Not Guilty by reason of Insanity READ OP FIRST

TomTomTim

Samsonsmasher wrote: »

Manson Dahmer Bundy Hyndley etc were all sane.

A person who is insane is not responsible for their actions.

Legally insanity is simply not knowing what you were doing. You didn't know your actions were wrong, as you were likely suffering from some form of psychosis. I know that even Richard Chase, The Vampire of Sacramento, didn't even meet the bar for insanity in the states even though he likely should of qualified. I don't see how the insanity element here was clearly established.

Wanderer78

Deleted User wrote: »

I wish and hope that she has to re-live the evil she commited every waking moment and is kept away from the public for the rest of her life

Her family, I wish all the best.

would you ever go away and read up on mental health conditions such as psychosis, ffs!

https://www.webmd.com/schizophrenia/guide/what-is-psychosis#:~:text=Psychosis%20is%20a%20condition%20that,or%20trauma%20can%20cause%20it.

tritium

Lollipops23 wrote: »

She presented at a hospital weeks before the murder, pleading for help.

Hawe didn't- he just wanted to murder his kids, for his own selfish reasons.]

I'm glad she's going to get the help she needs- for everyone's safety.

In the view of the clinical director of the central mental hospital Hawe was seriously mentally ill. The fact that a few rag newspapers have published unsubstantiated (and in some cases apparently incorrect) information about that case to play an agenda doesn’t change the fact. Had he survived it’s very likely we’d see a similar defence. Sadly we’ll never know if shining a proper light on mental health in the aftermath of that case (as opposed to the likes of the IT playing identity politics with it) could have seen changes that might have made a difference here.

On both these cases they are utterly tragic. Personally I find it difficult to decide my feelings for the killers. Part of me knows that mental illness changes who a person is but another part struggles to separate the person from the act. My heart goes out to the children’s father god bless him. Very few of us will, thankfully, ever understand or know that much suffering

con___manx1

pjohnson wrote: »

My empathy is reserved for the victims not the murderer.

Well then it's a good job you were not on the jury.
Its obviously horrific what she did. I couldn't even finish reading an article about the details of the case.
The bottom line is mental illness is real. Most people will not go and kill others. They usually just kill themselves.

Samsonsmasher

Samsonsmasher wrote: »

If or when she is recovered she should be released and return to normal life.

Would you feel comfortable with a person like this in society? Would you leave your kids with her?

joe40

joe40 wrote: »

And yet all the psychiatric healthcare professional, all the medical teams, all the legal teams, on both sides, think differently. Even the father of the dead children think otherwise.

You're perfectly entitled to your opinion but it does not reflect any of the actual expert opinion in this case.

The expert opinion is that we should all give the woman sympathy?

Nah.

mohawk

Sweet.Science wrote: »

Its a real grey area mental illness being a reason to get away with murder . I assume most who commit atrocities have some sort of mental disorder

Just on this one. Its the only case in my life i couldn't read the details on . I started but had to stop.

I often think similar when I read or hear about murder cases (except self defence). My thoughts are how could any right thinking individual do something so terrible to another. But, I think there is a difference between someone killing during a psychotic breakdown and someone who can kill in their normal state of mind.
Parents killing their children is always so hard to even comprehend. Home is supposed to be where our children are safest. It’s just unimaginable how these things happen.

Wanderer78

Wanderer78 wrote: »

would you ever go away and read up on mental health conditions such as psychosis, ffs!

https://www.webmd.com/schizophrenia/guide/what-is-psychosis#:~:text=Psychosis%20is%20a%20condition%20that,or%20trauma%20can%20cause%20it.

I've read up about it.

Doesn't change my opinion on this woman and what she did.

Doesn't change that I don't want people who commit these types of murders in the general public.

I know, I know... Radical thinking on my behalf....

Samsonsmasher

Samsonsmasher wrote: »

Manson Dahmer Bundy Hyndley etc were all sane.

A person who is insane is not responsible for their actions.

Lol.

They were totally sane.

Antares35

[Deleted User] wrote: »

Would you feel comfortable with a person like this in society? Would you leave your kids with her?

I was going to ask this too. Everyone going on about how she might not always be insane and someday will return to "normal". Normal enough to resume her work looking after other people's sick and vulnerable children? I'd run a mile before entrusting my daughters into her care.

Wanderer78

Deleted User wrote: »

I've read up about it.

Doesn't change my opinion on this woman and what she did.

Doesn't change that I don't want people who commit these types of murders in the general public.

I know, I know... Radical thinking on my behalf....

theres nothing radical about your thinking, its just ignorance, you need to read more, and maybe talk to those that have actually experienced these type of disturbances

Lemonee_

Lemonee_ wrote: »

Interesting article here regarding the Central Mental Hospital, gives a good explanation.

https://www.irishtimes.com/life-and-style/health-family/not-guilty-by-reason-of-insanity-inside-the-central-mental-hospital-1.3544665?mode=amp

While 3 years old, its still very relevant and incredibly detailed and informative- required reading for anyone contributing to this thread as there’s some desperately uninformed posts here

JimmyVik

Mullinabreena wrote: »

Was Deirdre Morley originally from Dublin? I wonder had she much family support around her in the build up to this tragedy?

She had a husband and 3 children to support her.

Wanderer78

Wanderer78 wrote: »

theres nothing radical about your thinking, its just ignorance, you need to read more, and maybe talk to those that have actually experienced these type of disturbances

I have plenty of experience when it comes to mental illness personally, in my family and in friends.

It's quite presumptuous and condescending of you to think otherwise.

It's not ignorant to want this woman away from the general public considering her actions.

tobefrank321

TomTomTim wrote: »

Legally insanity is simply not knowing what you were doing. You didn't know your actions were wrong, as you were likely suffering from some form of psychosis. I know that even Richard Chase, The Vampire of Sacramento, didn't even meet the bar for insanity in the states even though he likely should of qualified. I don't see how the insanity element here was clearly established.

A sociopath probably wouldn't know right from wrong. An egomaniac probably would but wouldn't care. There's a fine line between these and insanity. People often debate if dictators of the past were insane or just sociopaths but most were in the latter category.

For me anything that involves a significant amont of long term, detailed and relatively logical planning is not insanity. The act may appear insane but the planning isn't.

JackTC

Mullinabreena wrote: »

Was Deirdre Morley originally from Dublin? I wonder had she much family support around her in the build up to this tragedy?

From Dublin, Youngest of 8 children

Samsonsmasher

Antares35 wrote: »

I was going to ask this too. Everyone going on about how she might not always be insane and someday will return to "normal". Normal enough to resume her work looking after other people's sick and vulnerable children? I'd run a mile before entrusting my daughters into her care.

I never said she should be allowed to care for children again. However if she recovers her sanity and is not longer mentally ill she is free to go obviously.

Wanderer78

Deleted User wrote: »

I have plenty of experience when it comes to mental illness personally, in my family and in friends.

It's quite presumptuous and condescending of you to think otherwise.

It's not ignorant to want this woman away from the general public considering her actions.

you need to do more research so, for your own benefit and for the benefit of your loved ones, we do not know the current state of this womans health, id like to think she is receiving the appropriate care, and is now safe to return to as normal life as possible. we as onlookers do not have the right to make judgments on her well being, and her ability to live a normal life amongst us, we must trust the legal and health systems to make such a judgment. yes her actions were horrendous, but it shows how much of a destressed state she was in, and we as a society did not react, we all should be reflecting on this fact!

CiDeRmAn

Wanderer78 wrote: »

theres nothing radical about your thinking, its just ignorance, you need to read more, and maybe talk to those that have actually experienced these type of disturbances

Indeed, everyone is entitled to an opinion, but not all opinions are informed opinions.

The woman was clinically insane at the time she killed her children, therefore she cannot be culpable, regardless of someone here "feeling" it was otherwise.
She will be incarcerated until she is determined to be well and then she will be released, albeit with mental health involvement for the rest of her life.
The only danger that she then presents is that to herself, that she may take her own life because of what she did to her children.

I have worked in mental health/ intellectual disability for 30 years, in case you were wondering if I had an informed opinion.

Sweet.Science

She thought about taking her own life, but thought “I can’t leave the children.”

She wanted to get away and felt overwhelmed looking after the children. Her records noted that she “can’t manage children at all.”

Ms Morley described a fantasy “that I am in apartment in Paris, no children, just me”

All very hard to read and doesn't sit right . This wasn't a spontaneous breakdown / decision

iamwhoiam

Antares35 wrote: »

I was going to ask this too. Everyone going on about how she might not always be insane and someday will return to "normal". Normal enough to resume her work looking after other people's sick and vulnerable children? I'd run a mile before entrusting my daughters into her care.

Of course she wont ever be allowed work with children again .

stoneill

Deleted User wrote: »

I have plenty of experience when it comes to mental illness personally, in my family and in friends.

It's quite presumptuous and condescending of you to think otherwise.

It's not ignorant to want this woman away from the general public considering her actions.

Jaysus!
Do you think she was just let walk out of court or something?
She was found Not Guilty by reason of insanity - this is not the same as innocent.
She will probably spend the rest of her days in the Central Mental Hospital, is that far enough away for you?

tobefrank321

Wanderer78 wrote: »

you need to do more research so, for your own benefit and for the benefit of your loved ones, we do not know the current state of this womans health, id like to think she is receiving the appropriate care, and is now safe to return to as normal life as possible. we as onlookers do not have the right to make judgments on her well being, and her ability to live a normal life amongst us, we must trust the legal and health systems to make such a judgment. yes her actions were horrendous, but it shows how much of a destressed state she was in, and we as a society did not react, we all should be reflecting on this fact!

Not a hope of her returning to normal life any time soon. That would make for a very dangerous precedent and encourage more Alan Hawes. Kill your family, claim insanity, then sanity after a few years to be allowed out. No thanks. This woman should spend most of the rest of her life in some sort of confinement.

Wanderer78

Wanderer78 wrote: »

you need to do more research so, for your own benefit and for the benefit of your loved ones, we do not know the current state of this womans health, id like to think she is receiving the appropriate care, and is now safe to return to as normal life as possible. we as onlookers do not have the right to make judgments on her well being, and her ability to live a normal life amongst us, we must trust the legal and health systems to make such a judgment. yes her actions were horrendous, but it shows how much of a destressed state she was in, and we as a society did not react, we all should be reflecting on this fact!

Respectfully, I do not need to do any more research.

And I do have a right to make a judgement. Just as you would like to think she was safe to return to a life as normal as possible, I would like to think that she never is within touching distance of a child ever again.

And ffs, blaming us as a society for not reacting and telling us we should reflect on it and in the same breath telling us to trust the legal and health systems?

Samsonsmasher

tobefrank321 wrote: »

A sociopath probably wouldn't know right from wrong. An egomaniac probably would but wouldn't care. There's a fine line between these and insanity. People often debate if dictators of the past were insane or just sociopaths but most were in the latter category.

For me anything that involves a significant amont of long term, detailed and relatively logical planning is not insanity. The act may appear insane but the planning isn't.

You clearly don't understand the terms you are using.

Both sociopaths and psychopaths understand right and wrong it's just they don't obey the law. Sociopaths have a conscience and are remorseful but still commit criminal behavior. Psychopaths have no conscience because they have no emotions like fear or love or remorse and don't care who they hurt.
A sociopath or psychopath could develop psychosis and insanity but most are not insane.
They know right from wrong.

A person can be highly organized and commit an act which involves detailed planning but still be insane at the time.

You are simply wrong and do not know what you are talking about.

stoneill

stoneill wrote: »

Jaysus!
Do you think she was just let walk out of court or something?
She was found Not Guilty by reason of insanity - this is not the same as innocent.
She will probably spend the rest of her days in the Central Mental Hospital, is that far enough away for you?

Yes.

That's exactly what I was advocating for.

Not quite sure why you thought otherwise....

firemansam4

It really is a tragic case and horrific case.

I can understand both points of view on this, on the one hand its incomprehensible what she did, how could the mother, the most important person in their lives commit such a horrific act against them? I can certainly see why people would not want to show her any sympathy and would wish her to suffer for what she has done.

But then on the other side I have to think what sane person could possibly do this to their own children? from all accounts her children meant the world to her yet something inside her made her perform these most horrific acts on them.
I really just cant see how she could have been of sound mind to do this.
And it seems that experts in the field have come to this conclusion also.

Having said that I dont think she should ever be released into society again or at least not for a very large portion of her life anyway.
This may be a controversial thing to say but if she is still of the mind of wanting to kill herself it might actually be in her best interests to let her do it.

iamwhoiam

iamwhoiam wrote: »

Of course she wont ever be allowed work with children again .

Judging by some on here, that would be harsh as, on her release, she is no longer insane and has recovered.

silverharp

Samsonsmasher wrote: »

You clearly don't understand the terms you are using.

Both sociopaths and psychopaths understand right and wrong it's just they don't obey the law. Sociopaths have a conscience and are remorseful but still commit criminal behavior. Psychopaths have no conscience because they have no emotions like fear or love or remorse and don't care who they hurt.
A sociopath or psychopath could develop psychosis and insanity but most are not insane.
They know right from wrong.

A person can be highly organized and commit an act which involves detailed planning but still be insane at the time.

You are simply wrong and do not know what you are talking about.

at the end of the day "insane" is just a word for a category that isnt absolute. If you picked up any psychology book and looked for a particular term, one book would say...here are the 5 essential traits of X , another Psychologist will write a book that describes the 8 essential traits of the same X...huh? where did the other 3 come from?

tobefrank321

Samsonsmasher wrote: »

You clearly don't understand the terms you are using.

Both sociopaths and psychopaths understand right and wrong it's just they don't obey the law. Sociopaths have a conscience and are remorseful but still commit criminal behavior. Psychopaths have no conscience because they have no emotions like fear or love or remorse and don't care who they hurt.
A sociopath or psychopath could develop psychosis and insanity but most are not insane.
They know right from wrong.

A person can be highly organized and commit an act which involves detailed planning but still be insane at the time.

You are simply wrong and do not know what you are talking about.

https://www.verywellmind.com/what-is-a-sociopath-380184

While psychopaths are classified as people with little or no conscience, sociopaths do have a limited, albeit weak, ability to feel empathy and remorse. Psychopaths can and do follow social conventions when it suits their needs. Sociopaths are more likely to fly off the handle and react violently whenever they're confronted by the consequences of their actions.

Sociopaths have limited empathy. Psychopaths have next to none.

Like I said people often confuse insanity and sociopathy or psychopathy. There can be a fine line. Some medical professionals claimed Alan Hawe was insane for example. Numerous dictators have been labelled insane including the most infamous one. But a socio or psychopath is not insane, even if they perpetrate insane acts such as familicide.