PhillipBlunt Posted February 9, 2017 Share Posted February 9, 2017 16 hours ago, gurn said: I've given a bit of thought and I'm thinking my original analogy was actually pretty close, Vince was acting under orders from his God, while the soldiers were acting under the orders of their superiors or government. Fair enough. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
kingofsurrey Posted February 9, 2017 Share Posted February 9, 2017 Can't a person feel sorry for both the mentally deranged criminal and the victim ? D Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ghostsof1915 Posted February 9, 2017 Share Posted February 9, 2017 Boris, I've got special, when can you work him in? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
smokes Posted February 9, 2017 Share Posted February 9, 2017 11 hours ago, Down by the River said: To me, society benefits when intelligent and hardworking people are able to succeed. Ensuring these people have outlets for their success seems important to me. I agree with you on this wholeheartedly but that's not how things work sometimes, many people are given the short end of the stick in life and it's up to them on how to fix it and work with society. One can not be born poor and use that as an excuse to give up or turn to a life of crime. Just like someone with mental health issues should not use that as an excuse to kill or hurt others in society especially when there are meds that they can take to fix whatever problem they might have. I am sure that the majority of people with mental heath issues will not just get up and kill someone, this is the minority, the majority of people with mental health issues are invisible because they are able to overcome thier disadvantages and blend into society and be an important contributer. So letting someone off easy for murder because they have issues is not acceptable to me. If the doctors say that this man is mentally capable enough to be let into society, doesn't it mean that he should have been capable enough to be tried as a capable adult? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
smokes Posted February 9, 2017 Share Posted February 9, 2017 7 hours ago, gurn said: I've given a bit of thought and I'm thinking my original analogy was actually pretty close, Vince was acting under orders from his God, while the soldiers were acting under the orders of their superiors or government. Poligamists are under the impression that thier god says it's OK to have more than on wife, doesn't mean it's ok. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Master 112 Posted February 9, 2017 Share Posted February 9, 2017 14 minutes ago, smokes said: I agree with you on this wholeheartedly but that's not how things work sometimes, many people are given the short end of the stick in life and it's up to them on how to fix it and work with society. One can not be born poor and use that as an excuse to give up or turn to a life of crime. Just like someone with mental health issues should not use that as an excuse to kill or hurt others in society especially when there are meds that they can take to fix whatever problem they might have. I am sure that the majority of people with mental heath issues will not just get up and kill someone, this is the minority, the majority of people with mental health issues are invisible because they are able to overcome thier disadvantages and blend into society and be an important contributer. So letting someone off easy for murder because they have issues is not acceptable to me. If the doctors say that this man is mentally capable enough to be let into society, doesn't it mean that he should have been capable enough to be tried as a capable adult? Do you know what insight is in psychiatry? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
smokes Posted February 9, 2017 Share Posted February 9, 2017 5 hours ago, One one two said: Do you know what insight is in psychiatry? I really don't care, if it's treatable then treat it, if it isn't and the patient is a danger to society then lock em up. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Toews Posted February 9, 2017 Share Posted February 9, 2017 6 hours ago, smokes said: Poligamists are under the impression that thier god says it's OK to have more than on wife, doesn't mean it's ok. What's wrong with having multiple wives? Those that have them seem to think it is a fulfilling experience. Besides it's like you said, some people are intelligent, some are rich, some are blessed with great health. Some have multiple wives. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
smokes Posted February 9, 2017 Share Posted February 9, 2017 42 minutes ago, Toews said: What's wrong with having multiple wives? Those that have them seem to think it is a fulfilling experience. Besides it's like you said, some people are intelligent, some are rich, some are blessed with great health. Some have multiple wives. If you can get away with multiple wives in North America without the law on your back...more power to you. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
PhillipBlunt Posted February 9, 2017 Share Posted February 9, 2017 1 hour ago, Toews said: What's wrong with having multiple wives? Those that have them seem to think it is a fulfilling experience. Besides it's like you said, some people are intelligent, some are rich, some are blessed with great health. Some have multiple wives. That's how they put it? I would think it would be something more along the lines of.....beautifully dazed, constantly cross-eyed, with an eternal smile on your face. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
tbone909 Posted February 10, 2017 Share Posted February 10, 2017 Breaking Wow ...they freed him !! https://ca.yahoo.com/news/cp-newsalert-freedom-granted-man-221251763.html WINNIPEG — A schizophrenic man who was found not criminally responsible for beheading and cannibalizing a fellow passenger on a Greyhound bus was granted an absolute discharge Friday. That means he will no longer be subject to any conditions or monitoring to ensure he takes his medication. Manitoba's Criminal Code Review Board granted a request from Will Baker's lawyer to give Baker his full freedom, nine years after the brutal stabbing that horrified passengers. The board "is of the opinion that the weight of evidence does not substantiate that Mr. Baker poses a significant threat to the safety of the public," the written decision read in part. Baker, formerly known as Vince Li, was initially kept in a secure wing of a psychiatric hospital. He was granted more freedom and privileges every year at his review board hearings, starting with escorted walks on the hospital grounds. His doctors described him as a model patient who had not been treated for schizophrenia at the time of his attack. After his arrest and placement at the hospital, he responded well to medication and understood that he must continue to take it to keep his illness at bay, they said. Baker started living on his own in a Winnipeg apartment last November but was still subject to rules and nightly monitoring to ensure he took his medication. His lawyer has asked the review board Monday to strip away the remaining conditions and give Baker complete freedom. The victim's mother, Carol de Delley, has been outspoken against granting Baker freedom, arguing there would be no way to ensure he continued to take his medication. She declined comment Friday in a Facebook post. "I have no words," she wrote. Conservative member of Parliament James Bezan has also criticized Baker's release. He said earlier in the week it would be an insult to de Delley and McLean's other relatives. Baker's defenders include Chris Summerville, executive director of the Manitoba Schizophrenia Society, who has met and worked with him over the years. "He is no longer a violent person," Summerville said. "I will say, yes, he absolutely understands that he has to (take his medication) and has a desire to live a responsible, moral life and never succumb to psychotic episodes and not to hurt anybody ever again." On the night of the attack, Baker sat next to 22-year-old Tim McLean — a complete stranger — after the young man smiled at him and asked how he was doing. Baker said he heard the voice of God telling him to kill the young carnival worker or "die immediately." He repeatedly stabbed McLean while the young man fought for his life. As passengers fled the bus, Baker continued stabbing and mutilating the body. The Supreme Court of Canada ruled in 1999 that a review board must order an absolute discharge if a person doesn't pose a significant threat to public safety. The ruling added there must be clear evidence of a significant risk to the public for the review board to continue imposing conditions after a person is found not criminally responsible. Steve Lambert, The Canadian Press Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Hugor Hill Posted February 10, 2017 Share Posted February 10, 2017 Well that happened quickly. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
PhillipBlunt Posted February 11, 2017 Share Posted February 11, 2017 Disgusting. Absolutely disgusting. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
prix57 Posted February 11, 2017 Author Share Posted February 11, 2017 Canadian justice at its finest! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Hugor Hill Posted February 11, 2017 Share Posted February 11, 2017 5 minutes ago, prix57 said: Canadian justice at its finest! The court chose liberty over punishment. Justice is not same as vengeance. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Lancaster Posted February 11, 2017 Share Posted February 11, 2017 Well... I hope that he is truly sorrow for his past actions and will do everything in his power to make sure he takes his meds. If not, and another tragedy occurs, I hope that all the names of the decision-makers and doctors examining him are made public and are held accountable. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Alflives Posted February 11, 2017 Share Posted February 11, 2017 44 minutes ago, Hugor Hill said: The court chose liberty over punishment. Justice is not same as vengeance. What would be the sentence (prison time) for cutting off a person's head, and eating it for someone without mental illness? I know this Li guy served 8 years in hospital. Maybe he should serve a proper amount of time on top of that as a consequence of his crime? You know, 8+17=25 kind of thing? Then he pays his debt to society. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
riffraff Posted February 11, 2017 Share Posted February 11, 2017 1 hour ago, Hugor Hill said: The court chose liberty over punishment. Justice is not same as vengeance. And punishment is not the same as vengeance Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Gurn Posted February 11, 2017 Share Posted February 11, 2017 On 2017-02-07 at 7:17 AM, KelownaCanucksFan said: And the last time he went off his drugs how'd that work out for the victim, don't worry he's fine too, he was freaking beheaded and eaten. This guys should not be allowed out without direct supervision, he is a danger to the community and should be treated as such. If they do release him and he killls again then every doctor and therapist that said he is ok to be released should be held criminally responsible and do jail time. "His doctors described him as a model patient who had not been treated for schizophrenia at the time of his attack." Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
kingofsurrey Posted February 11, 2017 Share Posted February 11, 2017 MENTAL DISORDER AND CANADIAN CRIMINAL LAW BACKGROUND Canadian courts have long had the power, in prescribed circumstances, to exempt an individual from criminal responsibility for actions performed while he or she was incapacitated by a mental disorder. That power rests on “the basic principle of Canadian criminal law that to be convicted of a crime, the state must prove not only a wrongful act, but also a guilty mind.”(1) Consequently, Canada’s Criminal Code has always provided that persons will not be held criminally liable for their actions if their mental state at the time rendered them “incapable of appreciating” the nature and quality of the act and knowing that it was wrong. In such a case, however, it may be necessary for the state to exercise some level of control over those mentally disordered individuals who are believed to pose a threat to others. Thus, Parliament is faced with the challenge of achieving a balance between individual rights and public safety. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.