So, you’re saying that if he had been legally insane, then you don’t care that he was not actually responsible for the act and you still would want him executed. Does your stance of punishing someone for something for which they are not responsible extend to any alleged crime or is it just reserved for a crime in which you want to see someone die for it?
Personally, I don’t care if he did think he was fighting evil green monsters from outer space and was legally insane. I would still want him executed. I have no qualms about using the death penalty to punish those who do such evil acts.
How is it punishment if the person has no concept of what he did? That’s just vengeance and serves nothing but blood lust.
There’s a lot of people in prison for killing someone. A lot.
So, this guy killed more.
If the idea is that just because someone killed, that makes them crazy, … therefore makes them not guilty by reason of insanity. Umm.
And it’s not just murders. Prisons have a lot of people that do a lot of very bad things. They need to be locked up somewhere. I don’t know of any highly reliable method that “cures” murders, rapists, etc.
This guy was plenty rational enough for a long enough period of time to plan, prepare and carry out his plan. He made sure to keep it secret, even from his therapist. He knew it was wrong.
I don’t see any nuance, and I don’t think this is complicated.
You don’t have to be insane or crazy to do what he did. You just have to be evil. He knew what he was doing, and choose to do it, because he is evil. Hitler and Stalin weren’t crazy, they were evil.
By the way, I am not a lawyer, and do not play one on TV, but am happy to give my completely unlegal legal opinion to anyone. 
This.
Six months. Six months buying weapons. Six months buying body armor. Six months planning to shoot up a theater filled with people while continuing to go to class, see his psychiatrist, etc.
I could have a problem with the verdict if he kept to himself, never left the house, blockaded his apartment shut and thought the tin-foil people were coming to get him. He had none of these types of behavior.
Instead he keeps buying up weapons, body armor, booby trapped his apartment, he even went to the theater ahead of time to check out which theater to use and to prop the back door open for his entrance. Every step of this was planned.
Now for the death penalty, I am 99% against it, and then there’s cases like this. I haven’t seen any evidence pointing out his behavior is directly due to his schizophrenia. He kept planning and plotting these murders and seemed normal to most. You won’t convince me that he didn’t know he was shooting a six-year-old girl in the back, he knew he was shooting, husbands, wives, teens, people who want to enjoy a movie. He wasn’t angry or had anything against these people to begin with.
Death penalty is absolutely AOK with me on this one, unless someone can point me in a medical/mental direction that would land him in a hospital for life.
This guy? He knew what he was doing. He maybe mentally ill, but he wasn’t criminally insane. However, in general, if you’re so delusional that you thought you were killing aliens not people, then that’s a tragedy all around. That’s a completely different situation.
That standard hasn’t always been so impossible (remember the Twinky Defense?) and it really isn’t that impossible today. This defendant just caught the wrong defense lawyer and the wrong jury in the wrong place and time - at least from his viewpoint. From my standpoint I’m thinking we got the right call.
Now if he had had a far better attorney and more money he could have maybe made his claim stick -------- that is the part that pisses me off.
Sigh…I miss the good old days when everything was the fault of Marilyn Manson, black trenchcoats, and Doom.
Murderers have no place in society. Insane murderers less so. Its time to take out the trash.
If he was insane, and didn’t kill anybody, well, fine. Give him a cookie and some footy-jammies and shove him into a hospital. Once he murders anybody, its time for him to go!
So let’s take this further. Say I’m James Holmes, “legally insane”, and I did not have any idea that the room full of people I killed were not rats trying to eat the flesh from my body (or whatever). We’ll ignore the fact that I bought and carried that weapon to that particular place on that particular day and nowhere else and just stick with the insanity part.
After killing and wounding so many people, what can I expect? They’ll medicate me, get my insanity under control, and then what, they’ll just put me back on the street? I bear no responsibility for the murders, it was just a defect in my brain chemistry that did it?
Of course not. I’m still looking at prison or other incarceration for the rest of my life. In other words, the net effect is the same. I’m spared a date with the gurney (which I’ll probably never see anyway) only to be in a concrete cell 23 hours a day or surrounded by people trying to rip their skin off and screaming at the boogeyman for as long as I live.
Arguing about whether or not I’m insane is a fool’s errand, and really doesn’t matter in any case. I’ll never be free again.
We used to classify people as thus:
- Normal.
- Bad.
- Crazy/insane.
A number of decades ago it was decided there was no such thing as a “bad” person. It was decided a person who does bad things is really an insane person.
So today we classify people as
- Normal.
- Crazy/insane.
We no longer have “bad” people.
(post shortened)
Not necessarily. A team of doctors may decide that you are no longer a danger to society. If you don’t kill anyone during your 17 day vacations from Hotel Silly, they’ll consider releasing you full-time. Just don’t get between a Hinckley-type and his Jody Foster. 
*Reagan shooter Hinckley seeks full-time leave from mental facility
Updated 4:36 PM ET, Wed April 22, 2015
Washington (CNN)—John Hinckley Jr., the would-be assassin who shot President Ronald Reagan in 1981, appeared in federal court Wednesday to request what his family called his “unconditional release” from the mental facility at which he’s been living for the past three decades.
U.S. District Judge Paul L. Friedman in Washington is determining whether to grant Hinckley, 59, “convalescent leave” – near-permanent leave from St. Elizabeths mental hospital in Washington – and let him live with his mother full-time in Williamsburg, Virginia.
If granted, the leave would be an expansion of the 17 days that Hinckley is currently allowed to be away from the hospital. His lawyers Wednesday said based on doctor’s reports, Hinckley has rehabilitated from the mental illness that drove him to attempt the assassination of a President.*
Of course he’s not crazy. First, there is no official definition of crazy/insane. It boils down to “did he know what he was doing” and “did he know it was wrong?” The answer to both is yes. Planning a massacre like that takes time, lots of prep, and a sound mind to figure out all the details. He knew exactly what he was doing, and he knew it was wrong.
I do not believe in “not guilty by reason of insanity” because I don’t believe in insanity. I believe in schizophrenia, bipolar, and other defined disorders, but I don’t believe in insanity.
P.S. Hang 'em.
It’s likely that if Hinckley had simply been convicted of a crime, he’d already be out of prison.
Not picking on you here, peedin, you’re just the last one to push this button. It blows my mind how often people assume a person can’t be cripplingly delusional AND extremely logical and methodical.
Ignoring or minimizing that fact is itself a delusion that leads to needless & useless killings (executions) rather than study & treatment of devastating illnesses.
Generally-speaking, existing laws describe legally insane as being unable to tell right from wrong. If the defense can convince the court that the defendant is unable to tell right from wrong (the defendant did not know that building an Improvised Explosive Device in his apartment could destroy most of the building, and kill most, if not all, of the residents), or was unable to temporarily differentiate right from wrong at the time they committed the crime, the defendant can legally avoid criminal liability for the commission of that crime. If the defense can not successfully prove that the defendant was not able to tell right from wrong, the defendant will face the same liability as any other defendant charged with a similar offense.
The Aurora monster knew his bomb-making and shooting would result in the premeditated murder of dozens of people.The Aurora monster was not legally insane. The Aurora monster’s crimes warranted a trial and deserved multiple convictions for murder.
Do you believe in Guilty But Mentally Ill, which this cite says was adopted by 4 states due to uproar over John Hinkley being found mentally insane? From the cite (scroll down to the bottom)
Apparently 12 states have implemented this verdict option.
Incidentally, the same cite has that, by 1986, 3 states (Montana, Idaho, and Utah) had abolished insanity as a defense. Mental illness could be used to show that a person didn’t have the mens rea (or intent) for conviction under the charged offense, but it isn’t an affirmative defense. The cite also says that the American Medical Association supports abolition of insanity as a defense.
Thinks he’s so smart. Fuck that guy.
In their closing arguments, the defense claimed that Holmes visiting a psychiatrist in the months leading up to his attack was evidence he was insane. Implying that only insane people need to see a psychiatrist is just going to create more stigma for people with mental illness to seek help.
Just following the local news blog about the case, I’d say the prosecution did a great job proving Holmes was sane as defined by Colorado law.