At what level of crime do you say that person has been mentally defective all along 05 30 2025 draft article elements

 Dismemberment?

Something about fit to stand trial?  Somebody is accused of 

Why offer the general public a grain of hope of only being life in prison if they were to commit such a horrific crime or really crime against humanity?

Who among us needs that grain of hope assertion?

Who needs that...it really isn't liberal leniency is it?  Democrats didn't use to think that way.

Perhaps the question is, is there a large faction of our population that the general public doesn't know exist?  And that faction is irresponsible in everything that they do.  And it really helps them if they are constantly assured that they can really do no wrong that would result in their legal execution?

So you look at someone who committed a horrific crime they were found guilty of it beyond any reasonable doubt.  ZERO chance for error.  Because they committed a horrific crime weren't they really mentally ill the whole time.  And yet they stood trial.  Perhaps the criteria really has to do with coherency.  But the point here being, in retrospect, the nature of the crime means that they were mentally defective.

So perhaps it is merciful to spare the mentally defective?  But it really makes a statement that they are not mentally defective.  I should put that in all caps.  You are really making the statement that the underling-ness of it isn't a mental defect.  And again who among us needs a reassurance like that?

And these are concepts you likely never read about and find hard to understand.  Again think of the concepts and do not attempt to fixate on who wrote them?

Aha.  Someone who can't understand concepts fixates on the person who articulated them?  Sounds like how a criminal mind works.  "Instead of learning I will fixate on the teacher."  "Instead of teaching I will fixate on a student?"

"Instead of doing the job I will fixate on the employer."  "Instead of doing the job I will fixate on the employee."  Never went to college and then had to contend with 'people' like this?

So sometimes I have to digress in order to work my way back to the main points in these articles.

So perhaps the main point is that often people who do horrific things and have prison sentences that would seem where they are in there for life are freed.  And you might ask yourself, has someone who dismembered people really had enough talking to, enough highly paid therapy, whereby you would be comfortable with them being your neighbor?

So who among us needs that reassurance that no matter what they do wrong they won't be legally executed for it?

I worked with a gal who had a mentally retarded person in her family.  And she said to me, every family has one.  I was shocked to hear that.  But it is more and more true isn't it.  And perhaps they do "outgrow it"  And if they didn't have that assertion, as mentioned above, it would not be as easy for them to outgrow it.

Okay.  I wrote it.  I had every right to say it.  And if my Constitutional right to free speech doesn't protect me...you don't understand that do you.

© 2025 Thomas Paul Murphy