[Tricks]

So in an earlier CBC article it does say he was admitted to William Osler Health Centre. However, nothing about a previous diagnoses of schizophrenia.

https://www.cbc.ca/news/canada/manitoba ... s-1.907329

He was discharged against medical advice, but it doesn't saying anything about a diagnosis. I would think that would be important information in a review board briefing.

$1:

He had one psychiatric admission to hospital. In 2005, he went to Ontario from
Winnipeg in search of employment. He was picked up by police walking on the highway
on his way back to Winnipeg from Toronto and was admitted to William Osler Health
Centre in Etobicoke. He was allowed to be discharged against medical advice and
returned to Winnipeg, where he did not seek further psychiatric help.

(Note, this is a pdf, may download)
http://murderpedia.org/male.L/images/li ... nce-li.pdf


I'd imagine what likely happened, is he was admitted to the hospital, they were trying to treat him, they hadn't diagnosed him yet, or at the very least hadn't put in real treatment protocols for him, so nothing was solved when he left the hospital. Schizophrenics, even after being diagnosed, take time to come to terms with the fact they are mentally ill, and it sounds like he was there for 10 days. That's not enough time for him to understand his illness, if it were even diagnosed. It's likely why virtually every mental health professional who has been asked about this case has agreed with the NCR. He wasn't aware he was sick, he wasn't aware of reality.

[herbie]

My buddie's wife repeatedly "gets better" and stops taking her meds. Usually when she reads some utter bullshit thing on Facebook, like how honey 'cures' bipolar...
They find her three days later in N Saskatchewan 'following her spirit eagle' or some such thing.
Women aren't typically as violent, but when I was a kid one of my Mom's friends stabbed three of her kids out of the blue. In them days it was a 'nervous breakdown' and she went straight to the funny farm, not court.

[newz]

herbie herbie:

$1:

It's our justice system that's to blame for things like this

It wouldn't be a justice system if it didn't have NCR.

Bullshit! It would still be a justice system, just not a liberal crapfest of one.

[DrCaleb]

newz newz:

herbie herbie:

$1:

It's our justice system that's to blame for things like this

It wouldn't be a justice system if it didn't have NCR.

Bullshit! It would still be a justice system, just not a liberal crapfest of one.

Without NCR, it becomes a vengeance system.

Same reason we don't punish children for their offences; because they aren't capable of knowing right from wrong.

[llama66]

No, it becomes a justice system. There is no justice in allowing someone to circumvent the system and a potentially shorter sentence by claiming NCR. If they want to claim NCR, then they should be committed and forced to receive treatment for the same length of time if they were convicted of the charge criminally.

[DrCaleb]

llama66 llama66:

No, it becomes a justice system. There is no justice in allowing someone to circumvent the system and a potentially shorter sentence by claiming NCR. If they want to claim NCR, then they should be committed and forced to receive treatment for the same length of time if they were convicted of the charge criminally.

I don't disagree with you, except that; if the problem with their ability to comprehend reality is fixed, why should they continue to be punished for something they had no control over? Keeping them in hospital for any length beyond what treatment required only makes them a burden to the system and does nothing to serve justice. It would only be vengeance.

I realize a lot of anger comes from NCR pleas, but that's because people don't understand mental illness. For example, the drugs used to control a mental imbalance can also have very severe side effects. And people taking the drugs are prone to think once the drugs take effect, that they can skip them because they are "cured", also a side effect to the mental illness and the severity of the side effects.

If they get found NCR, which is not an easy thing to do, the justice systems should have little say in how long they are treated for. That's a Doctor's arena. If the person needs lifelong treatment, that should be up to the doctors. Getting found as "NCR" is a life sentence in itself. "Vince Lee" had to change his name in order to escape some of the stigma, and he will always be under the care of a doctor.

[llama66]

DrCaleb DrCaleb:

llama66 llama66:

No, it becomes a justice system. There is no justice in allowing someone to circumvent the system and a potentially shorter sentence by claiming NCR. If they want to claim NCR, then they should be committed and forced to receive treatment for the same length of time if they were convicted of the charge criminally.

I don't disagree with you, except that; if the problem with their ability to comprehend reality is fixed, why should they continue to be punished for something they had no control over? Keeping them in hospital for any length beyond what treatment required only makes them a burden to the system and does nothing to serve justice. It would only be vengeance.

I realize a lot of anger comes from NCR pleas, but that's because people don't understand mental illness. For example, the drugs used to control a mental imbalance can also have very severe side effects. And people taking the drugs are prone to think once the drugs take effect, that they can skip them because they are "cured", also a side effect to the mental illness and the severity of the side effects.

If they get found NCR, which is not an easy thing to do, the justice systems should have little say in how long they are treated for. That's a Doctor's arena. If the person needs lifelong treatment, that should be up to the doctors. Getting found as "NCR" is a life sentence in itself. "Vince Lee" had to change his name in order to escape some of the stigma, and he will always be under the care of a doctor.

Look at it less as "punished" and more as "protected from". If these people have proven they cannot operate in society or if they present a threat to themselves or the public at large, should we just let them "roam free" for fear of punishing them for something they don't "understand"? I think there is a societal responsibility to care for the most vulnerable that includes mentally ill.

If they can't be trusted to constantly take their meds, then, really, can they be trusted to live unsupervised?

Your right, far be it for a judge to determine how a patient is treated, be he can impose how long they are treated for.

[martin14]

DrCaleb DrCaleb:

"Vince Lee" had to change his name in order to escape some of the stigma, and he will always be under the care of a doctor.

Not according to the law....

https://www.cbc.ca/news/canada/manitoba ... -1.3977278

$1:

Last year, he was permitted to move into independent living, but he had to abide by certain rules, which included taking medications and attending counselling appointments.

According to a 1999 ruling by the Supreme Court of Canada, a review board must order an absolute discharge if a person doesn't pose a significant threat to public safety.

$1:

Baker has expressed a desire to "stay engaged" with his doctors and mental health organizations, Summerville said.

Staying engaged, but not legally required.



From what Robair posted:

$1:

The province's Criminal Code Review Board ruled he is no longer required to attend annual reviews or abide by conditions.

So he has a completely free walk.



It's a complete disaster for the Mclean family, years and years of nothing
but be shit on by every facet of Canadian society.

No justice.
No satisfaction.
No compensation from Greyhound or the government.
No changes in the law.
Every agency in Canada going batshit insane to make sure
Vince got the full victim treatment.

Meanwhile, the real victim lies in a cemetery; most of him, anyway.

[DrCaleb]

martin14 martin14:

Staying engaged, but not legally required.

I didn't write that he would be. I wrote he'd be under a doctors' care for life. Which your quote backed up.

martin14 martin14:

From what Robair posted:

$1:

The province's Criminal Code Review Board ruled he is no longer required to attend annual reviews or abide by conditions.

So he has a completely free walk.



It's a complete disaster for the Mclean family, years and years of nothing
but be shit on by every facet of Canadian society.

No justice.
No satisfaction.
No compensation from Greyhound or the government.
No changes in the law.
Every agency in Canada going batshit insane to make sure
Vince got the full victim treatment.

Meanwhile, the real victim lies in a cemetery; most of him, anyway.

How do you extract those from a person who did not understand what he was doing was wrong? 'Justice' does not seek those things, 'vengeance' does.

It sucks for the family, for sure. But if it's prevention they want, why not put some effort into getting more funding for the mental health part of the healthcare system?

Also, from your link:

$1:

Grant said the criminal justice system doesn't apply its usual "punishment-based model" to offenders who are not criminally responsible. Instead, the model is based on treatment with the goal of allowing offenders to eventually function in society.

But she said the system can feel painfully unfair for people affected by violence.

"I think that we have to be respectful of people who disagree with the decision on that basis, but recognize that we've made a decision as a civilized country that we don't punish people who really didn't know what they were doing at the time of the offence, and really didn't know that they were doing something wrong, and that's a very, very small subset of people," she said.

[CharlesAnthony]

martin14 martin14:

No compensation from Greyhound or the government.

Good point.
Greyhound needs to be responsible for their security breach.

All of the rest is media-whoredom to distract the public's attention away from the key point.

[martin14]

DrCaleb DrCaleb:

I wrote he'd be under a doctors' care for life.

Only if he wants to.

$1:

It sucks for the family, for sure.

$1:

But she said the system can feel painfully unfair for people affected by violence.

"I think that we have to be respectful of people who disagree with the decision on that basis, but recognize that we've made a decision as a civilized country that we don't punish people who really didn't know what they were doing at the time of the offence, and really didn't know that they were doing something wrong, and that's a very, very small subset of people," she said.

Like I said, batshit insane crying Vince the victim.
Like anyone will really know what Vince was or was not thinking at the time.

Tim ?

Not so much.

[DrCaleb]

martin14 martin14:

Like I said, batshit insane crying Vince the victim.

Quote one person claiming that.


I'll wait.

[martin14]

DrCaleb DrCaleb:

martin14 martin14:

Like I said, batshit insane crying Vince the victim.

Quote one person claiming that.


I'll wait.

https://nationalpost.com/news/greyhound ... ear-voices


Chris Summerville, CEO of the Schizophrenia Society of Canada
What we have here,” Summerville added in an email that accompanied the interview, “are two victims and two families who are victims of untreated, uncontrolled psychosis.”

[herbie]

Doc, you're arguing with people who think punishment and justice mean the same thing.
Who think that mental illness is terminal and you can never get better, so therefore if a doctor says you are better, you obviously faked it.
Who can't understand that if judgement is impaired by drugs or alcohol that was a choice where mental illness wasn't, thus different legal implications.
Even some who think Judges should be elected by popularity rather than appointed because of proven law skills.

I'll settle that one of them admits he's not lawyer, but....

[DrCaleb]

herbie herbie:

Doc, you're arguing with people who think punishment and justice mean the same thing.
Who think that mental illness is terminal and you can never get better, so therefore if a doctor says you are better, you obviously faked it.
Who can't understand that if judgement is impaired by drugs or alcohol that was a choice where mental illness wasn't, thus different legal implications.
Even some who think Judges should be elected by popularity rather than appointed because of proven law skills.

I'll settle that one of them admits he's not lawyer, but....

And that's the whole point of logical debate - to change people's minds.