Skip to main content

View Diary: No Fifth Amendment for Aurora Shooter - Judge Approves 'Narcoanalytic Interview' Using 'Truth Serum' (182 comments)

Comment Preferences

  •  This contradicts the article, which says that (3+ / 0-)
    The idea would be that such a "narcoanalytic interview" would be used to confirm whether or not he had been legally insane when he embarked on his shooting spree on 20 July last year.
    I am reading the linked article; there is nothing about the reason for it being to determine his competence to stand trial. It clearly says the point is to determine whether he was legally insane at the time of the crime. Which they will use only in the event that he enters a plea of not guilty by reason of insanity. I don't think he can enter a plea until/unless he is competent. That's what happened with Loughner, they forcibly medicated him until he was sane enough to know what he'd done when he wasn't, then he understood what was going on and was competent for trial, then they convicted him for what he did when he was mentally ill and untreated. Weird system.

    Anyway, I think you are mistaken that the point of this is about his competency for trail. Unless you have another source for that information which makes this one incorrect?

    •  This is My Source For That Information (0+ / 0-)

      http://www.hlntv.com/...

      The "truth serum" and polygraph will likely come into play if/when the defense asserts that Holmes is incompetent to stand trial. At that point, the judge will order a mental examination of Holmes. Thereafter, the judge will conduct a hearing, at which evidence will be presented on both sides, and will then make a ruling as to Holmes' competence to proceed.
      It is difficult for me to reconcile the two articles, but that's what I was basing my statement on.

      Too Folk For You. - Schmidting in the Punch Bowl - verb - Committing an unexpected and underhanded political act intended to "spoil the party."

      by TooFolkGR on Thu Mar 14, 2013 at 08:10:17 AM PDT

      [ Parent ]

    •  And he was deemed "sane" for how long? (2+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:
      CS in AZ, Paul1a
      they forcibly medicated him until he was sane enough to know what he'd done when he wasn't, then he understood what was going on and was competent for trial, then they convicted him for what he did when he was mentally ill and untreated. Weird system.
      This is my definition of insane.  lol

      "That men do not learn very much from the lessons of history is the most important of all the lessons of history." ~ Aldous Huxley

      by markthshark on Thu Mar 14, 2013 at 08:16:48 AM PDT

      [ Parent ]

    •  If so, he'd have the burden of proof (1+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:
      TooFolkGR

      on the insanity issue, as an affirmative defense.  As such, he could only meet that burden if an examination were possible.  If such an examination is possible only by medicating him, his rights are enhanced, not limited by the ruling.

      Too folk is right that the 5th amendment's testimonial privilege is limited to actually using statements against him for elements of the crime.  There may be a 14th amendment due process claim about bodily integrity, but there's a balancing test issue that the state can easily meet given the probable cause they have in ample amounts.

      But, hysteria is more fun and less work.

      Difficult, difficult, lemon difficult.

      by Loge on Thu Mar 14, 2013 at 09:06:33 AM PDT

      [ Parent ]

Subscribe or Donate to support Daily Kos.

Click here for the mobile view of the site