Jurors turn down insanity plea in murder case

Doreen Camilleri

Sep 18th 2008, 15:32

@Claudine Cassar
hmmmm...Do read what i wrote! did i mention schizophrenia?! a crime is a crime - murder is murder - and pleading insanity or crimes of passion do not change the result - the perpetrator committed a crime - murder!..and to add some info (although i do not have the inside details of the case) normally a person would have a history of committing acts of domestic violence before leading to murder!..and DV is a crime!
My sympathies lie with the vctim and her loved ones..

albert fiorentino

Sep 18th 2008, 14:31

@Claudine Cassar

Here's a teaser for you since you seem to understand the subject well.
psychiatrist for defence says there is proof that perpetrator is insane
psychiatrist for prosecution says there is no proof that perpetrator is insane.
Both qualified psychiatrists ......so will it be shocking that jurors go one way or the other?
Again no it is not shocking!!!! jurors go on hard evidence (twice may i add in this case).After all that is what jurors do, work on hard evidence not opinions.
Why dont we just do away with jurors and base everything on experts.

Claudine Cassar

Sep 18th 2008, 14:06

@ Doreen Camilleri
With all due respect a crime of passion has nothing to do with being Schizophrenic! A person who suffers from Schizophrenia is not responsible for his or her actions when going through a paranoid or psychotic episode.

@Albert Fiorentino
Yes it is shocking that the jurors did not take the doctor's advice. They are not psychiatrists, so how can they make decisions as to whether a person is insane or not?! This person did not plead insanity after the fact, this person is a long time patient at Mt Carmel and suffers serious mental illness!

So to both of you, stop talking about crimes of passion and temporary insanity, and instead start wondering what the state is doing to help and support (and keep safe!) the families of people who suffer from such mental illnesses!

albert fiorentino

Sep 18th 2008, 13:42

@umberto montalto

Why are you surprised that the jurors did not accept the doctor's advice?
Im sure that the jurors were competent and based their decision on hard evidence.
I personally have no sympathy to anyone pleading insanity after the fact. My sympathy lies only with the victim and the rest of the family.
If you lose your head and hit someone in anger would you call that insanity?
Ms.Doreen Camillieri is 100 % right. I would go a step further and eliminate pleading temporary insanity or crimes of passion.

Martin Debono

Sep 18th 2008, 13:00

In the first place if the was mentally unstable he should not be out in the streets.

The question is, if he had schizophrenia who was the person that signed or gave permission to leave the mental hospital? Is this person also partly responsible for what happened?

And by the way the jurors seem to have more common sense and being more open minded to realize themselves that they don't need to take in consideration the doctors advice.

I agreed with Doreen Camilleri he should be locked with the keys thrown away. Also his photo should be published on all the local newspapers. He is 61 now so I imagine he has nothing to loose if he spends the rest of his life in prison.

umberto montalto

Sep 18th 2008, 01:03

my personal thoughts is unbelievable the whey the jurors come to decision not to accept the doctors advice

Doreen Camilleri

Sep 17th 2008, 20:29

'temporary insanity' and 'crime of passion' are, in most cases, a way to ensure a lenient ruling! if a peson can so easily lose his/her sanity with the result of committing a serious crime such as murder, then they should be locked away and the key thrown away.....if not in a prison then in a mental institution....either way they are still dangerous.