|
Author
|
Topic: PMS responsible for stabbing
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
jeff house
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 518
|
posted 23 November 2002 03:06 PM
How do we know this "will be tried in court"? Youth courts are not public, for one thing. Secondly, the defence seldom telegraphs its position prior to trial. To me it looks more like somebody is trying to stir up trouble, than think clearly about the question of when personal/biological events overcome one's normal legal responsibility. By the way, a quick glance at Quicklaw, a lawyers' database, indicates that this "old defence" has never been successful in Canada. [ November 23, 2002: Message edited by: jeff house ]
From: toronto | Registered: May 2001
| IP: Logged
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
jeff house
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 518
|
posted 24 November 2002 11:38 AM
Today's Toronto Star clears up some of the mystery. First, the girl pleaded guilty. So, it wasn't an "old defence", since she didn't enter a defence. Second, in mentioning the factors which caused her to act criminally, the lawyer (who I know well, and respect), mentioned that part of the cause of her uncharacteristic behaviour was a medication she was taking. The medication was for severe menstrual pains.Various medical reports about the possible side effects of the particular medication were presented for consideration by the judge. These reports may be used to effect the sentence imposed. I noted that the Star article refers to the prosecutor as saying that, on the surface, it appears as another act of random violence at a school, but that he expects another side to the story to appear at the sentencing hearing. It will be interesting to follow this.
From: toronto | Registered: May 2001
| IP: Logged
|
|
Kindred
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 3285
|
posted 24 November 2002 04:51 PM
I picked up on the item when I heard the news report, which was basicially a "by the way" and said the girl was claiming PMS - no mention of meds. Typical - give us the gloss, dont worry about the details. I am glad you found some more info on it that we can follow.It will be interesting to see how this plays out. Wondering if doctors will be held accountable for the meds they prescribe young people? I suppose not. My own daughter was prescribed a medication which warned not to give to persons with seizure disorder, she has epilepsy and ended up in the hospital after having 3 severe seizures one after the other -very scary. Wonder what medication? - thanks for the info -
From: British Columbia | Registered: Nov 2002
| IP: Logged
|
|
|
|
jeff house
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 518
|
posted 16 December 2002 05:13 PM
quote:
What about the idea of people taking responsibilty for their actions?
Legally speaking, a person who pleads guilty HAS taken responsibility for his or her actions. But people are not required to accept the maximum sentence. They are allowed to let the trial judge know about mitigating circumstances. It is tempting to want to banish complexity from human affairs, but sometimes the complexity exists. In this case, apparently the prosecutor accepts that there are unusual medical reasons for the behaviour. Why should the defendant suppress that fact?
From: toronto | Registered: May 2001
| IP: Logged
|
|
|
|
Email this thread to someone!
