Schizophrenic Canadian who beheaded bus passenger walks free, won’t be monitored.

[Evil Midnight Bomber]

He cut off someone's head, but he's not a threat? WTF IS a threat then?

He cut off someone's head 9 years ago. Since then he's been in a mental institution undergoing therapy. The doctors now feel like he can live a normal life.

[Tikaru]

He cut off someone's head 9 years ago. Since then he's been in a mental institution undergoing therapy. The doctors now feel like he can live a normal life.

Until he doesn't take his meds. Again.

[Evil Midnight Bomber]

Until he doesn't take his meds. Again.

What do you mean "again"?

He wasn't diagnosed at the time of his attack. There were no meds for him to take.

[Dequanacus]

What is your point exactly? I think Ouch and I must not be getting it.

If the concern is that vigilantes will take revenge, then we deal with that when they commit their crime.
If the concern is that people will treat him differently if they recognize him, then that's their right to do so - up until the point where their behaviour becomes illegal - at which point we deal with their crime.
If the concern is that life will be forever different for him, as he will forever exist within a society which may potentially recognize him for his publicity - that's life.

You don't confine people to a padded cell until death to spare them the minor awkwardness that they may be treated differently by someone at some point, when recognized.

My response was to a user who posed the question "were it a family member would I kill him?". I responded jokingly and than offered a more serious response, that, while I would not kill them, I would be concerned about how they would be treated when returning to public life. The impression I sought to give was that I would merely be in close contact with them instead of simply pretending nothing happened and going about my life, if they were having any troubles readapting, I would be available to assist them.

I feel you and Ouch are drawing conclusions from my post that aren't there. I never made any comment on the idea of isolation and never commented on the idea of executing someone in this situation beyond one joking remark that nobody made reference to. I'm unsure why both of you seem so adamant about mistreating the person in question in reference to my posts when I didn't come anywhere near saying any of that. It seems to me as if you're taking the general attitude of the thread and miss associating it with my posts.

That isn't meant to be an accusation, I just do not understand why you keep returning to these more extreme ideas when, in essence, all I said (or meant to say) with my post was, "I'd take care of my now released family member". I said nothing more.

[Berndorf]

You don't think almost an entire decade of no incidents is good enough?

- - - Updated - - -



Except it took a fucking decade for him to be considered rehabilitated. So, obviously they're not going to make that assessment in just a year if he has another incident. They may never let him go again after another one.

I don't care if it was a regular decade or a fucking decade. It was really prob more like 7 years of real rehabilitation also. The point is we are giving the guy the benefit of the doubt to go on with his life without any oversight when if he does stop taking his medication there is prob a high chance someone will die as a result. That wouldn't exactly fill me with joy as a Canadian citizen right now.

[dwightyo39]

Cue the people who don't recognize the important part of a "not guilty by reason of insanity" plea.

So if this was your wife, sister, brother, father, or best friend that he butchered, you would be completely satisfied with him being released?

[Yvaelle]

I feel you and Ouch are drawing conclusions from my post that aren't there. I never made any comment on the idea of isolation and never commented on the idea of executing someone in this situation beyond one joking remark that nobody made reference to. I'm unsure why both of you seem so adamant about mistreating the person in question in reference to my posts when I didn't come anywhere near saying any of that. It seems to me as if you're taking the general attitude of the thread and miss associating it with my posts.

We're definitely conflating part of your post with some other posts in the thread, sorry for that. However, I think part of why we're both taking issue with your stance goes back to this post:

If a member of my family pulled out a man's heart and ate it because a voice in their head told them that doing so would grant them live saving abilities, I would already know that no force could possibly put an end to them.

I would also be very concerned for their future as "that person who ate someone's heart" and would likely not simply let them waltz around the streets as if nothing happened.

To say that 'no force could possibly put an end to them' implies that rehabilitation is impossible. When you say that you would be 'concerned for their future', and that you would 'not simply let them waltz around the streets' - suggests you either expect vigilante violence against them, or that they shouldn't be set free at all.

So there are some posts in this thread which take an even more extreme position than yours - 'he should be killed' etc - that we did conflate, but your position a few pages ago was also seemingly far more extreme than you are portraying it now.

[Dequanacus]

To say that 'no force could possibly put an end to them' implies that rehabilitation is impossible.

Actually it was implying that they are a immortal omniscient being with powers beyond mortal comprehension. I think it's cute that my little joke about consuming the hearts of man is being used to argue the institutional framework of the Canadian rehabilitation center.

'concerned for their future'

As an individual who was put on trial for a criminal act and who might be given a wary reception by others. If they feel uncomfortable buying milk and eggs at the super market for fear of getting weird glances, I'd be happy to do grocery shopping for them.

'not simply let them waltz around the streets'

In the sense that I would not pretend this incident did not occur and would remain open to assisting my family member as they may definitely feel trouble readjusting after so long and would definitely not be treated the same as they were when they were a relative nobody.

suggests you either expect vigilante violence against them, or that they shouldn't be set free at all.

I'm not sure why you're so hell bent on taking everything to its extreme. If I offered to walk my grandmother to the grocery store, it's not because I think she'll be beaten, raped and murdered, but because she's fucking old and might have trouble moving around or picking things off shelves.

As I said before, I do not think this person would be hung from a streetlamp, but they definitely may get weird looks when, prior to have cutting off the head of a fellow individual, they might have had no reason to receive such a reception. When I made that post, my only motivation behind typing what I did was the idea that they may feel uncomfortable readjusting to society and would feel more comfortable if someone who they felt nice around was with them. That does not equate to "A mob of Canadians will descend onto him and tear him to pieces, feasting on his body til none remains, burning his house to cinders, and delivering a plague onto his loved ones"

You might say that's a bit excessive, but that's how I feel when you equate "I wish to help my family members buy milk" with "I expect him to be subject to vigilante violence and should be locked in a cell for the rest of his life"

Where do you come up with this stuff?

[Astalnar]

I mean, with all the pronouns policing that needs to be done, Canadians really don't have any resources to spare on just same random crazy who decapitates people. They need to protect the people's feelings first!

[DSRilk]

Cue the people who don't recognize the important part of a "not guilty by reason of insanity" plea.

That doesn't mean he doesn't need medical help, and that society should just trust that he'll continue taking his meds without supervision. It just means he doesn't belong in a prison.

- - - Updated - - -

That's good. Punishing people will only marginalize them further into extremism.

Ensuring a person with an incurable mental condition takes their meds, when not doing so triggers murderous intent is NOT a punishment. It's an unfortunate side effect of his medical condition. Just like someone without a thyroid needs to take synthroid every day. Except not taking it will result in him murdering someone, so it must be enforced if he wants to remain free.

[skitzin]

Based on your expert knowledge in the field? They aren't stopping treatment. He still has to take his medication and he'd likely have to go a few days without it for him to lapse.

He has been given an absolute discharge. He is no longer under any obligation to continue taking his medication(s).

There is no longer any legal recourse that can be taken to ensure he is on his medication or complying with his treatment program. I.e. they cannot force him to take it or to his psychiatrist.

This means if he lapses then there is nothing that can be done until he attacks another person. Which will be far too late then.

[Deleted]

Where did you get that idea? And the justice is in that this man has been rehabilitated and is healthy now instead of just killing a sick individual. If someone has unwittingly contracted a flesh-eating bacteria and spreads it to people who suffer and die should that person be killed as well? Just because you have no understanding of mental illness doesn't mean there was no justice in this case, it just means you've got some learning to do.

yeah we talk again when he does it again I like how you assume something about me without knowing ANYTHING about me at all.

very smart indeed. bye.

[Thimagryn]

Endus, Endus, Endus...... so if I were insane and decided that my Neighbor Phil probably tasted delicious and I went Hannibal Lector on him would I be free to go about my life because I'm insane. because Phil tastes like chicken and he's closer than the store.

If it were an isolated schizophrenic episode that was left untreated and further treatment was unsuccessful, sure. And even if you are treated successfully and diagnosed as so by professionals who don't take your case lightly, you should stay locked up because Silence of the Lambs happens to be a better way of judging sanity.

While I won't say this is going to be safe for the public in any worst-case-scenario means, it seems like this guy was already living his life normally albeit while being monitored. He's taking his meds and he was back in society already. As far as the professional opinion is concerned, this isn't some serial killer who wants to harm people and is only pretending to be sane until he's off the leash.

[Nasuem]

If he was thought to still be a danger he would not be released.

Haha people are released all the time still being considered threats to the public. Often the police say they are CERTAIN they will re-offend. But that's a justice system ran by liberals for ya.

[Evil Midnight Bomber]

Haha people are released all the time still being considered threats to the public. Often the police say they are CERTAIN they will re-offend. But that's a justice system ran by liberals for ya.

The police are not trained psychiatrists.

[Super Kami Dende]

Cue the people who don't recognize the important part of a "not guilty by reason of insanity" plea.

If someone is Not guilty due to Insanity, why the fuck would you let them loose on society again if they were literally insane enough to commit such a crime.

[Evil Midnight Bomber]

So what? The dead man just magically died with no one to blame for his death? I'm sorry but it wasn't a heart attack, it was brutal murder. That schizophrenic freak needs to be drugged up and under 24/7 observation or lobotomised so he cannot harm another innocent human being again.

When people say things like this it really makes me question who I should really be afraid of.

- - - Updated - - -

If someone is Not guilty due to Insanity, why the fuck would you let them loose on society again if they were literally insane enough to commit such a crime.

Because they believe he is now in a state where he has the means and the motivation to take care of himself.

[Berndorf]

Why does it have to escalate to attacking a person? Even a minor incident and they'd likely force him into treatment again. A serious incident and he'd likely never be released again.

- - - Updated - - -



Probably a high chance based on what? Your medical experience?

- - - Updated - - -



And he had medical help, for almost a decade.

You live long enough and you know people who had to take medication and hear plenty of other stories. So its a mixture of first hand knowledge and other things. I bet you could ask any doctor who was part of his rehabilitation and they would say the same thing. That if he stops taking his medication there is a good chance of him ending up hurting someone or doing something similar to what he did on the bus. That's generally the way it is with people who are being told to take medications for mental problems on a continual basis.

[Endus]

If someone is Not guilty due to Insanity, why the fuck would you let them loose on society again if they were literally insane enough to commit such a crime.

Because they were deemed not criminally responsible for their actions. And their doctor is saying that they're better now.

Again, you're ignoring the "not guilty" part of things. An insanity plea doesn't get you a sentence in a mental institution rather than a prison, it gets you acquittal. Whether you need to be in an institution is a separate determination and based on whether your doctors consider you a potential danger, and once they don't, you're free to go. Because, again, you didn't commit a crime. You can't reasonably complain that an innocent person isn't serving a long enough sentence, c'mon.

I already said I wasn't sure about the doctor's decision, but given that I haven't been treating the guy and I'm not qualified to make that kind of determination, that makes my position one that's rooted in ignorance, not fact. So I wouldn't claim I know better than his doctors.

[Super Kami Dende]

Because they believe he is now in a state where he has the means and the motivation to take care of himself.

And completely disregard the heinous crime he committed?

Jeez, I should just go on a crime spree, plead insanity then go back to living a normal life. totally seems legit.