CO - James Holmes Trial - *Penalty Phase* #3

[MissHaley]

nelson told judge she wanted to wait until tomorrow morning to finish. judge said how many pages? she said 7-10. judge repeated '7-10 pages, on 2 instructions?' oh boy!
court is back at 8:40 and jury back at 11:30. CO time. Please adjust your schedules.
See you all tomorrow!

 

[sumzero]

While I agree she should have called his parents back, I honestly don't believe there's any more she could have done, otherwise. I certainly don't believe she's to blame for this heinous crime.

The defendant would not have agreed to voluntarily commit himself, and she didn't have enough "evidence" to prove that he was a danger to himself or others (she wasn't aware a notebook even existed back then & he lied to her about having specific plans). Without knowing those things, coupled with the fact that he wasn't acting incoherent, or psychotic, or out-of-touch with reality at the time, it's unlikely that a judge would have agreed to an involuntary confinement. Psychiatric patients say terrifying things and make empty threats about all kinds of things, all the time, to their doctors. But the majority of those patients never make a plan, act on it, or even mean it.

Every psych doctor on this planet has probably found themselves in a terrible Catch 22 at least once throughout their career. These doctors worry about being sued if they commit a patient who might not need to be committed. They worry about being sued or losing their license if they violate HIPPA laws if it wasn't absolutely necessary (which is a grossly objective decision to make---and will ultimately rely on the decision of a review board who doesn't even know their patient). They worry about making a poor judgment call--like trusting a patient who says he doesn't have a plan to carry out a verbal threat.

They're damned if they do and damned if they don't. Hindsight will always be 20/20, but those decisions are incredibly difficult to ascertain in the present tense. All they can do is use what they've learned through their education and experience, and follow the legal guidelines that are set in place. But they aren't mind readers or psychics... they're human and can't predict the future any more than anyone else can, and unfortunately, sociopaths are experts at making others see what they want them to see.

ETA: I posted this essay (lol) before I read the other posts on the subject... so I hope no one thinks I'm trying to carry on the convo after it's over or jumping down anyone's throat or anything like that... because I'm definitely not.

Excellent post.

 

[MissHaley]

Is it just the dad or the mom too? Maybe he couldn't face seeing them after what he did?


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

I wondered about that. Was it the jail that said no visitors? That would mean he lost privileges do to misbehavior.
Did the defense not want him to see anyone?
Or was it jh himself, refusing visitors.
Strange.

 

[Whiteorchids]

Yes, and some filed suit against the online ammunition co. They lost. Just because someone sues doesn't mean it has merit.

Let's stop talking about it. I think the victims will win in her lawsuit. Drs malpractice is very high. The insurance co will probably settle, I've never sued anyone so I wouldn't know. My point was only she made a bad decision where the outcome could have been different. The ammunition co didn't know JH had thoughts of killing lots of people Fenton did. She had a moral obligation to the safety of the community but chose to refrain from calling the authorities. JH even wrote and told Dr Reid he thought she was afraid of him.

 

[Maisiebelle]

Let's stop talking about it. I think the victims will win in her lawsuit. Drs malpractice is very high. The insurance co will probably settle, I've never sued anyone so I wouldn't know. My point was only she made a bad decision where the outcome could have been different. The ammunition co didn't know JH had thoughts of killing lots of people Fenton did. She had a moral obligation to the safety of the community but chose to refrain from calling the authorities. JH even wrote and told Dr Reid he thought she was afraid of him.

I know you don't want to talk about this further but I just wanted to show you what the law in Colorado states:

Colorado statutes hold that a psychiatrist "shall not be liable for damages in any civil action for failure to warn or protect any person against a mental health patient's violent behavior, and any such person shall not be held civilly liable for failure to predict such violent behavior, except where the patient has communicated to the mental health care provider a serious threat of imminent physical violence against a specific person or persons."

Maybe this means that Jonathon Blunk's widow might not be successful in suing the doctor.

http://www.businessinsider.com/lynne-fentons-duty-to-prevent-harm-2013-1?IR=T


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

[Maisiebelle]

I wondered about that. Was it the jail that said no visitors? That would mean he lost privileges do to misbehavior.
Did the defense not want him to see anyone?
Or was it jh himself, refusing visitors.
Strange.

Well his mother testified that it's difficult to set up a visit due to security concerns. I'm not sure I believe this. I'm sure there are many dangerous prisoners who have regular visits.

It seemed to me (based on the dad's testimony) that the shooter was refusing to see his parents.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

[atthelake]

Unless and until any HC provider has Evidence due to HIPPA..their hands are tied:scared:...then again IF they had evidence..No brainer..put patient on HOLD!! Up here we cal "Formed"..72 hour HOLD!!!

The mere fact she contacted his mother speaks volumes of her concerns..BUT knowing the rule's she can NOT pursuit her (mother) but her gut forced her to at least contact family ( and of course family said..he's fine..no concerns and suppressed whatevers) ..THEIR collective hands were TIED!!

Blame the law..but not the ones constrained by that law.....I'm sure Fenton and by proxy Feinstein) regrets she couldn't have done more..BUt until laypeople realize the CONSTRAINTS..they will never realize how they (caregivers) are curtailed....:scared:

Visit's and sense cannot be evidence to declare someone unfit or in need to assessment..

Never did he suggest his mission..NEVER did he claim depression or any other symptoms ( hygiene and other symptomology) for that matter..

WHY?? because HE KNEW they would put him away. ( He even said as much in interviews)..

J. was large and in charge ..Don't blame the therapist given their constraints..Fenton actually was worried..but couldn't prove anything..AAS a women..she needed to just let J.'s mom know and try to get info..but to know avail....Mom had no idea that her son had plans to annialate so many innocents..BUT given the LAWS..there was NOT much else she could have done..

This is just one thing that has always bothered me.."Self- reporting" is NOT reliable..and cases followed indicates similar..Patient's often do not tell the truth...and practitioner's are barred from interacting with anyone who knows their patient as well as those who may have very important informations...:scared:

Having said all that..There's a very slim portion of MI folk who are homicidal..MOST often die at their own hands or get killed due to behaviours......Sad but true..J. Is a very intelligent mass murderer..LWOP..Fine with me..however DP charge forces this family history of exposure....so blame J...since his team refused to SHARE background with their Plea Deal...

:goodpost:

 

[atthelake]

I wonder why JH doesn't have his family on visitor list according to Dad. That's very strange.

Perhaps the defense attorneys suggested it as they normally do? :moo:

 

[cece5300]

I'm lost on what's happening tomorrow. They just had the defense and they're almost through, now will the victims get to speak tomorrow? Thanks!!

 

[Amster]

Ok....let's ignore all the facts and blame Dr. Fenton. Sorry, no "lol" from me.

 

[Maisiebelle]

I found this article which discusses the sentencing phases.

Interesting points on mitigation:

"Mitigating factors under Colorado law that could be included in this case are:

The defendant's capacity to appreciate wrongfulness of the defendant's conduct or to conform the defendant's conduct to the requirements of law was significantly impaired, but not so impaired as to constitute a defense to prosecution
The defendant was under unusual and substantial duress, although not such duress as to constitute a defense to prosecution; or
The emotional state of the defendant at the time the crime was committed
The absence of any significant prior conviction
The extent of the defendant's cooperation with law enforcement officers or agencies and with the office of the prosecuting district attorney
The good faith, although mistaken, belief by the defendant that circumstances existed which constituted a moral justification for the defendant's conduct
The defendant is not a continuing threat to society
Any other evidence which in the court's opinion bears on the question of mitigation.

After hearing those presentations, the jury needs to deliberate again to decide if the mitigating factors outweigh the aggravating factors. If they do not, the case will move to the third phase.

In that third and final phase, the jury will be asked to judge the defendant's character against his crime. They need to decide if the prosecution has proven beyond a reasonable doubt if the death penalty is the appropriate penalty.

If at any point in the process the jury decides not to move to the next phase, the gunman would be sentenced to life imprisonment without the possibility of parole. Also, the vote must be unanimous to deliver a death sentence.

All of the 12 jurors and seven alternates will continue to be in court for the next phase."

http://www.thedenverchannel.com/new...se-begins-for-convicted-murderer-james-holmes


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

[Maisiebelle]

In light of my previous post does anyone think the mitigation offered by the defence sounds anything like the list above?

I haven't heard any of those points listed.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

[Maisiebelle]

I'm lost on what's happening tomorrow. They just had the defense and they're almost through, now will the victims get to speak tomorrow? Thanks!!

I think the jury deliberate one more time before the victims get to speak.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

[BUF]

In light of my previous post does anyone think the mitigation offered by the defence sounds anything like the list above?

I haven't heard any of those points listed.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

The only one out of this list is the absence of a significant prior conviction, which they will argue in closing...along with whatever else they agree to.

I had read somewhere that they had 40 min each for closings in this phase.

 

[Maisiebelle]

The only one out of this list is the absence of a significant prior conviction, which they will argue in closing...along with whatever else they agree to.

I had read somewhere that they had 40 min each for closings in this phase.

This must be when the powerpoints are for. The judge is going to discuss them with the attorneys in the morning before the jury comes in.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

[Amster]

I'm not sure what happens if there is no phase 3.....

 

[BUF]

This must be when the powerpoints are for. The judge is going to discuss them with the attorneys in the morning before the jury comes in.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Yes, probably. I think the prosecution has been asking just what their mitigation argument was for a while as they needed to know how to proceed on their end.

Bad storm & my power went out (again), so I missed a lot. How did they leave it at the end? Are closings scheduled for tomorrow, or is the prosecution having any witnesses?

 

[MissHaley]

In light of my previous post does anyone think the mitigation offered by the defence sounds anything like the list above?

I haven't heard any of those points listed.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

No. And that is what we kept posting about since Friday. "How is this mitigation". You should repost this tomorrow. I kept saying the neighbors, classmates, baby pics are for the sentencing phase, not mitigation. They did not present a proper mitigation case & I don't know why.

 

[MissHaley]

This must be when the powerpoints are for. The judge is going to discuss them with the attorneys in the morning before the jury comes in.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

So, instead of presenting it in their evidence, they're just going to say it in closings?

 

[BUF]

I'm not sure what happens if there is no phase 3.....

If the jury can't come to an agreement in the mitigation phase, the judge will be the one to sentence him. DP needs a unanimous jury vote, so it would be a LWOP sentence. Victims usually get to speak prior to sentencing.