Tim's Law

[betsy]

This is about Vincent Li, the guy who beheaded a greyhound passenger.

About Tim’s Law

Tim McLean

Vincent Li has in effect gotten away with murder so it is understandable that people’s emotions escalate when discussing Tim McLean’s tragic death. These same concerns and viewpoints are similarly shared by many people who demand that the justice system render a fair response. Unfortunately, not everyone believes that it was a systematic breakdown that led to Tim’s untimely death. Indeed, there are some groups in Canada who want to deflect the heightened attention away from Tim’s Law. Regardless of one’s stance, most Canadians would agree that the current procedures relied upon when rendering a verdict in Not Criminally Responsible criminal cases is lacking. Why? Because for the most part, the judicial verdicts provide minimal assurances that the criminal behaviour will not be repeated on another family by the same individual at a later date.

Those who are aware of the gruesome details of the murder readily agree that this guy is nuts. And unfortunately, there was likely nothing that could have been done to prevent this barbaric tragedy from occurring. This is not to suggest that legislative measures cannot be taken to ensure that Li will not be deemed “cured” at some point and subsequently awarded his freedom. In other words, walk the streets among us again. Whether he is likely to re-offend should be a mute point. The reality is that he should never have the opportunity.

And this is the reasoning behind Tim’s Law. The need to have a serious debate on how we “treat” people with mental illness who have offended in this manner. Public consultations across Canada that would be mandated to compile a list of recommendations including accountability and transparency within institutions. Of course we already know that Tim’s Law can do little to prevent this type of crime. But it could provide strict legal and institutional criterion to prevent these types of criminal activity from reoccurring by the same perpetrator.

So this is like a life sentence for those with mental illness. I don't know. That seems too unjust. If the guy has been declared mentally fit to be back in society, shouldn't they have that freedom?

What do you think?

[Michael Hardner]

That is very poorly written. Paragraphs don't follow related thoughts, and it doesn't explain what it's talking about. Also, the voice is screwed up - is it written by someone who is partial, or is supposed to be written about people ?

[eyeball]

That is very poorly written. Paragraphs don't follow related thoughts, and it doesn't explain what it's talking about. Also, the voice is screwed up - is it written by someone who is partial, or is supposed to be written about people ?

I think it's written by someone who must think mental illness is a life style choice that is best corrected by punishment, which is just just plain mean and ignorant.

Edited May 29, 2012 by eyeball

[eyeball]

This is about Vincent Li, the guy who beheaded a greyhound passenger.

So this is like a life sentence for those with mental illness. I don't know. That seems too unjust. If the guy has been declared mentally fit to be back in society, shouldn't they have that freedom?

What do you think?

Of course they should.

[kimmy]

That is very poorly written. Paragraphs don't follow related thoughts, and it doesn't explain what it's talking about. Also, the voice is screwed up - is it written by someone who is partial, or is supposed to be written about people ?

http://www.timslaw.ca/about/

It was taken from a website that's advocating for a law.

Can we be sure that a mentally ill person has been "cured" when they are released back into the public? About as much as we can be sure that a criminal person has been "rehabilitated" when they're let back out into the public.

The idea that Vincent Li could be free as a bird after beheading a man just a few years ago is extremely upsetting to people. I'm not sure what can be done about the situation. I don't think keeping a man in permanent custody because people are mad is an option.

-k

[fellowtraveller]

The Headchopper is - as I understand it- is not a threat if he takes his meds without fail for the rest of his life.

I don't have a problem if that can be guaranteed.

The only way to guarnatee it is if he takes it under supervision by police or medical authorities, and straight back to confinement if he misses any appointments. That may mean he wears a tracking device too.

[Moonlight Graham]

http://www.timslaw.ca/about/

It was taken from a website that's advocating for a law.

Can we be sure that a mentally ill person has been "cured" when they are released back into the public? About as much as we can be sure that a criminal person has been "rehabilitated" when they're let back out into the public.

The idea that Vincent Li could be free as a bird after beheading a man just a few years ago is extremely upsetting to people. I'm not sure what can be done about the situation. I don't think keeping a man in permanent custody because people are mad is an option.

-k

If a person is schizophrenic or severely bipolar, chops off a head, and then is found to have mental illness, is given proper needed medication and improves dramatically, and is proven to stay on that medic willfully on his own accord (given the meds as any one would a prescription, and remembers to take it everyday) I don't see why you wouldn't let that person on the street. But there has to be a solid amount of time in custody to them to prove they can stay on the meds consistently and want to stay on them without be forced or reminded, just as they would be as a free person living on their own.

That said, I have no idea what Li's mental disorder was.

[Signals.Cpl]

The Headchopper is - as I understand it- is not a threat if he takes his meds without fail for the rest of his life.

I don't have a problem if that can be guaranteed.

The only way to guarnatee it is if he takes it under supervision by police or medical authorities, and straight back to confinement if he misses any appointments. That may mean he wears a tracking device too.

Whats to stop him from cutting off the tracking device and disappearing before the police get there?

If a doctor is willing to put their career on the line by saying he is ok as long as he takes his meds then let him live in a minimum prison or a halfway house where he will follow strict rules and be monitored when taking meds and will be with curfew and all that stuff. Break the rules and he goes back to the hospital.

[bleeding heart]

I think it's written by someone who must think mental illness is a life style choice that is best corrected by punishment, which is just just plain mean and ignorant.

Yes...the author snidely remarks that we "treat" people (note the scary scare quotes) with mental illness. Quotation marks can say a lot.

Edited May 29, 2012 by bleeding heart

[Guest Manny]

What about a murderer (not insane) who is truly sorry for what he/she did, and went through rehab and promises to never do it again? Should they be released at that point, regardless of time served? How is that dramatically different.

[bleeding heart]

What about a murderer (not insane) who is truly sorry for what he/she did, and went through rehab and promises to never do it again? Should they be released at that point, regardless of time served? How is that dramatically different.

Because Li is no more responsible for the murder than you and I.

[betsy]

That is very poorly written. Paragraphs don't follow related thoughts, and it doesn't explain what it's talking about. Also, the voice is screwed up - is it written by someone who is partial, or is supposed to be written about people ?

It does sound like it. I also heard the anchorperson at Sun News seeming partial towards Tim's Law. I saw newsclip with Tim's mother reacting saying to the effect that Vince Li should never see the light of day again.

Well it's troubling because what if the person is truly cured?

[betsy]

What about a murderer (not insane) who is truly sorry for what he/she did, and went through rehab and promises to never do it again? Should they be released at that point, regardless of time served? How is that dramatically different.

Of course they should serve time according to their sentence. It's not exactly the same crime committed by an insane person. The insane person had no control over his actions at the time of the murder.

[Signals.Cpl]

Of course they should serve time according to their sentence. It's not exactly the same crime committed by an insane person. The insane person had no control over his actions at the time of the murder.

Neither does someone who is high, or someone who commits a murder in the heat of the moment yet we still demand they serve their sentences.

Edited May 29, 2012 by Signals.Cpl

[jacee]

It's very vague what "Tim's Law" really is about

We, the undersigned, citizens of Canada call upon the House of Commons To amend the Criminal Code of Canada to ensure those who commit murder but are found Not Criminally Responsible on Account of a Mental Disorder are detained for a minimum period of time

Doesn't say much to me.

I've always believed that those whose mental illness leads to violent crime should be deemed 'guilty' with extenuating circumstances instead of 'not guilty' by reason of 'mental defect'. The difference would be in court-ordered monitoring following incarceration/treatment.

I think the monitoring should be on the same schedule as for any serious offfender paroled or otherwise released from custody, and should involve monitoring of medication levels too.

It's not enough to medicate and release them. They went off their medication once and committed horrific crimes, and there has to be monitoring and early alert if it happens again. Many seriously and dangerously mentally ill people resent the medication and are prone to avoiding it. There should be clear consequences to that, not for punishment but for protection of society.

If indeed this 'law' is about opening a national conversation about protection of society, then I support it.

If it's about punishment, then it's useless.

[Canuckistani]

It's very vague what "Tim's Law" really is about

We, the undersigned, citizens of Canada call upon the House of Commons To amend the Criminal Code of Canada to ensure those who commit murder but are found Not Criminally Responsible on Account of a Mental Disorder are detained for a minimum period of time

Doesn't say much to me.

I've always believed that those whose mental illness leads to violent crime should be deemed 'guilty' with extenuating circumstances instead of 'not guilty' by reason of 'mental defect'. The difference would be in court-ordered monitoring following incarceration/treatment.

I think the monitoring should be on the same schedule as for any serious offfender paroled or otherwise released from custody, and should involve monitoring of medication levels too.

It's not enough to medicate and release them. They went off their medication once and committed horrific crimes, and there has to be monitoring and early alert if it happens again. Many seriously and dangerously mentally ill people resent the medication and are prone to avoiding it. There should be clear consequences to that, not for punishment but for protection of society.

If indeed this 'law' is about opening a national conversation about protection of society, then I support it.

If it's about punishment, then it's useless.

I totally agree. For murder, the person should be closely monitored, especially for meds, but also state of mind, for the rest of their lives. That would mean living in a mental health group home, or having to check in with a psych nurse every day. In that case I have no problem releasing them.

The biggest bs is the temporary insanity - like that doctor in Montreal who got off from killing his children because he was deemed temporarily insane and has now been released or is about to be. That's a travesty.

[Topaz]

There COULD be one downfall on this, will he always have his meds? Will he always have the money to buy them, through the rest of his life? We hear about some many people not having the money for their meds. Would it be better for him to have the meds under his skin and automatically release them?

[guyser]

Neither does someone who is high, or someone who commits a murder in the heat of the moment

Not quite right,as a blanket statement. Mitigating curcumstances can and do adjust the penalty.

yet we still demand they serve their sentences.

Did Li serve his sentence or not?

[Guest Manny]

I guess the main concern I would have is how do we really know if the person is cured, or not. The mind is a very complex thing that is still a great mystery to us. Just because some psychologist says he's all better now, wouldn't be enough to put me at ease. There can be considerable dispute among medical professionals in these circumstances.

Knowing that someone is so unstable that they might kill, simply because they did not take their medication would not make me feel comfortable near that person. Me, or my kids. Or anyone else for that matter.

Second thing, someone lost their life, and that's a huge tragedy. Even when people make mistakes that result in the death of another person, there are laws and sentences that can apply. Like through negligent use of a vehicle, or firearm or what have you. In a case like this, not taking the medication that keeps you from killing is negligence.

[eyeball]

Can we be sure that a mentally ill person has been "cured" when they are released back into the public? About as much as we can be sure that a criminal person has been "rehabilitated" when they're let back out into the public.

Schizophrenia cannot be cured it is treatable however. We can only be as sure as his doctors that his treatment has been effective. It's unfortunate society has such little faith in the experts who are in far better position to determine the long term outcome of the Vincent Lee's of the world - as if the social stigma the mentally ill already have to bear wasn't enough. I think this distrust and cynicism in academic expertise is a real issue that's making discourse and understanding difficult in a lot of other areas too. I blame political exploitation and moral entrepreneurs for this egregious breakdown in public trust in many of our institutions.

The idea that Vincent Li could be free as a bird after beheading a man just a few years ago is extremely upsetting to people. I'm not sure what can be done about the situation. I don't think keeping a man in permanent custody because people are mad is an option.

-k

It would probably be a lot less upsetting if people took a little time to understand the nature of mental illness. It would be a lot better for society if the government ramped up it's recently announced Mental Health Strategy and especially those parts related to public education.

[Guest Peeves]

It seems to be accepted that with some mental illness a treatment with drug(s) corrects the ailment. There are many forms of mental illness, and, degrees even within them. Meds can often be mind altering as to creative ability, capacity or lucidity. Therefore when left to their own devices some potentially violent offenders chose to go off their drugs.

Returning a violent (murderer) to society without a hard and fast means of ensuring they are 'medicated' is irresponsible as society is being threatened and punished.

That leaves only one choice, the mentally ill person that has a potential for violence must be guaranteed as safe by what ever means needed. I personally would never rely and accept that a 'freed' mental patient will without exception continue taking their meds.

Therefore unless a time release pill or injection of a REQUIRED drug is available that cannot be missed or otherwise avoided, I want the violent mental case under supervision in a facility.

The fact that they have a mental condition that threatens others is sufficient to warrant the protection of others as the primary obligation in dealing with such situations.

[August1991]

If a person is schizophrenic or severely bipolar, chops off a head, and then is found to have mental illness, is given proper needed medication and improves dramatically, and is proven to stay on that medic willfully on his own accord (given the meds as any one would a prescription, and remembers to take it everyday) I don't see why you wouldn't let that person on the street.

There are simply too many ifs in that argument.

I would be leery about living in a society where anybody could carry a concealed loaded gun.

----

The OP is germaine though because these cases seem to be more prevalent.

A Quebec doctor who fatally stabbed his two children should be detained for at least one more year, according to psychiatrists who evaluated him.

"The fragility is still there – It hasn't been dealt with, so, there is still a risk,” said Guy Desjardins, who met with Guy Turcotte nine times for a total of 17 hours.

CBC

My fear is that defence lawyers will increasingly use this as a strategy believing that their client will be released in a short period of time.

[Moonlight Graham]

My fear is that defence lawyers will increasingly use this as a strategy believing that their client will be released in a short period of time.

Yes, especially since it's hard to physically observe empirically things like bipolar disorder, psychosis, and schizophrenia. I'm not a neurologist, maybe there are brain scans that can observe these things happening in the brain? Rather than just relying on a psychiatrist's and others' observations of the patient.

[fellowtraveller]

Whats to stop him from cutting off the tracking device and disappearing before the police get there?

If a doctor is willing to put their career on the line by saying he is ok as long as he takes his meds then let him live in a minimum prison or a halfway house where he will follow strict rules and be monitored when taking meds and will be with curfew and all that stuff. Break the rules and he goes back to the hospital.

What is to stop any convicted murderer from killing again while in prison? Answer: nothing.

There are no guarantees.

What is to stop Li from murdering sagfe house staff? The threat of going back to hospital? Why would that stop him.

What bothers me is that his crime was not just horrific, it was planned. He bough a knife. He bought a bus ticket. He got on the bus. I can accept that he was crazy, but I don't accept that he can just be released with the promise of taking meds. Tracking devices are not foolproof, but when taking it off or tampering with it means back to the nuthouse will make his lizard brain think twice.

I don't really give a shit about the civil liberties implications of a life sentence of having to wear a tracking device.

[guyser]

I would be leery about living in a society where anybody could carry a concealed loaded gun.

You already do.

Are you worried now?