heinous act; not the least of which was murder, obviously.</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>True. In Texas, even when a mentally disturbed person uses the insanity defense and attempts to establish that the defendant, within the haze of their mental illness, truly believed what he/she did was right at the time, if there were ANY attempts to cover up their behavior, lie to police, show any kind of premeditation that included getaway attempts or disposing of evidence, etc., the prosecutors are all over that as proof that the defendent knew his actions would bring him trouble from legal authorities. In other words, they knew their actions were legally wrong. Insanity is just a really hard defense to sell to juries under those conditions.</p>
<p>Agreed that military court is different, and so far no one on this thread seems to know much about presenting an insanity defense in military court. If that is even what Nidal does, and obviously that is not known yet. It would be good to hear from someone who does know about the rules in military court for the use of the insanity defense (Bullet, you out there?).</p>
<p>The concept of “get off” isn’t what I would call it when someone is successful in presenting an insanity defense. Rarely (pretty much never) would that person walk free in any court, civilian or military. Look at John Hinkley, who is still in a mental institution 29 years after his offense.</p>
<p>Nrdsb4, agreed that this is how Texas treats it. I would not say that I agree with it, knowing the byzantine “logic” that my sibling exhibited with his mental illness. It was not mutually exclusive for him to think he needed to take violent action to defend himself from a perceived threat, while knowing that he could end up in trouble for doing so (his tortured logic just told him that the authorities were “in on” the plots against him). Obviously Nidal’s case may be very different, and insanity may not be a valid defense.</p>
<p>“Rarely (pretty much never) would that person walk free in any court, civilian or military.”</p>
<p>That’s right. And it’s not always clear that a locked public mental hospital is a more pleasant environment than prison.</p>
<p>I think the chance this guy gets the death penalty is about 90%.</p>
<p>^Perhaps, but the last military execution was 1961 I believe.</p>
<p>In a court martial, he will have a jury of his peers. Officers will sit on the panel and conviction requires only a majority. I cannot speak for how insanity is handled in military court.</p>
<p>
And what did that guy do? Treason?</p>
<p>Pvt. John A. Bennett of Virginia, hanged in April 1961 after being convicted of rape and attempted murder.</p>
<p>I do not care too much what will happen to him. I care about how many others are hiding behind political correctness shield and ready to kill more americans at first opportunity that they will have. Apparently, it is not even a point that they are hidden, they are not really, their cases are known and being monitored and all these activities are waste of money and time, because nobody is allowed to point the finger. People have given up for fear of their jobs. So more and more americans will be killed in a name of political correctness, which comes all the way from White House. This what scare me the most, not what will happen to the one who will be prevented from killling again one way or another.</p>
<p>I’ve talked to a retired US Army officer, on old-school and wise type of fellow, who incidentally was raised in Texas and whose two sons are both active officers, one serving in Iraq in a quite dangerous area. When I asked him whether he had read or seen conservative commentators’ opinions that ‘political correctness has run amok’ in the military, he laughed out loud. Essentially his response was that anyone who believes that doesn’t know a thing about the army.</p>