MO - Elizabeth Olten, 9, St Martin's, 21 Oct 2009 #12

[vjlaw]

Its a bit surprising in my experience with such motions that a ruling wasnt handed down within 72 hours on that motion. I am not sure how this judge operates but most motions of that nature would be ruled on within 48 hours.

Since this is for hospitlization would it be covered by the medical privacy act and they would not make public the judge's ruling? So we would have not idea if the judge ruled on it. So if she was sent there and back, we wouldn't know it or the judge denied it.

 

[AndresEscobar]

This will be a longer than average case as you will have a lot of differnt expert testimony coming from both sides. Any time you try a minor as an adult it will be a long drawn out fight on both sides.

Also, it's a high profile case. Lots of eyes watching.

Since there's a confession, and assuming it's a valid confession, the majority of the case should be devoted to her level of culpability. This will require a lot of expert testimony, and a lot of other testimony too.

Mostly, since a 15-year old is being tried as an adult, there is a need to get this right. And, I'm sure the case will be appealed.

 

[vjlaw]

Also, it's a high profile case. Lots of eyes watching.

Since there's a confession, and assuming it's a valid confession, the majority of the case should be devoted to her level of culpability. This will require a lot of expert testimony, and a lot of other testimony too.

Mostly, since a 15-year old is being tried as an adult, there is a need to get this right. And, I'm sure the case will be appealed.

If this is not a valid confession would they have tried to get it thrown out in the certification hearing to keep her in the juvenile system?

 

[Dal Gal]

Since this is for hospitlization would it be covered by the medical privacy act and they would not make public the judge's ruling? So we would have not idea if the judge ruled on it. So if she was sent there and back, we wouldn't know it or the judge denied it.

I don't believe that the ruling itself would be covered under HIPAA. The medical records themselves may not be either, as there are many exceptions to disclosure (you'd be surprised). JMO

 

[vjlaw]

I don't believe that the ruling itself would be covered under HIPAA. The medical records themselves may not be either, as there are many exceptions to disclosure (you'd be surprised). JMO

Thanks. I am just curious why there is no docket entry showing the ruling on the motion. The juvenile authorities took her to St. Louis hospital sat. after her arrest. I am just thinking her mental therapy and mental state may not be that much of an issue if the Morgan County jail hasn't taken her somewhere like the Prenger Center did.

 

[Jodibug]

I've just emailed Bob Watson to see if he can tell us if the hearing is open or not.

 

[Dal Gal]

Thanks. I am just curious why there is no docket entry showing the ruling on the motion. The juvenile authorities took her to St. Louis hospital sat. after her arrest. I am just thinking her mental therapy and mental state may not be that much of an issue if the Morgan County jail hasn't taken her somewhere like the Prenger Center did.

I hear where you're coming from on that. Sure, her attorney would try to bring a mental health situation to the forefront...but does the judge see the same need? Verrrrry interesting!

 

[eyes4crime]

As a defense attorney I would put her parents, gps, her therapists AND prozac on trial, whatever it takes to get the jury to understand my client had no control over what she was doing. I would not suggest she walk out of court acquitted but I think she needs to be put in a hospital and not a prison.

[Bolded by me]

Wow - the conversation on this thread is so interesting. For such highly inflamable topics, you people sure are wonderful at avoiding conflict. Thanks

Regarding putting Prozac on trial:

The black box warning found on all packaging of SSRI might make putting Eli Lilly/Dista on trial very difficult. IMO you would have better luck putting the mental health facility/doctor who prescribed it to her on trial. And good luck getting her therapy notes.

Black Box Warning (in part) - Suicidality in children and adolescents - Antidepressants increased the risk compared with placebo of suicidal thinking and behavior (suicidality) in short-term studies in children, adolescents, and young adults with major depressive disorder (MDD) and other psychiatric disorders........
....Pooled analysis of short-term (4-16-week), placebo-controlled trials of 9 antidepressant drugs (SSRI and others) in children and adolescents withMDD and OCD or other psychiatric disorders...

...greater risk of adverse reaction representing suicidal tlhinking or behavior (suicidality) during the first few months of treatment....twice the placeo risk of 2%....
Excerpts taken from 'Drug Facts & Comparisons, 2010, p. 1410

We would all like to think the black-box warning was finally put on SSRI's for patient protection...when in reality, it was put on the boxes to protect the drug companies. With a warning such as this - putting a child/adolescent on SSRI therapy is only done so after weighing risk/benefit ratio. That puts the prescribing psysician on trial, and not the drug company. My own opinion is that messing with the Serotonin levels in a child can be and is dangerous. However, if there is any evidence from therapy notes, teachers, etc that she improved, even the slightest bit, the defense will be walking a very thin rope mho

It would be interesting to administer the Hare Psychopathy Check List to see how high she scores...very possible this child was born a psychopath. Even though Dr. Hare is in Canada, I bet he is following this case closely.

Didn't mean to interrupt your very interesting conversation...please continue.

 

[AndresEscobar]

If this is not a valid confession would they have tried to get it thrown out in the certification hearing to keep her in the juvenile system?

Again, I don't know. The scope of the hearing . . .

I'm presuming it's valid, and therefore wasn't an issue. But, the issue could be raised subsequently.

 

[PAXIMUS]

[Bolded by me]

Wow - the conversation on this thread is so interesting. For such highly inflamable topics, you people sure are wonderful at avoiding conflict. Thanks

Regarding putting Prozac on trial:

The black box warning found on all packaging of SSRI might make putting Eli Lilly/Dista on trial very difficult. IMO you would have better luck putting the mental health facility/doctor who prescribed it to her on trial. And good luck getting her therapy notes.

Black Box Warning (in part) - Suicidality in children and adolescents - Antidepressants increased the risk compared with placebo of suicidal thinking and behavior (suicidality) in short-term studies in children, adolescents, and young adults with major depressive disorder (MDD) and other psychiatric disorders........
....Pooled analysis of short-term (4-16-week), placebo-controlled trials of 9 antidepressant drugs (SSRI and others) in children and adolescents withMDD and OCD or other psychiatric disorders...

...greater risk of adverse reaction representing suicidal tlhinking or behavior (suicidality) during the first few months of treatment....twice the placeo risk of 2%....
Excerpts taken from 'Drug Facts & Comparisons, 2010, p. 1410

We would all like to think the black-box warning was finally put on SSRI's for patient protection...when in reality, it was put on the boxes to protect the drug companies. With a warning such as this - putting a child/adolescent on SSRI therapy is only done so after weighing risk/benefit ratio. That puts the prescribing psysician on trial, and not the drug company. My own opinion is that messing with the Serotonin levels in a child can and is dangerous. However, if there is any evidence from therapy notes, teachers, etc that she improved, even the slightest bit, the defense will be walking a very thin rope mho

It would be interesting to administer the Hare Psychopathy Check List to see how high she scores...very possible this child was born a psychopath. Even though Dr. Hare is in Canada, I bet he is following this case closely.

Didn't mean to interrupt your very interesting conversation...please continue.

Yes but this isnt a civil trial, although that could come later, in a criminal trial where a prozac defense would be used, you wouldnt be putting the drug company on trial but you would simply be arguing that the drug made it impossible for her to understand the wrongfulness of her acts. This is not to say that the drug itself is bad for everyone but it can effect some people in that way and her attorney would argue that she is one of those people. In a civil lawsuit you would then be actually putting the drug company on trial but in the criminal trial you would simply argue diminished capacity due to known adverse effects of prozac on some patients. Her therapist could be called in to question for giving her this drug knowing her history of suicidal attempts and prozacs propensity to increase that sort of behavior in such patients.

Yes the black box does state that it causes this and that is ok, all the prozac defense is arguing is that she did indeed suffer these adverse effects and it led to the result of her being involved in this murder. You arent suing the company for tricking or lying to anyone you are simply arguing that AB suffered the adverse effects of prozac which the company itself admits is a possibility.

In a civil trial the black box warning would protect the company but in a murder trial the company isnt being sued, the argument is simply that prozac can cause such and such behavior, the company admits this, and my client suffered from it and that resulted in her killing someone.

 

[W8nC]

It would be interesting to administer the Hare Psychopathy Check List to see how high she scores...very possible this child was born a psychopath. Even though Dr. Hare is in Canada, I bet he is following this case closely.
QUOTE]

Please, more info!? What is this test, and how is it administered?

Thanks!!

 

[not_my_kids]

http://www.minddisorders.com/Flu-Inv/Hare-Psychopathy-Checklist.html

Dr. Hare's checklist.

 

[AndresEscobar]

Another thing: I just want to say that in spite of some of the lively discussion here, we all seem to be looking for the same things in this case. We have a very diverse group of people here from a variety of backgrounds. We all want justice. And we all want to know why.

Justice for EO, obviously. Justice for AB as well, to make sure she's prosecuted fairly. Justice for the community.

As to the question why, this is what brought me to this case. What makes a 15 year old do this to anyone? Some have suggested that maybe some people are born evil. I'm not willing to accept that just yet.

 

[vjlaw]

Another thing: I just want to say that in spite of some of the lively discussion here, we all seem to be looking for the same things in this case. We have a very diverse group of people here from a variety of backgrounds. We all want justice. And we all want to know why.

Justice for EO, obviously. Justice for AB as well, to make sure she's prosecuted fairly. Justice for the community.

As to the question why, this is what brought me to this case. What makes a 15 year old do this to anyone? Some have suggested that maybe some people are born evil. I'm not willing to accept that just yet.

Just as some babies are born with brains that don't allow them to learn academically, I think it is possible they are born with brains unable to learn emotionally or socially. jmo

 

[PAXIMUS]

Also keep in mind that just because she buried the body does NOT mean she was able to appreciate the wrongfulness of her acts. I would argue if she was on prozac it is possible that she wasnt able to appreciate the wrongfulness of her acts even though she buried the body which would certainly SEEM to indicate she knew what she was doing was wrong, however a good attorney could argue rightfully that there are any number of reasons for burying a dead body some of which do not require a knowledge that killing is wrong. For example she may have understood that a dead body smells and she wanted to bury the body not to hide it because she KNEW what she did was wrong but rather because she happens to hang out in that area often to picnic and didnt want the place to smell from a decomposing body or to attract wild animals, the act of burying the body then wouldnt be an act of trying to hide or cover up an action that one knew was wrong but rather just an act of trying to prevent a bad smell and the attracting of wild animals.

What matters most here is if AB was really able to appreciate what she did was WRONG and it is a fact that prozac could prevent her from feeling that what she did was wrong. Also her statements that she wanted to know what it feels like to kill someone is very much what one might expect someone suffering from the adverse effects of prozac to say and think, she states this as if killing is nothing to be ashamed of or to hide but rather something to express to others as if it is a natural and harmless feeling and thought.

Assuming she was on prozac I would absolutely be looking at this as a defense to spare AB a prison sentence and get her in to a medical facility where she belongs.

I understand that it is very difficult for some of you to stand up for the rights of AB and I certainly have nothing but respect for those of you who fight for justice for the victims, I too want justice for that little girl who was killed but I also want to protect people like you and I from ever being wrongfully accused of a crime and/or convicted and imprisoned and taken away from your family and loved ones for something you didnt do and in order to do that then someone has to be willing to look out for the rights of those who are accused of crimes even if that sometimes means showing support for those who may be guilty, that is the system we have and it is the best system in the world as far as I know. So kudos to everyone on each side of this, we all want the same thing in the end and that is justice and to ensure that our system is fair and balanced towards all.

 

[vjlaw]

Also keep in mind that just because she buried the body does NOT mean she was able to appreciate the wrongfulness of her acts. I would argue if she was on prozac it is possible that she wasnt able to appreciate the wrongfulness of her acts even though she buried the body which would certainly SEEM to indicate she knew what she was doing was wrong, however a good attorney could argue rightfully that there are any number of reasons for burying a dead body some of which do not require a knowledge that killing is wrong. For example she may have understood that a dead body smells and she wanted to bury the body not to hide it because she KNEW what she did was wrong but rather because she happens to hang out in that area often to picnic and didnt want the place to smell from a decomposing body or to attract wild animals, the act of burying the body then wouldnt be an act of trying to hide or cover up an action that one knew was wrong but rather just an act of trying to prevent a bad smell and the attracting of wild animals.

What matters most here is if AB was really able to appreciate what she did was WRONG and it is a fact that prozac could prevent her from feeling that what she did was wrong. Also her statements that she wanted to know what it feels like to kill someone is very much what one might expect someone suffering from the adverse effects of prozac to say and think, she states this as if killing is nothing to be ashamed of or to hide but rather something to express to others as if it is a natural and harmless feeling and thought.

Assuming she was on prozac I would absolutely be looking at this as a defense to spare AB a prison sentence and get her in to a medical facility where she belongs.

Iirc, Tricia's source said she wrote in her diary, should've gone to church.

 

[PAXIMUS]

Iirc, Tricia's source said she wrote in her diary, should've gone to church.

Yes but that is highly circumstantial and we have no way of knowing or proving what she was referring to or thinking or what her intentions were at the time she wrote that statement and therefore such a statement really has no place in a court of law since any interpretation of what she meant or intended by it would be speculation and not based on fact.

 

[vjlaw]

Yes but that is highly circumstantial and we have no way of knowing or proving what she was referring to or thinking or what her intentions were at the time she wrote that statement and therefore such a statement really has no place in a court of law since any interpretation of what she meant or intended by it would be speculation and not based on fact.

And it hasn't come out yet what written comments may have preceded it, then it would come into play in court....yes? no? That is if there was anything else from the diary.

 

[PAXIMUS]

And it hasn't come out yet what written comments may have preceded it, then it would come into play in court....yes? no? That is if there was anything else from the diary.

Well if they can tie a narrative together that could come in to play but the statement that you stated by itself is quite meaningless as far as what she meant or intended by it. Its obvious to you and I what she probably meant but that doesnt work in court.

 

[eyes4crime]

this is for those who want to know a little bit about psychopathy...
According to Dr. Robert D. Hare, PhD (Without Conscience) - Psychopaths are not disoriented or out of touch with reality, nor do they have hallucinations, delusions or the subjective distress that plague those with mental disorders. Psychopaths are aware of what they are doing and they know why.

Psychopathy is not a diagnosis here in the States - the DSM IV uses Antisocial Personality Disorder instead. For children and adolescents the DSM IV has 3 overlapping categories : ADHD, Conduct Disorder, and Oppositional Defiant Disorder all under 'Disruptive Behavioral Disorders'. Dr. Hare believes these diagnosis' are very different from Pschopathic Personality Disorder.

Dr. Hare has researched this diagnosis for over 35 years...his empirical research has been outstanding. mho

The check list is comprised of 20 areas most defined in the psychopath. The highest score is 40...Manson got a 39...he wasn't exactly a social kind of psychopath.

Dr. Hare and his PhD research students have studied children and here are some of the findings:

1. the psychopathic personality disorder becomes apparent at a very early age

2. The raw materials for this disorder can and do exist at a very early age

3. Psychopathy does not suddenly spring into existence unannounced in adulthood

4. Most parents of children later diagnosed as psychopaths were painfully aware that something was seriously wrong with their child before starting school.

5. Some children remain stubbornly immune to socializing pressures

6. They are inexplicably 'different' from normal children - more difficult, aggressive, and harder to get close to and relate to.

7. He has found that these children do not process emotion in the same way as normal children. That is why psychopathic children can hurt/kill animals, set fires, etc.

He is careful to say - a trouble maker is NOT necessarily a psychopath...he is always concerned about labeling a child. However, newer research is now showing that certain brain functions are different in the psychopath...specifically, the areas of the brain that processes emotion.

Dr. Hare is appalled by some of the uses of the check list - he feels it takes a highly trained individual to administer his 20 point checks. Use in the court systems by the defense or prosecution should only be done by qualified and trained individuals.

As you can tell I'm a great fan of Dr. Hare. His research is empirically sound and I believe the validity of the diagnosis here in the US would be a great improvement over our present categories of diagnosis'. all just my opinions