Posted by PattyG on March 6, 2000, at 15:38:16
In reply to abuse of insanity defense, posted by Elizabeth on March 5, 2000, at 8:17:22
I don't agree 100% with my psych & law professor's opinion that the insanity defense should be abolished
altogether. But it does seem like the existence of easily-bribed professional expert witnesses like Br*ggin who can
use pseudoscience to twist any set of facts to suit their needs, combined with the shocking gullibility of some
juries, results in acquittals or reduced sentences for persons who were in no way "insane."///Hey guys.....(I suppose I'm going to be the ONLY one who believes in these instances!) What about the fact that the prosecutors selected a psychiatrist who also AGREED that the man had been adversely affected by the Prozac? Trust me, that is very, very rare (for the State's witness to, ultimately, testify for the defense!)I wonder if there's any way to actually get some *real* statistics regarding crimes committed and any relationship to medications (authorized.) I doubt we'd get it from the pharmaceutical companies! And just for the record, I do agree with regard to Peter Breggin - I think he's an idiot. (IMHO, of course.)
poster:PattyG
thread:25642
URL: http://www.dr-bob.org/babble/20000302/msgs/26132.html