270

‘They’re Eating the Cats’: American Woman Jailed in Ohio (www.thedailybeast.com)

submitted 3 weeks ago by MicroWave@lemmy.world to c/politics@lemmy.world

41 comments fedilink hide all child comments

Summary

Allexis Ferrell, a 27-year-old Ohio woman, was sentenced to one year in prison for killing and attempting to eat a cat.

The case gained global attention after it was falsely linked to Haitian immigrants in Springfield, Ohio, by Donald Trump and JD Vance, despite Ferrell being a U.S. citizen from Canton, 170 miles away.

The baseless claims were widely debunked by authorities.

Ferrell, a mother of three, was found competent to stand trial and requested treatment for substance abuse.

Judge Frank Forchione called the crime "repulsive" and sentenced her to the maximum term.

you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments

[-] Kusimulkku@lemm.ee 15 points 3 weeks ago

The defendant had previously pleaded not guilty by reason of insanity, but a competency report from Akron’s Psycho-Diagnostic Clinic said she was capable of understanding the court proceedings.

The Canton Repository reported that the mother-of-three’s psychological report said she was “irritable, aggressive, deceitful, lacks remorse, shows a reckless disregard for the safety of others and fails to conform to social norms with respect to lawful behaviors by repeatedly performing acts that are grounds for arrest.”

Fucked up

[-] deranger@sh.itjust.works 9 points 3 weeks ago

The defendant had previously pleaded not guilty by reason of insanity, but a competency report from Akron’s Psycho-Diagnostic Clinic said she was capable of understanding the court proceedings.

IANAL, but not guilty by reason by insanity and competent to stand trial are completely different things. You can be competent and not guilty by reason of insanity. Insanity defense means you were out of your mind at time of the crime, not at time of trial or permanently.

[-] raef@lemmy.world 2 points 3 weeks ago

You're talking about "temporary insanity"

[-] deranger@sh.itjust.works 4 points 3 weeks ago* (last edited 3 weeks ago)

No, “not guilty by reason of insanity” is the insanity defense. There is no distinct temporary insanity.

A person is “not guilty by reason of insanity” relative to a charge of an offense only if the person proves, by a preponderance of the evidence and in the manner specified in section 2901.05 of the Revised Code, that at the time of the commission of the offense, the person did not know, as a result of a severe mental disease or defect, the wrongfulness of the person’s acts.

[-] raef@lemmy.world 2 points 3 weeks ago

Okay, I see what you were saying now. Obviously, someone can be insane before, during and after the crime as well. I thought you were excluding chronic insanity with the last sentence

[-] BarrelAgedBoredom@lemm.ee 2 points 3 weeks ago

In legal proceedings, being fit to stand trial is the opposite of insanity. Pleading not guilty for insanity suggests a chronic mental health issue that leaves the person incapable of understanding or making sound judgements.

We have a similar system in place in the medical field. If a person is unable to demonstrate basic self awareness in the moment, they cannot consent to medical care. For us, this means implied consent takes effect and we are allowed to act in what would be considered a reasonable manner to save the patients life. There are systems in place for people who are chronically not oriented; be it medical power of attorney, advanced directives, DNRs, etc

From what I understand, this is (in spirit at least) what's happening in a legal setting as well. If a person isn't capable of understanding the legal proceedings, then they need to be treated for their illness before the case can continue. I could be misremembering but a not guilty verdict by reason of insanity isn't a get out of jail free card, it's a "go to a state run mental institution until you're able to stand trial" card. You're still being locked up, often times into an environment that is significantly worse than the prison you would've gone to instead. Possibly for longer than the sentence they would've (and still may) served in prison. It's an awful system with massive flaws that punishes some of the most disadvantaged people in society for being neglected by the state to a point where they're a danger to themselves and those around them.

[-] deranger@sh.itjust.works 3 points 3 weeks ago* (last edited 3 weeks ago)

Insanity defense means you were insane at the time of the crime. Fit to stand trial means your ability to comprehend the trial as the trial happens. They are separate things in a temporal sense.

Pleading not guilty for insanity suggests a chronic mental health issue that leaves the person incapable of understanding or making sound judgements.

It can be an acute condition as well, only affecting the defendant at the time of the crime.

From Wikipedia:

The insanity defense, also known as the mental disorder defense, is an affirmative defense by excuse in a criminal case, arguing that the defendantis not responsible for their actions due to a psychiatric disease at the time of the criminal act.

Ohio Supreme Court also has something:

How Is Competency Different From a Not Guilty By Reason Of Insanity Plea?

Competency to stand trial is a determination by the judge about a defendant’s present mental condition and about the defendant’s capacity to understand the proceedings and assist in the defendant’s own defense. A plea of not guilty by reason of insanity (NGRI) asserts an affirmative defense regarding the defendant’s mental condition at the time of the offense and focuses on the defendant’s knowledge of the wrongfulness of the defendant’s actions at that time.

this post was submitted on 03 Dec 2024

270 points (98.2% liked)

politics

19244 readers

2134 users here now

Welcome to the discussion of US Politics!

Rules:

Post only links to articles, Title must fairly describe link contents. If your title differs from the site’s, it should only be to add context or be more descriptive. Do not post entire articles in the body or in the comments.

Links must be to the original source, not an aggregator like Google Amp, MSN, or Yahoo.

Example:

Articles must be relevant to politics. Links must be to quality and original content. Articles should be worth reading. Clickbait, stub articles, and rehosted or stolen content are not allowed. Check your source for Reliability and Bias here.
Be civil, No violations of TOS. It’s OK to say the subject of an article is behaving like a (pejorative, pejorative). It’s NOT OK to say another USER is (pejorative). Strong language is fine, just not directed at other members. Engage in good-faith and with respect! This includes accusing another user of being a bot or paid actor. Trolling is uncivil and is grounds for removal and/or a community ban.
No memes, trolling, or low-effort comments. Reposts, misinformation, off-topic, trolling, or offensive. Similarly, if you see posts along these lines, do not engage. Report them, block them, and live a happier life than they do. We see too many slapfights that boil down to "Mom! He's bugging me!" and "I'm not touching you!" Going forward, slapfights will result in removed comments and temp bans to cool off.
Vote based on comment quality, not agreement. This community aims to foster discussion; please reward people for putting effort into articulating their viewpoint, even if you disagree with it.
No hate speech, slurs, celebrating death, advocating violence, or abusive language. This will result in a ban. Usernames containing racist, or inappropriate slurs will be banned without warning

We ask that the users report any comment or post that violate the rules, to use critical thinking when reading, posting or commenting. Users that post off-topic spam, advocate violence, have multiple comments or posts removed, weaponize reports or violate the code of conduct will be banned.

All posts and comments will be reviewed on a case-by-case basis. This means that some content that violates the rules may be allowed, while other content that does not violate the rules may be removed. The moderators retain the right to remove any content and ban users.

That's all the rules!

Civic Links

• Register To Vote

• Citizenship Resource Center

• Congressional Awards Program

• Federal Government Agencies

• Library of Congress Legislative Resources

• The White House

• U.S. House of Representatives

• U.S. Senate

Partnered Communities:

• News