?
"Kurt Ullman" wrote
There is mental illness and then there is LEGAL mental illness. Two
VERY different animals. Legally mentally ill basically boils down to can
they form intent. While obviously a major looney turner, the AZ shooter
will most likely NOT be judged legally insane, since there was planning,
and intent behind it.


So in your eyes, would a booking picture of someone with red
bloodshot eyes be the only thing you would need to see to find
someone guilty of DUI ?

No, but a field sobriety test and a follow up breathalyzer will do.
Well, that and some indication he/she was actually in the car on the
driver's side (g).



belief that anyone who tries to kill their child is mentally
ill, you would have to find the accused not guilty by reason
of mental illness or defect OR be dishonest and make
a the choice wanting to hear nothing beyond what you
had already decided the first day in court when you were
being empaneled as a juror...

I'd be honest. Mentally ill. See, that was quick and in these days of
tough
times, very cost effective.

But LEGALLY mentally ill? You may believe going in that a person is
clincally mentally ill, but wouldn't you still have to look at the
evidence for the legal definition?

That is a problem as they should be the same. Mentally ill people that do
horrific crimes should not be put back into society. The only difference is
where they spend their time.