Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

To diagnose a serial killer

Collapse
X
 
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • GUT
    replied
    Originally posted by curious4 View Post
    Hello GUT

    That really does explain things clearly. Wow!
    Thanks.

    Best wishes
    C4
    That was the "Nutshell" version, the one mentioned earlier with hyperglycemia (or was it hypo) would have been because such a condition can cause confusion and obviously t was accepted that the confusion caused was severe enough to interfere in capacity to understand right from wrong.

    One exception is when you have bough on the inability yourself (in most jurisdictions anyway) by drugs or alcohol.

    Leave a comment:


  • curious4
    replied
    Originally posted by GUT View Post
    Show an inability to know right from wrong, regardless of the cause, and MacNaughten kicks in.

    Had a client once, committed an awful murder made Jack's look tame anyone would have said she was as mad as a hatter, even the psych said she had major mental health problems including PTSD, she went down because of steps she took to hide it (showed she knew what she'd done was wrong) pretty sure she was the first women here, to get Life means life.
    Hello GUT

    That really does explain things clearly. Wow!
    Thanks.

    Then I suppose Jack would be deemed insane, as he made no effort to hide anything. (Except himself of course).

    Best wishes
    C4
    Last edited by curious4; 10-05-2015, 02:00 AM.

    Leave a comment:


  • GUT
    replied
    Originally posted by John G View Post
    Criminal insanity is determined by the McNaughton Rules, which requires the condition to be a "disease of the mind", and therefore not necessarily a disease of the brain. This is a legal rather than a medical question, which is why being in the state of hypoglycaemia night allow for an insanity defence: see R v Quick.
    Show an inability to know right from wrong, regardless of the cause, and MacNaughten kicks in.

    Had a client once, committed an awful murder made Jack's look tame anyone would have said she was as mad as a hatter, even the psych said she had major mental health problems including PTSD, she went down because of steps she took to hide it (showed she knew what she'd done was wrong) pretty sure she was the first women here, to get Life means life.

    Leave a comment:


  • curious4
    replied
    Originally posted by John G View Post
    Criminal insanity is determined by the McNaughton Rules, which requires the condition to be a "disease of the mind", and therefore not necessarily a disease of the brain. This is a legal rather than a medical question, which is why being in the state of hypoglycaemia night allow for an insanity defence: see R v Quick.
    Thanks John

    Fascinating. I was familiar with the McNaughten rules but not in detail, and especially the more recent judgements.

    Best wishes
    C4

    Leave a comment:


  • John G
    replied
    Criminal insanity is determined by the McNaughton Rules, which requires the condition to be a "disease of the mind", and therefore not necessarily a disease of the brain. This is a legal rather than a medical question, which is why being in the state of hypoglycaemia night allow for an insanity defence: see R v Quick.

    Leave a comment:


  • Trevor Marriott
    replied
    Originally posted by Pierre View Post
    Hi Simon,

    And just because there is no evidence as far as you can see, and given that we do have a lot of what you call bogus rubbish, that still doesnīt mean that Jack the Ripper didnīt exist.

    I can understand your interest in the deconstruction of ripperology but such methods arenīt methods for solving murder cases.

    Regards Pierre
    When you look closely at the murders you can likely as not link three to the same killer Eddowes Chapman and Nichols. So I guess on that basis you could say a serial killer was at work but as Simon says there wasn't a Jack the Ripper the name was not invented by the killer via the letters etc.

    www.trevormarriott.co.uk

    Leave a comment:


  • curious4
    replied
    Originally posted by GUT View Post
    There is a big difference between having (or not having) a psychiatric disorder and being Criminally (in)sane.

    Sanity is purely a legal test
    Hello GUT

    Could you explain the difference? No problem understanding what a personality disorder is, but how do you get a verdict of criminally insane without some kind of diagnosis of mental illness?

    Best wishes
    C4

    Leave a comment:


  • lynn cates
    replied
    yup

    Hello Simon. Just so.

    Before one holds forth on serial killers, one must be sure there are serial killings.

    Cheers.
    LC

    Leave a comment:


  • DJA
    replied
    Originally posted by Pierre View Post
    PD = Personality Disorder. My fault.

    Regards Pierre
    Not really.

    You were possibly born that way.

    Leave a comment:


  • Pierre
    replied
    Originally posted by GUT View Post
    There is a big difference between having (or not having) a psychiatric disorder and being Criminally (in)sane.

    Sanity is purely a legal test
    PD = Personality Disorder. My fault.

    Regards Pierre

    Leave a comment:


  • Fisherman
    replied
    Originally posted by The Good Michael View Post
    Valentino may have been to young a man to have done such a thing, in fact he wasn't born yet, but as good as Lechmere at least...just a joke Fish.


    Mike
    And a sheik one at that...

    Leave a comment:


  • GUT
    replied
    Originally posted by The Good Michael View Post
    Valentino may have been to young a man to have done such a thing, in fact he wasn't born yet, but as good as Lechmere at least...just a joke Fish.


    Mike
    Rudolph was a Reindeer not a fish.

    Leave a comment:


  • The Good Michael
    replied
    Originally posted by GUT View Post
    Nope it was Rudolph.
    Valentino may have been to young a man to have done such a thing, in fact he wasn't born yet, but as good as Lechmere at least...just a joke Fish.


    Mike

    Leave a comment:


  • GUT
    replied
    Originally posted by DJA View Post
    Is that a hint that Sanity Clause was the Ripper?

    Nope it was Rudolph.

    Leave a comment:


  • DJA
    replied
    Originally posted by GUT View Post

    Sanity is purely a legal test
    Is that a hint that Sanity Clause was the Ripper?

    Leave a comment:

Working...
X