VA - Couple & two teens found murdered, Farmville, 15 Sept 2009 #4

[PAXIMUS]

...lol.....i'm already thinking film version also...too bad the soundtrack would have to contain horrorcore.....

Staring, Uncle Fester as Sicktanick Tha Soulless...

:dance:

 

[AndresEscobar]

Andres, as I've said before, if Sam's attorneys can't swing a plea deal to avoid the DP then IMO their next best shot is an insanity defense. IANAL but I've always heard that it's a tough argument to win because the killer must not realize that he did something wrong. Sam's cover up attempts, the lies to Mel's parents (and the cops) and his killing the pastor, IMO will be difficult facts to overcome. But I don't see any other way to keep Sam alive.

Virginia executed DC sniper John Muhammad last night. He was sentenced to death in 2004. The Old Dominion does not fool around when it comes to capital punishment.

If he's insane, he's insane. I think from the facts we have so far we can say to some degree of certainty that Sam McCroskey is mentally ill. I think he certainly has depression issues, and based on the behavioral oddities in this case indicate there were other psychological issues at play here.

An insanity defense is a rare thing. But this is a rare case. How many sane people can you name that would hang around with dead bodies for days?

Edited to say: Yeah, read about the DC sniper yesterday. I think that's one of the few instances where I'm not offended by use of the death penalty.

 

[PAXIMUS]

Good PDF here on the differences between MEDICAL and LEGAL INSANITY:

http://query.nytimes.com/mem/archive-free/pdf?res=9E01E1DD143BEE33A25752C1A9649C94679ED7CF

 

[Soulmagent]

Maybe the insanity plea IS the plea to save the boys life?

Think about it: here's a 20 year old kid with a history of being bullied and outcast. He has a terrible family life. Bad parents. A mother that's high all the time. Mentally Ill sister. He doesn't bathe, is obviously depressed, and spends his life immersed in online communities and videogames. He rarely leaves his room. His social skills are stunted, and we can deduce from online communication that most of his direct communication had a child like quality to it.

He became obsessed with an internet clique genre of people who glorify murder, occult, satanism, and drug use. People he looks up to routinely garnish weapons, wear make up and fake blood, and write/sing about how cool it is to murder. They also glorify drug use, violent sex, and domestic abuse.

The internet clique is highly structured with the people on top considered (and considered themsevles) as gods (ie, apostles, anyone?). Sam is a low man on a totem pole, and is actively trying to climb rank by joining them as a rapper. This scene becomes his life. He's seeking the approval he has never had before. Yet, he's stuck. His music isn't very well-received.

He finds an underaged girlfriend online. He spends all of his money to fly out to meet her. As he leaves, he's rejected by his parents as they tell him he's no longer welcome home. He gets off the plane to see her, and she rejects him. They spend hours in a car together where she's cold and ignores him. At the concert, she goes off with the people he's trying to impress while he stays off in a corner. The rejection builds on the ride home. She and her friend are bullying him, the thing he left his life behind in California rejected him. Etc.

Could that sway a judge or jury? Throw some expert testimony in there about Sam's mental state? That makes it a toss up between whether you believe the state's expert or the defense's. Seems like it could be a pretty long (expensive) and intense trial if they pull the insanity defense. Maybe this is what the defense is going to hang their hat on in an attempt to save his life.

Maybe they enter an insanity plea until the DA offers LWOP.

A few loose ends: we keep pointing to what Sam said to the taxi driver and reading things into it. We can do that, but if the prosecution were to put the Taxi driver on the stand and say "What did Sam say to you?" "He waited for her to go to sleep and he left" and then somehow tried to make the point that what Sam MEANT was he waited for her to go to sleep, then killed her, that would be immediately objected to as speculation. Which it is. And is barred from the Federal Rules of Evidence. If the judge allowed it to continue: personally, I would object until I was thrown in contempt. Also, it would be an appealable error.


Also, if Sam's attorney is competent, he wont take a "demonic possession" defense when the insanity defense is certainly better suited and less, well, ridiculous.

Sam could of went anywhere in the US to commit such a crazy crime. If he was insane He wouldnt of went to the airport or calmly lied to the police officer or Mels parents.

Virginia isnt a state to feel sorry for a 20 yr old internet junkie with no job and a underage girlfriend. Without the the court seeing his imaginary friend their selves they will most likey be lighting Sam'a$$ up before Christimas 2016.
Not that I am trying to speak for the whole court system but the overall attitude of a locality plays a big role in the jury pool and also how the judge deals with that locality.
So in my dealing in VA court here what I have noticed ,observed etc... Alth
never farmville and never murder and never have I had criminal charges other then mooning an Ex but those where dismissed( before I could present evidence:innocent
They are no nonsence in the functions.
The judges I have encountered and witness watching cases are fair and follow stature and guidelines in sentancing. They sort though B.S pretty swifty.
If they do not have a strong case or an insanity plea would hold merit they wouldnt seek death they dont like wasted money they would plea it to life in prison or something that still means his butt isnt going anywhere. They wont grant any unnecessary motions to run up the cost and time of the trial. And they wont allow that weird state police guy in their court (Don) IMO I predict them rejecting the insanity plea. This is just what I think based on what I have seen. Except the part about Don not being allowed in court .That is me just really really hoping!

 

[Nessa]

http://www.trutv.com/library/crime/serial_killers/predators/jason_massey/index.html
I hope I did this right for the link. The story of Jason Massey has a lot of similarities and insight into this type of killer. I particularly found it interesting what the profilers said about Jason as it seems eerily similar to Sam. Jason (as do most people with APD) seemed to get off on killing/torturing animals. Makes me wonder if Sam hasn't done the same thing.

 

[AndresEscobar]

(addressed a few parts below)

Sam could of went anywhere in the US to commit such a crazy crime. If he was insane He wouldnt of went to the airport or calmly lied to the police officer or Mels parents.

I'm going to disagree with you here. An insanity defense does not require a random act of violence nor are the lies he told to the police officer or Mels parents themselves dispositive of an insanity defense. Neither is trying to escape.

I don't know who this Don is . . . I'm also not suggesting that he'll ever bet let out of wherever they put him: I'm sure that in the event of a successful insanity plea, he will be in a mental institution for the rest of his life.

The judges I have encountered and witness watching cases are fair and follow stature and guidelines in sentancing. They sort though B.S pretty swifty.

If they're fair and follow statute, and also common law, then they're going to also follow the statutes and common law in regards to defenses.

They wont grant any unnecessary motions to run up the cost and time of the trial.

Not sure what motions you're referring to but in a death penalty case, the defense is going to be allowed to have the resources it needs to make its case. Lawyers do not make "frivolous motions". Every motion in a case has merit. If a lawyer is found to be making frivolous motions for the purpose of running up the "cost and time of the trial", they can be subject to discipline per the ABA rules. They can even be disbarred.

The state, or the jury, doesn't have to feel sorry for him. If Sam was legally insane, and the trial judge or jury rules otherwise, the case will be appealed. He will have an automatic right to an appeal. If the appellate court finds the court erred, the case will be remanded for appropriate sentencing.

 

[Farmvillian]

I'm going to do a little experiment with a maul this weekend. I'm going to go to a local hardware store, pick out one, and swing it around to see how many times I can swing it in certain time periods.

How tall was Sam and how much did he weigh? I have a feeling I am quite larger than Sam, as I'm 6'4" 230. As a control, I'll have my girlfriend and sister try it to. I'm assuming Sam's actual size is somewhere between me and my girlfriend (She's about 5'9" but thin). My sister is about 5'7" and very thin.

I was originally thinking about videotaping this, but I'm not sure I want a video of myself floating around on the internet swinging a maul. Maybe we'll wear masks or something.

Sounds like a YouTube hit to me

 

[Soulmagent]

Don is the state trooper the occult guy.
I said unnecessary not frivolous. They will grant him cost needed. I never said they wouldnt. What i meant is they wont do is waste a crapload of money doing it.
I predicted the tossing out an insanity defence.
And the jury and the states opinion are going to matter on the outcome of this. It sure would help sam if they could say aww poor him.I didnt say it would prevent a fair day in court or that if they dont feel sorry for him it wouldnt be fair. I was stating an opinion based on the fact he may be trying to avoid death with an insanity defence which will not work unless he is really insane. And in my opinion he isnt.
Now with the lawyers and frivolous motions. I am sure you have heard of frivolous lawsuits. I am pretty sure these are precluded by a frivolous motion to which isnt a crime nor warrents reporting. I also didnt say the said lawyer would be the filing motions to run up the cost and time of the trial. All the motions filed are not always heard they can be rejected if the judge decides what ever motion is not of importance of the case.

 

[dangrsmind]

Let's compare these two cases of violent murders by "horrorcore rappers"...

Big Lurch: Found standing in the road covered in blood staring at the moon.
Syko Sam: Found asleep at the airport trying to leave town.

They may try the insanity defense, I can see how they might not see many alternatives, but I think it is a loser. The guy knew enough to try and leave town. I don't think he is legally insane and I would be very surprised if a court found him to be so.

 

[AndresEscobar]

I just did some research on the insanity defense in Virginia.

Here's some interesting points I found in this .pdf, which is here: www.dmhmrsas.virginia.gov/documents/manuals/ofo-ngrichapter1.pdf

The Insanity defense is:

1. Product of case law (DeJarnette v. Commonwealth, 75 Va. 867 (1881);
Price v. Commonwealth, 228 Va. 452, 323 S.E.2d 106 (1984); Thompson
v. Commonwealth, 193 Va. 704, 70 S.E.2d 284 (1952))

2. Defendant is insane if, at time of the offense, because of mental disease or defect, he/she

a. Did not understand the nature, character, and consequences of
his/her act, or
b. Was unable to distinguish right from wrong, or
c. Was driven by an irresistible impulse to commit the act

3. "Mental disease or defect" is defined as a disorder that "substantially
impairs the defendant's capacity to understand or appreciate his conduct"

a. Psychotic disorders qualify
b. Mental retardation qualifies
c. Voluntary intoxication does not qualify
(1) "settled insanity" due to substance abuse may qualify. The
criteria are organic impairment, with psychotic symptoms,
resulting from long-term substance use
(2) voluntary intoxication may negate "premeditation" to
reduce homicide offense from first-degree or capital murder
to second-degree murder
d. Involuntary intoxication is an independent defense

4. "Nature, character, and consequences" are not defined. It is not clear
whether the defendant must have believed that the act was legally justified
or whether belief that act was morally justified suffices.

This is a hard burden to prove. Notice: Sam's defense has to prove that Sam's mental disorder was a direct cause of the crime, not a contributory factor.

This is interesting because the lawyers of the DC sniper's teenage accomplice Lee Boyd Malvo failed to meet their burden to have him acquitted for reasons of insanity despite having several psychiatrists testify he was insane. Their argument that John Allen Muhummad's influence indoctrinated him failed. However, Lee Boyd Malvo eventually received a plea bargin to serve LWOP.

 

[gxm]

An interesting article here from the Sowell case, it applies because of earlier talk Sam may be a serial killer, this seems to imply a serial killer must have a sadistic sexual to his killings or he is just a mass murderer.



http://blog.cleveland.com/metro/2009/11/imperial_avenue_strangler_is_a.html

The National Institutes of Justice defines serial killing as a series of two or more homicides committed over a period of time in which "the offender's behavior and the physical evidence . . . reflect sadistic, sexual overtones."

The sadistic sexuality, the chronic pattern and the lack of an immediately obvious motive separate serial killing from mass murder (2007's Virginia Tech massacre), terrorist attacks (1995's Oklahoma City bombing) and other kinds of "multicide."

Police say 30 to 50 serial killers stalk the United States at any one time, but Douglas believes that to be a conservative estimate, in part because the country's 17,000 law-enforcement agencies can't share data easily. Ohio ranks sixth in the nation among states with geographical ties to serial killers, University of Akron criminologist Mary Myers said.

I don't know. They called the DC sniper a serial killer. That's why he was supposed to be a white guy… Only white guys are serial killers… Oooops!

IMO, Sam is an interesting mix of serial/thrill killer. (Even though he was caught before the 30 days required for serial status, I think he would have kept on killing.)

Something to think about; according to Wiki, a serial killer comes in four categories, one of them is visionary:

Visionary serial killers suffer from psychotic breaks with reality, sometimes believing they are another person or are compelled to murder by entities such as the devil or God.[17] The two most common subgroups are "demon mandated" and "God mandated."[18]

Herbert Mullin believed the American casualties in the Vietnam War were preventing California from experiencing an earthquake. As the war wound down, Mullin claimed his father instructed him via telepathy to raise the amount of "human sacrifices to nature" in order to delay a catastrophic earthquake that would plunge California into the ocean.[19]

David Berkowitz ("Son of Sam") is an example of a demon-mandated visionary killer. He claimed a demon transmitted orders through his neighbor's dog, instructing him to murder.[20]

Source link:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Serial_killer

 

[AndresEscobar]

Don is the state trooper the occult guy.
I said unnecessary not frivolous. They will grant him cost needed. I never said they wouldnt. What i meant is they wont do is waste a crapload of money doing it.

(respectfully snipped)

Now with the lawyers and frivolous motions. I am sure you have heard of frivolous lawsuits. I am pretty sure these are precluded by a frivolous motion to which isnt a crime nor warrents reporting. I also didnt say the said lawyer would be the filing motions to run up the cost and time of the trial. All the motions filed are not always heard they can be rejected if the judge decides what ever motion is not of importance of the case.

Again, I don't know what motions you're referring to, but a motion for a change of venue is likely in this case. Unnecessary and frivolous are synonymous.

Model Rules of Professional Conduct
Advocate
Rule 3.1 Meritorious Claims And Contentions

A lawyer shall not bring or defend a proceeding, or assert or controvert an issue therein, unless there is a basis in law and fact for doing so that is not frivolous, which includes a good faith argument for an extension, modification or reversal of existing law. A lawyer for the defendant in a criminal proceeding, or the respondent in a proceeding that could result in incarceration, may nevertheless so defend the proceeding as to require that every element of the case be established.

Lawyers are sanctioned if the judge views the lawsuit as frivolous. They can even be disbarred.

 

[AndresEscobar]

Let's compare these two cases of violent murders by "horrorcore rappers"...

Big Lurch: Found standing in the road covered in blood staring at the moon.
Syko Sam: Found asleep at the airport trying to leave town.

They may try the insanity defense, I can see how they might not see many alternatives, but I think it is a loser. The guy knew enough to try and leave town. I don't think he is legally insane and I would be very surprised if a court found him to be so.

The insanity defense probably wont get him acquitted, but it might help in sentencing. And, the guy apparently didn't know enough to leave town immediately, hanging out with bodies for days.

 

[Soulmagent]

[/QUOTE]

This is a hard burden to prove. Notice: Sam's defense has to prove that Sam's mental disorder was a direct cause of the crime, not a contributory factor.

This is interesting because the lawyers of the DC sniper's teenage accomplice Lee Boyd Malvo failed to meet their burden to have him acquitted for reasons of insanity despite having several psychiatrists testify he was insane. Their argument that John Allen Muhummad's influence indoctrinated him failed. However, Lee Boyd Malvo eventually received a plea bargin to serve LWOP.[/QUOTE]

I am telling ya Virginia isnt big on the insanity defence and since it was stated Sam was drinking he has no defence there. They may offer him a plea but I doubt that seriously.

O/T I actualy waited on the D.c sniper. They came in to order food and when asked what to drink he had to have direction. Nothing I asked him was answered until john M. gave an approving head shake. I didnt know at the time who they were but I thought that kid who looked 15 or 16 to me was abused.
I felt sorry for him as he ate his food an wondered wth was up with them. I truely believe based on what I saw that kid was afraid of that man. But very dependant on him. They arrested them shorty after but not before they shot a man within 50 feet from where my mom was standing ,and I had waited on them 2 days before.

 

[AndresEscobar]

I am telling ya Virginia isnt big on the insanity defence and since it was stated Sam was drinking he has no defence there. They may offer him a plea but I doubt that seriously.

We don't know that he was drinking at the time of the murder, and drinking doesn't negate the defense. What the law in VA says is he could not use a legal insanity defense BASED on being intoxicated. So he can't say he's not culpable because he was drunk. Evidence of him drinking prior to the murders wont wipe away his insanity defense.

Some stats about the insanity defense: it's raised in approximately 1% of criminal cases, and is only successful in 25% of the cases in which it's raised. So, I agree Virginia isn't big on the insanity defense. However, it'll be hard to find anyone that thinks Sam is going to walk away from this. The more important issue is how it will effect sentencing.

Weird story about the snipers. Small world, I guess.

 

[dangrsmind]

The insanity defense probably wont get him acquitted, but it might help in sentencing. And, the guy apparently didn't know enough to leave town immediately, hanging out with bodies for days.

Sure. But it seems to me, not a lawyer, that this defense would be a lot stronger if he had stayed at the house until he was caught. Then I might buy the idea that he didn't understand what he had done.

But he didn't stay there, he left and eventually went to the airport to leave town. If he was "insane" at the time of the murders and while hanging out in the house with the decomposing bodies, he seems to have come to his senses at some point later on. But then instead of turning himself in to authorities he tried to leave town to escape the consequences. He had enough knowledge of the consequences of his crimes to lie to various people including law enforcement as well. He may have tried to create a (very lame) alibi. None of this supports the legal definition of insanity does it?

I don't think it's going to work.

 

[ziggy]

I certainly don't see much hope for Sammy boy here.

He can't say SODDI because he had Mark's car. Sam could not have left for the airport before Mark, the last to die, was dead because he had Mark's car and it will make no sense to a jury that Mark just let him take his car to the airport when he didn't even have a driver's license. No way.

Forensic evidence - we don't know much about what they have, but Sam won't be able to escape much of it pointing directly at him. They may be able to attack the handling of it Mr. Fung style. I guess they can take their shot.

Insanity - Wow. If the defense goes with this I would be surprised - IANAL - but I do know that a Personality Disorder is not considered a mental illness, and that's about all they will get on Sam - unless there is a battle of the medical experts and then their testimony will cancel each other out and the jury will be left to infer... having crappy parents and being a loner and bullied is not going to be enough for them to let him off for this.

I know the defense attorneys taking this case probably also have hopes of gaining notoriety through a high profile case. I would not like having Sam McCroskey as a client for my big close up!

 

[Soulmagent]

We don't know that he was drinking at the time of the murder, and drinking doesn't negate the defense. What the law in VA says is he could not use a legal insanity defense BASED on being intoxicated. So he can't say he's not culpable because he was drunk. Evidence of him drinking prior to the murders wont wipe away his insanity defense.

Some stats about the insanity defense: it's raised in approximately 1% of criminal cases, and is only successful in 25% of the cases in which it's raised. So, I agree Virginia isn't big on the insanity defense. However, it'll be hard to find anyone that thinks Sam is going to walk away from this. The more important issue is how it will effect sentencing.

Weird story about the snipers. Small world, I guess.

And my answer to the big question is... It will not effect sentencing because VA is not going to accept an insanity plea. IMO I really believe virginia will fry him.

Also the drinking part I tossed in because in the insane defence it mentioned impulse control and not being able to control it . But he was drinking and had he not been he might of been able to control it ,so in effect he had control over drinking which lead to the incontrol of the murder making him still in control from the start.
The impulse control was the only area I thought he might fit for such a defence.

 

[smartie74]

I certainly don't see much hope for Sammy boy here.

He can't say SODDI because he had Mark's car. Sam could not have left for the airport before Mark, the last to die, was dead because he had Mark's car and it will make no sense to a jury that Mark just let him take his car to the airport when he didn't even have a driver's license. No way.

Forensic evidence - we don't know much about what they have, but Sam won't be able to escape much of it pointing directly at him. They may be able to attack the handling of it Mr. Fung style. I guess they can take their shot.

Insanity - Wow. If the defense goes with this I would be surprised - IANAL - but I do know that a Personality Disorder is not considered a mental illness, and that's about all they will get on Sam - unless there is a battle of the medical experts and then their testimony will cancel each other out and the jury will be left to infer... having crappy parents and being a loner and bullied is not going to be enough for them to let him off for this.

I know the defense attorneys taking this case probably also have hopes of gaining notoriety through a high profile case. I would not like having Sam McCroskey as a client for my big close up!

Carey Bowen is one of the best defense attorneys in the State and is listed on superlawyers.com, hence the reason he was appointed as the defense attorney. I don't think this will tarnish his reputation as a well respected defense attorney.

http://www.superlawyers.com/virginia/lawyer/Cary-B-Bowen/a87fa20f-156a-4cc7-bfcc-14f6aa481d9b.html

 

[peace_gurl]

Sure. But it seems to me, not a lawyer, that this defense would be a lot stronger if he had stayed at the house until he was caught. Then I might buy the idea that he didn't understand what he had done.

But he didn't stay there, he left and eventually went to the airport to leave town. If he was "insane" at the time of the murders and while hanging out in the house with the decomposing bodies, he seems to have come to his senses at some point later on. But then instead of turning himself in to authorities he tried to leave town to escape the consequences. He had enough knowledge of the consequences of his crimes to lie to various people including law enforcement as well. He may have tried to create a (very lame) alibi. None of this supports the legal definition of insanity does it?

I don't think it's going to work.

I am sure some of the things that he did at the house after the murders will prove he knew exactly what he was doing : )