The trial has been underway for a month. James Holmes has plead not guilty by reason of insanity to the charges that on July 20, 2012, he killed 12 people and injured 70 others at a movie theater in Aurora, Colorado.
The trial itself has been airing live on local (Denver) broadcast tv, and is also streaming live. I've been watching here and there. So far, the prosecution is still making their case.
I know little of law, and mental illness standards, and maybe because of that the case seems strange to me. From what I understand, the defense is not contesting that Holmes did the deeds. Yet, because he has pled not guilty, the prosecution must go through every little detail to prove he did all of this (testimony from victims, responders, people who know him, etc). And on top of that, they have to prove beyond a reasonable doubt that he was NOT insane when he did it (more interviews, more evidence). I think the estimate is that, after 4 weeks, they are roughly half way through. Then the defense starts.
My feeling is that proving he was not insane is going to be all but impossible. True, mental illness is not the same as insanity, and he was under treatment for mental illness. But proving, behind a reasonable doubt, that his illness and his treatment and his medications and the potential medication side effects and some subsequent pyschotic episode were not involved, or at least does not raise a serious doubt... i don't know.
In any case, I think this will be a landmark case involving mental illness, with potential impacts to early detection and treatment, public understanding of such, and maybe new laws, or changes in funding, country wide.
The trial itself has been airing live on local (Denver) broadcast tv, and is also streaming live. I've been watching here and there. So far, the prosecution is still making their case.
I know little of law, and mental illness standards, and maybe because of that the case seems strange to me. From what I understand, the defense is not contesting that Holmes did the deeds. Yet, because he has pled not guilty, the prosecution must go through every little detail to prove he did all of this (testimony from victims, responders, people who know him, etc). And on top of that, they have to prove beyond a reasonable doubt that he was NOT insane when he did it (more interviews, more evidence). I think the estimate is that, after 4 weeks, they are roughly half way through. Then the defense starts.
My feeling is that proving he was not insane is going to be all but impossible. True, mental illness is not the same as insanity, and he was under treatment for mental illness. But proving, behind a reasonable doubt, that his illness and his treatment and his medications and the potential medication side effects and some subsequent pyschotic episode were not involved, or at least does not raise a serious doubt... i don't know.
In any case, I think this will be a landmark case involving mental illness, with potential impacts to early detection and treatment, public understanding of such, and maybe new laws, or changes in funding, country wide.
via International Skeptics Forum http://ift.tt/1Bet3QS
Aucun commentaire:
Enregistrer un commentaire