The Package and the Defense Motion

[February]

According to the prosecution, it's with Aurora Police Department.

Ahh from the court docs...

 

[HastingsChi]

Ahh from the court docs...

was laughter involved? LOL

Sent from my Samsung Galaxy S 2

 

[February]

was laughter involved? LOL

Sent from my Samsung Galaxy S 2

Hahaha...Happy Sunday!

 

[shadowraiths]

Even *IF* the package was received the week before, it is my opinion that unless *ALL* of the following criteria are met:

• The package was opened by the psychiatrist
  
  
• who reasonably believed this guy posed a public threat
  
  
• and did nothing (i.e., put him on a 72 hour)

...there would be no legal foundation to hold her, or the university, responsible for his actions.

That being said, I do admittedly wonder why the university disabled public access. ( link )

The university declined to release any details of his academic record, citing privacy concerns, and at least two dozen professors and other staff declined to speak with The Associated Press. Some said they were instructed not to talk publicly about Holmes in a blanket email sent to university employees.

Montgomery said police have told the school to not talk about Holmes. The university took down the website for its graduate neuroscience program on Saturday.​

I also wonder about the initial email that was sent, and later denials. ( link )

About 11 hours after the attack, Barry Shur, dean of the graduate school at the university, sent an email to faculty, students and staff saying: "If anyone is contacted by the media, PLEASE refer them" to a school spokeswoman. Shur's email was released in response to an open records request from the AP.

Earlier this week, Shur denied trying to prohibit those who knew Holmes from talking.

"We told them they are fully free to interact with the media," he said at a press conference Monday.​

 

[DeadCat]

I also wonder about the initial email that was sent, and later denials. ( link )

About 11 hours after the attack, Barry Shur, dean of the graduate school at the university, sent an email to faculty, students and staff saying: "If anyone is contacted by the media, PLEASE refer them" to a school spokeswoman. Shur's email was released in response to an open records request from the AP.

Earlier this week, Shur denied trying to prohibit those who knew Holmes from talking.

"We told them they are fully free to interact with the media," he said at a press conference Monday.​

Seems like the uni has changed their tune. Their media relations page doesn't have the original email on it anymore (I don't think anyway. I am pretty sure that's where I'd accessed it before this past Monday). Now all the updates seem point to how forthcoming they've been. Is the original online in full anywhere--it told all not to speak the press and defer all to Ms. Montgomery at Media Relations.

http://www.ucdenver.edu/about/newsroom/Pages/Newsroom.aspx

 

[jjenny]

What exactly do people expect? Universities do have to follow HIPAA and FERPA. So they are not supposed to release information about a student, even without a GAG order. When they say that the package arrived on Monday July 23, and anonymous source for fox news was not accurate, some people still refuse to believe it.

 

[shadowraiths]

What exactly do people expect?

I expect them to, at the very least, keep their stories straight. And yes, I get privacy issues. So, stick with that, instead of making conflicting statements, backpedalling and denying. As for the anonymous source? They're anonymous to us, not the reporter. Reporters, esp those from reputable news stations, are going to vet their sources. Even so, sure, their sources could still be full of it. Am just saying that there appears to be quite a few discrepancies in the various reports coming out. Including, in the court documents, pictures, and various victim and LE reports. Unfortunately, all this sort of thing does, is to quite naturally raise questions for some of us.

That being said, I think their behavior has more to do with fear of public reaction as opposed to having actually done anything wrong. Which is understandable. After all, the problem, as I see it, his treating psych was a member of the BETA (Behavioral Assessment and Threat Assessment) Team. This team is tasked to recognize and assess threatening behavior... to determine whether a student poses a threat. We already know that Holmes had been planning for, at least, four months. In this context, the public (and surviving victims) would quite naturally wonder how someone who exacted that degree of violence, could have flown under the radar for so long.

In reality, you know, and I know, that there is no true means to predict violence. Regardless of what the media portrays. Still we wonder. And, in some instances, our B.S. meters are quite accurate.

 

[jjenny]

He might have not exhibited any threatening behavior because he didn't want people to know what he was up to. For whatever reason, people seem to be eager to blame anyone else but him. And even if there were any signs, what exactly can be done with these signs? The University can't lock anyone up, can not contact his parents due to FERPA (he is an adult after all). The only way something could have been done if he directly told his psychiatrist what he was up to. And there is nothing to suggest he did that.

 

[Liz]

He might have not exhibited any threatening behavior because he didn't want people to know what he was up to. For whatever reason, people seem to be eager to blame anyone else but him. And even if there were any signs, what exactly can be done with these signs? The University can't lock anyone up, can not contact his parents due to FERPA (he is an adult after all). The only way something could have been done if he directly told his psychiatrist what he was up to. And there is nothing to suggest he did that.

~BBM ~

Where did you get this idea? I am almost certain this is absolutely not true.

You've repeatedly posted about news organizations' misreporting; not providing sources; and even just making stuff up. But many of your own posts imply information as being "factual", which (in my opinion) are not factual. And you provide no source whatsoever. :waitasec:

 

[shadowraiths]

The only way something could have been done if he directly told his psychiatrist what he was up to.

Well, not quite. If he was exhibiting behavior that caused the attending physician to believe he posed a credible threat to himself or others, they could initiate a 72 hour hold.

The Florida version of a 72 hour hold is the Baker Act, which is part of the Florida Department of Children and Families ( link ). And Cali's version is 5150, and is part of WIC (Welfare and Institutions Code), known as LPS ( aka the Lanterman–Petris–Short Act, link )

Here's the 72 hour hold for Colorado (i.e. Colorado Revised Statute, Title 27-10-105-II, link )

Emergency Procedure – Who may initiate a 72 hour hold

(II) The following persons may effect a seventy-two-hour hold as provided in subparagraph (I) of this paragraph (a):

(A) A certified peace officer;
(B) A professional person;
(C) A registered professional nurse as defined in section 12-38-103 (11), C.R.S., who by reason of postgraduate education and additional nursing preparation has gained knowledge, judgment, and skill in psychiatric or mental health nursing;
(D) A licensed marriage and family therapist or licensed professional counselor, licensed under the provisions of part 5 or 6 of article 43 of title 12, C.R.S., or an addiction counselor licensed pursuant to section 12-43-804 (3), C.R.S., who by reason of postgraduate education and additional preparation has gained knowledge, judgment, and skill in psychiatric or clinical mental health therapy, forensic psychotherapy, or the evaluation of mental disorders; or
(E) A licensed clinical social worker licensed under the provisions of part 4 of article 43 of title 12, C.R.S.​

Also see:

An Evaluation of the State of Colorado’s Care and Treatment of the Mentally Ill: Title 27, Article 10 (CRS 27-10-101 et seq.) ( link )​

 

[jjenny]

~BBM ~

Where did you get this idea? I am almost certain this is absolutely not true.

You've repeatedly posted about news organizations' misreporting; not providing sources; and even just making stuff up. But many of your own posts imply information as being "factual", which (in my opinion) are not factual. And you provide no source whatsoever. :waitasec:

It wasn't just me "posting" about news organizations misreporting, not providing sources, or even just making stuff up. Prosecution said the exact same thing in their motion. And if you want to believe anonymous fox news source, it's your prerogative. I am not sure what sources you want me to provide. When there is a source, I link it. The rest is my opinion.

 

[songline]

What exactly do people expect? Universities do have to follow HIPAA and FERPA. So they are not supposed to release information about a student, even without a GAG order. When they say that the package arrived on Monday July 23, and anonymous source for fox news was not accurate, some people still refuse to believe it.

And that is the gospel?
Some people did not get the memo that all the facts have been released. :waitasec:

I say maybe? maybe not... We dont know yet.

 

[songline]

He might have not exhibited any threatening behavior because he didn't want people to know what he was up to. For whatever reason, people seem to be eager to blame anyone else but him. And even if there were any signs, what exactly can be done with these signs? The University can't lock anyone up, can not contact his parents due to FERPA (he is an adult after all). The only way something could have been done if he directly told his psychiatrist what he was up to. And there is nothing to suggest he did that.

FACTUALLY: They could have done something if he exhibited that
he is a danger to himself or to anyone else.
so your "only: theory is just a theory......

 

[jjenny]

Well, not quite. If he was exhibiting behavior that caused the attending physician to believe he posed a credible threat to himself or others, they could initiate a 72 hour hold.

Yes, she would have to know he represents an imminent threat to himself or others, but how would she know this unless he told her? I suppose she somehow could have figured it out without him telling her-but I doubt it.

 

[jjenny]

FACTUALLY: They could have done something if he exhibited that
he is a danger to himself or to anyone else.
so your "only: theory is just a theory......

I would like for somebody to come up with examples of behavior he would have to exhibit for her to know he is a direct threat to others. And I don't think red hair would work. He was sitting in court looking quite pitiful. Would any of you know that he was a danger to others by simply looking at him and his weird facial expressions?

 

[songline]

Yes, she would have to know he represents an imminent threat to himself or others, but how would she know this unless he told her? I suppose she somehow could have figured it out without him telling her-but I doubt it.

There are more ways to exhibit a threat:
attempted suicide, excessive pills, cutting - just to mention a few...there are others.

 

[jjenny]

There are more ways to exhibit a threat:
attempted suicide, excessive pills, cutting - just to mention a few...there are others.

We don't have any information that he ever attempted a suicide.

 

[Liz]

I'm thinking anon source said something like "last Monday" and Fox News calculated a date.

I have a hard time believing Fox News (or any news org) would do something that irresponsible.

I do realize news organizations make mistakes such as ABC News' reporting that 'JH might be a tea party member' the morning of the shootings. Or, ABC News' reporting that JH's mom implied that her son 'was the right one' that had commited the mass shootings in Aurora. But to outright make up a delivery date based on anonymous calculations .... I can't see it. Especially the way FNC has stuck to the July 12th date all along.

(Fox initially reported the package arrived on campus on the 12th; and later updated that to stating it may have been postmarked the 12th. But they are sticking by and with the 12th.)

Part of UC's press release stated, "The anonymous Fox News source that stated the package was received and sat on a loading dock is inaccurate.":

Replying to that:

Fox News Stands By Its Reporting: In a statement sent to reporters, Fox News executive vice president/executive editor John Moody says that "we respect the university's position but are confident that our law enforcement source, who we will not name because of a prior agreement, was in a position to know the timing of the package's whereabouts. We believe those details will be part of the evidence, which will be presented at an eventual trial.")

For the record, Fox News never reported that the package sat on a loading dock.

I'm not saying it's not 'possible'. Just saying I have a hard time believing Fox simply calculated a date, and reported it as such. Especially in a case of this magnitude. JMO

 

[February]

I would like for somebody to come up with examples of behavior he would have to exhibit for her to know he is a direct threat to others. And I don't think red hair would work.

"will you visit me in jail"

This is a THREAT that he can commit a crime anytime soon.

how do we know that the psychiatrist seen this or not?
How do we know that JH didnt give his adultfriend finder profile to his psychiatrist or not?

No we dont know alll what happened between JH and Fenton.
We dont even know if JH was even allowed to see him since his access to some facilities are terminated

 

[jjenny]

"will you visit me in jail"

This is a THREAT that he can commit a crime anytime soon.

how do we know that the psychiatrist seen this or not?
How do we know that JH didnt give his adultfriend finder profile to his psychiatrist or not?

No we dont know alll what happened between JH and Fenton.
We dont even know if JH was even allowed to see him since his access to some facilities are terminated

"Will you visit me in prison" is quite ambiguous. I don't think that would qualify as an imminent threat. Obviously none of AFF members became alarmed and reported him. You can find worse examples on the internet, and those people for the most parts don't do anything, they are just trying to be original or funny. In addition, I really doubt he would give his AFF profile to his psychiatrist.