PDA

View Full Version : Hinckley's Therapists Say He's Normal


basca
09-21-2005, 06:28 AM
http://www.breitbart.com/news/2005/09/20/D8CO70OG0.html

John Hinckley's relationships with women are normal, two of his therapists testified Tuesday, disagreeing with suggestions by government attorneys that the presidential assailant is not yet ready for lengthy visits to his parents' home in Virginia.

Hinckley has no symptoms of mental illness and trips would be good therapy, Dr. Sidney Binks testified in federal court. A judge is considering whether to allow Hinckley overnight stays for several days at a time at his parents' home in Williamsburg.

His family lives a three-hour drive from the Washington hospital where he has spent more than two decades for shooting President Reagan and three other people in 1981.

Binks said he is not concerned about Hinckley's recent approaches to women _ including a chaplain and an intern on the hospital staff.

Hinckley "understood the boundary between patients and staff," said the psychologist. Hinckley's perceptions were that he and one of the women were simply being "friendly."

There is a "big difference between these relationships and delusions," said Binks.

Dr. Robert Keisling, a psychiatrist who treated Hinckley in 1998 and testified that Hinckley's "only problem is that he wants to have a relationship with a woman."

"Do we call that normal?" asked Hinckley attorney Barry Levine.

"I would," Keisling replied.

Hinckley had a 22-year-long relationship with a former patient at the hospital, but returned a ring she had given him in January and broke off all contact in an effort to increase his chances of being granted additional travel privileges. In evaluating whether Hinckley should receive more freedom, prosecutors wanted to interview the woman, who had grown tired of the government's intrusions.

Government attorneys say Hinckley's recent interactions with the opposite sex are important because he has a history of not correctly perceiving the nature of his relationships with women who are not interested in him, resulting in disastrous consequences.

When he shot Reagan, Hinckley suffered from major depression and a psychiatric disorder that led to an obsession with actress Jodie Foster. Hinckley, found not guilty by reason of insanity in 1982, said he shot Reagan to impress Foster.

Hinckley's illness before the attempted assassination "was years in the making" and he is now in full remission, said Binks.

Jannilu
09-21-2005, 02:41 PM
No more "women" problems, huh? Gee, that's great.
What about that little "shooting the president" problem?

:wtf

Bleep
09-21-2005, 02:49 PM
Well. okay, Hinckley made a major faux pas in his choice of delusions, didn't he? I mean, if he went after the 7-11 clerk down the street and tried to shoot the garbage man when the little voices told him to, he'd have been out long ago. Heck, if he wasn't crazy and did what he did, he'd probably be out already. 20 years incarcerated in a mental hospital? heckuva sentence. Most actual killers don't get as much.

Most people who develop these sorts of delusional fixations actually have some sort of bipolar disorder variant. And those often respond very well to treatment. I don't know Hinckley or his shrinkley, but it seems pretty legit to let him go on passes if they feel he's well enough.

Poodles
09-21-2005, 04:49 PM
Well. okay, Hinckley made a major faux pas in his choice of delusions, didn't he? ----..Well yes but when ya wanta impress the ladies-well- :winky ..

I hope they let him have his vists out-People do recover from Mental Illness- :clap --so many different types as well-would be intersted in just what his Dx is-20 years in a Psy-hos-well Iam thinking they have had enought time to suss him out-to treat him-now is the "getting him back out in to the main stream" -

overnight stays for several days at a time at his parents' home in Williamsburg.-Well thats a good start-not as if they"re asking that he be let stright back in to main-stream- they"re building steps back in to what we call "normal" life :laugh --

-I think he may just find more ill ppls out than in-Is also a very differne world he is returning too-What are ppl"s concerns about here.?..That he will re-offend-that his "crime" was so bad he should be locked away for ever?..that 20 plus years is not enought.?.

Ive read where ppls have murdered in the most ugly way and got out way sooner. :mad: - The Mentally Ill do recover..

Bard
09-21-2005, 04:55 PM
I have long felt that TOO many men go to trial for their second murder rap and third, or ATTEMPTED murder.

It may sound cold, but to protect a society from murderers, should begin by perhaps, never giving them another shot at it.

It remains a FOREVER sentence for the victims afterall, why should it be less for the murderer?

stinky*felix
09-21-2005, 05:03 PM
Hinckley's illness before the attempted assassination "was years in the making" and he is now in full remission, said Binks. Remission does not mean "cure." Remission means that an any time, the "illness" may unexpectedly return.

I say release him to his therapists, require he live in their homes, endangering the lives of their families, and make them responsible for his actions.

Jannilu
09-21-2005, 05:04 PM
Agree with Bard. The fact that many are released doesn't make it right.

Mental illness, or not. Murder & attempted murder should be life sentences.

Poodles
09-21-2005, 05:54 PM
Iam outta the Loop on this one-I was thinking NO one was killed-I was thinking that he injuried ppls-he killed some one.?. :confused: -

Jannilu
09-21-2005, 06:04 PM
Attempted murder

clemiedog
09-21-2005, 06:29 PM
Fuck him. Lock him up forever. One thing I can't stand is a pathetic assassin. I mean, trying to impress a teenage actress pales in comparison to fanatical anarchists, frustrated office seekers, communists, or secessionists. Even a wigged out Manson bitch is preferable to Hinkley.

Slight TIC, but to hell with Hinkley.

Bleep
09-22-2005, 10:19 AM
well, its an interesting thought there, Bard- lock up anyone who kills, forever.
Theoretically, I can see the wisdom in this, after all the best predictor of future behavior is past behavior.
However, most murderers only ever do it once. Its not your usual sort of crime.

But with all crime- 10% of the criminals do 80% of the crimes, most criminals are not serial offenders, but a few are. I kind of like the '3 strikes and you're out forever ' laws some of your states have- because they address the problem of the repeat offender who does most of the cr*p. Someone like Hinckley, who was clearly mentally ill and untreated at the time of his offenses, is not in that category. Treatment of mental illness is actually pretty succesful these days when people want to get better. For example, on maintenance treatment, most people will bipolar disorder have less than a 15% -re-occurence per year. Untreated, nearly 80% will re-occur within a year.

This sort of "erotomania" is a particular interest of mine and I have treated a half dozen people with it, all succesfully in long term remission at last follow-up. While the literature is sparse and the disorder is recurrent if left untreated, those with bipolar disorder tend to do well. The very few who have a different delusional disorder, either paranoia or schizophrenia, do not fare as well. I have not seen Hinckley and do not know what his diagnosis is. but even with a severe disorder, he is likely to be pretty well supervised- he is definitely not under the radar.

Bard
09-22-2005, 10:34 AM
well, its an interesting thought there, Bard- lock up anyone who kills, forever.


Lori,

You make it sound harsh?

Surely you agree the victims get no second chance?

Keep the ten percent inside forever and we are home free correct?

Jannilu
09-22-2005, 02:11 PM
But with all crime- 10% of the criminals do 80% of the crimes, most criminals are not serial offenders, but a few are. I kind of like the '3 strikes and you're out forever ' laws some of your states have- because they address the problem of the repeat offender who does most of the cr*p.

We're talking about murderers. Do they really need to be serial offenders?? :thud
If victim # 2 or 3 was someone close to you, I'm not sure you'd be of the same opinion. :confused:

IMO, it doesn't matter if they failed in their attempt to murder, or not. They forfeit the right to return to a free and normal life, when they tried to end somone else's. :mad:

Bleep
09-23-2005, 08:46 AM
Jannilu and Bard, the problem is in the large net you cast to catch a few bad guys. Most murderers ( I am speaking not in terms of the legal definition of murder, but generally about people who kill and are convicted of a variety of offenses from manslaughter to first degree murder) kill someone close to them in a "moment of passion" and yes, they should pay for their crime. The sentences here range from 8 years to life in prison. We are discovering in our country that a fair proportion of convicted murderers are not guilty at all, and we've had half a dozen famous cases released in the last 2 years based on DNA evidence which proves their innocence after decades of imprisonment. Is it fair to them and their families? Is it fair to those who kill their abusive husbands, or who kill someone attacking them? Because thats what the average murderer does- kills someone who is threatening. The average murderer has no previous criminal record. Like I said, murder is a "different" sort of crime. The career criminal/repeat offender usually has a long slate of previous non-murder, but violent crimes before they ever kill anyone and if the three strikes laws were applied more, we would probably prevent more murders that way. :old

Bard
09-23-2005, 09:05 AM
Lori,

Sorry, I do not believe, the majority of murders in our country today are Crimes of passion, I think the stats would bear me out on this as well.

I understand your point, yet you must research how many are in prisons today nationwide for their SECOND and THIRD murder convictions.

Jannilu
09-23-2005, 02:17 PM
Somone murdered in a "moment of passion" is just as dead as someone murdered by premeditation. Many who have committed murder in a "moment of passion" probably DO wish they could undo it. I really don't care. They can't go back anymore than the dead can rise. Why should they get a second chance, when the victim can't?

I agree that some are falsely convicted, but that is a different subject. Letting the guilty off easy do not make up for that.