|4 years ago :: Sep 20, 2009 - 4:48AM #31|
I wasn't referring to that witness--the absurdity of even thinking a commercial show had anything to do with her killing her children made no sense. Even the shows that follow how forensic evidence solved crimes also include time lines that can stretch over months or years.
I had mentioned post-partum simply because some of the pictures taken with her and some of the younger children before she killed them she looked totally exhausted and her eyes just seemed glazed. Her husband's solution to getting her some help with things at home and with a doctor to see what was going on with her was to have another baby without planning so much as an extra 30 minutes a day with the kids so she'd have a short moment for herself.
She is where she should be- a secure psychiatric hospital. I pity her when they finally get all of the hormonal levels balanced and help her break out of the psychosis and the torment of those voices.Being able to remember the details of how she killed each child without the benefit of having her feelings shut down is going to be worse than anything any court could ever come up with.
"You are letting your opinion be colored by facts again."
'When I want your opinion, I'll give it to you."
these are both from my father.
|4 years ago :: Sep 21, 2009 - 5:38PM #32|
I have, myself, pleaded insanity in the context of government sanctioned torture. I was forced to say that I was insane to get out. When I realized that they were tricking me, I took back my statement though. The lawyer couldn't do anything for me. I had no choice but to sign the papers to get out. It was a very disturbing experience.
Now I have to say that I am insane.
Technically, what I had to do was go to a disability hearing to rectify my injury or "illness." The board of medical examiners agreed to my psychological impairment due to my treatment/drug therapy. I still had to go to the court to argue the medication to uphold my position that I did not have a mental illness biological disease but instead a legitimate psychological disorder from my treatment. Really this was just to prove that I was not insane.
I have to say, based on experience and the law, that I was "insane" when I signed the papers. That is just a result from the treatment.
I told my story.
I have tried everything to put my life back on the correct path. I have never been able to use the insanity defense other than to secure my rights in disability practice. I have not agreed to the type of actions taken against me to enforce the mental illness stigma that legitimizes the insanity position. It just so happens that the braindamage I suffered can only be explained because of drugs. And the result is insanity...which I have proven. That is a reason not to take the medication which has been my main concern to reinforce my legal standing for disability rights. If they would have been able to make me take the medication in court, then I would have had to admit insanity, mental illness and renounce the torture and insanity position. In this case the point of insanity is useful I would say.
Without the insanity people could not understand that I was tortured and forced to sign papers whereas I had no capacity to do so, being under the influence of the drugs and "trauma."
The drugs caused me to suffer.
I didn't know that I would have to go through all of this just because I signed those papers. I have refuted this position for years now. You see. It seems like I am saying the exact opposite of what I am intending to present. That is the product of disinformation.
Signing those papers not only affected my legal status and caused me to go on disability but ruined my spiritual life, religion.
I had to fight very hard.
And still I was put to shame.
I learned a lot.
It seemed like it was intolerable for a long time...after the experience. Then I was redeemed. Eventually I got onto different medications and told my story to Doctors and professionals, who agreed "yes you were right, the medications were bad for you." That elimenates the position of mental illness but justifies a legitimate insanity defense.
You see, as long as I can say I have an insanity defense somehow I reject my insanity.
And I'm treated as having a disability.
I'm not trying to say that by admitting I'm insane I get better emotionally or something! I'm saying that the wrong type of injury or legal position is rejected and the correct status is legitimized. Now it is clear. I can't have a disability and be treated incorrectly under the jurisdiction of a corrupt system.
|4 years ago :: Sep 25, 2009 - 3:53PM #33|
WHEN THIS COP-OUT IS USED,THE PERSON USING IT SHOULD GET LIFE IN A MENTAL HOSPITAL
|4 years ago :: Sep 25, 2009 - 7:55PM #34|
I think here that anger is the real problem...it is not necessarily the person who is to blame, but the action that they are engaging in.
For example, in Christianity, one distinguishes and admonishes sin but still has hope for the sinner.
In mental health, a person or society respects the person but does not accept the action. This is the role of politics in mental health, and the consciousness of the people in the world will reflect the level of tolerance and compassion for this position.
You must understand that not everyone who commits a crime is insane.
Some people who do commit crimes are generally responsible, don't you think - since one way or another they will have to atone for their actions in society, with their thinking, or the more immediate effects of society's actions towards them for their actions. I believe it all comes down to the mind. When a group of people do not understand a person's actions it is very easy to misconstrue the real intent. They blame it on their thinking, you see, rather then their doing. This is the basis of forgiveness! And also the cause for everyone to get along in the world.
You cannot have the people in the jails and systems of healthcare without the people outside of them. As long as their are people outside of the system there will be people inside. Imagine you went into a career where you had to be inside the system. This is a perfect example of tolerance. There is tolerance from the society because the world in some sense understands. He's in there "because he has to be." Also you should consider the fact that people sometimes are inside these places because it is less of a burden to others. In that sense they accept what they have done, whether for right or wrong.
Who really is to judge right or wrong? I don't think it should be up to society.
Society is the reason these places are there.
I think that also people tend to have hatred towards the people, not the actions. That is a lot of bad I think. Just as bad as committing the action yourself, even. Why do you think you live in a world where you try to hide the wrong? Why live in a world where wrong even exists? What is your opinion on how to resolve it if it is different from the traditional approach which has not proven effective in the past?
I think the way to resolve things is not through hatred.
Think about it this way: a person is always responsible for their actions. No one makes them that way.
If they are forced to suffer then why should that be acceptable as a result in a world where suffering is not necessary? They must reap the results of their actions...this is insanity! If you don't believe that a person reaps the results of their actions but you believe that they must reap the results of their actions because you say they should. Isn't that backwards thinking? Why not just let them reap the results of their actions to begin with. Who is the one responsible is what you should be asking. If man creates his own world then I would be more fearful of the people who are trying to control the situation then those who are receiving their dues. Of course, the people who are trying to control will also receive their dues and should and will in turn, understand, that everything is a cycle of cause and effect. Without a cause there is no result. Without a crime you will not have a criminal. Without a crime you will not have a sentence. This is real reason.
When you start mixing up things that don't exist with things that do you have already plunged deep into wrongdoing yourself. As long as you are confused over this subject you probably do not understand what cause and effect actually means. Am I saying everyone should do whatever they want? If you understood cause and effect and are truly a responsible being, the creator of your reality, be it good or bad, then you will know not to do the actions that will bring more suffering. The real question here should be, "Are their people who do not create their own realities?"
Some people will try to justify others' evil actions to benefit themselves.
These people pretend to have compassion for the disabled and those with handicaps. Are you one of them?
See. Here, we don't even know if you are the one with the handicap or the one abusing them. How can we get anything communicated?
As long as you view yourself as seperate from other beings who are the same as you in wanting happiness and avoiding pain, not taking responsibility on yourself for the world around you by your actions, then you should just admit that you at this present moment do not have the capacity to judge another person's actions. You cannot even make the right choices yourself. Next, who are you believing if you don't believe in yourself to believe in yourself?
You are probably listening to psychology. And psychology says that persons behavior comes from the mind. It does not say how it exists though and why. Why can't it be explained? Because you yourself don't understand it now. Because you don't have a good relationship with yourself. Because you wait for the answers from a controller! The real controller is you though, the one who says, "I don't know my own self."
If you know your own self then it will be natural to know others. You will not have to try to understand.
Wherever people do not know one another there is obvisouly confusion. I think everyone can agree that we want to better understand one another for the better of all humanity.
This understanding should not be cruel. If you are cruel you will not understand one another. You will create more cruelty.
If you create more cruelty what is the result? Think about it.
What happens, people start designating the thought from the thinker. Then they create prejudice by pretending to care.
No one cares based on a cruel attitude really! Its not reality that the thought and the thinker are seperate. You only are creating this judgement yourself.
When you think about it, you can't force things. You wouldn't have to think about it and force it if your ideas were actually correct about other people and creatures.
There are a few who may believe that they are trying to understand for the sake of others. Then you must admit you have the same potential as every other being in the world.
This is compassion.
You see. I was right. We all do have the same potential. And that potential is limitless. It means that we do create our realities and we are responsible. There are some...who know this. These are the ones who are responsible. They are the ones with the greatest reward.
Is it worth it to risk everything to believe?
If you create one thing, you create everything.
That means you are the one who has created your future already. And also the one who can change it.
Your a step ahead.
You think your free will is not based on a permanent choice...that is already manifest before you.