Casey & Family Psychological Profile #6

[Woe.be.gone]

I'v been wondering for about 3 months if Kc could use "Temporary Mental Derangement as a defense. Two members posted this might be able to be used by defense. I found two sites that explain this defense and wonder what others think about this. First site I found by googling is from the Cyclopedia of La wwww.books.google.com/books?id=9Ho8AAAAAAJ... and the other site is "Forensic Psychology & Neuropsychology for criminal & civil cases" www.booksgoogle.com/books?isbn=0849381738 I hope this link works and if it doesn't can someone help in posting these articles? Thanks, Lets start the debate!

To let you know, the link didn't work for me kagey. Wish I could help but I've never even posted a link. Must learn soon!

 

[kageykaren]

Thanks, I don't know what I'm doing wrong but I'm sure gonna try and figure this out! You feel so left out when trying to get an idea across. Until someone comes to my rescue again just google.

 

[Pattymarie]

After today's depositions, were George and Cindy's behavior a clever set-up for Casey's defense or is this really how they actually are?

If so, what are the ramifications for the trial, the state of the A's marriage and most importantly the memory of baby Caylee?

Who really sets to profit here? The defense? The prosecution? Or Caylee?

 

[Whisperer]

After today, I am afraid to tell you but this is the real family. Gosh, I never knew there could be mass narcissism but this whole family has it. What an arrogant bunch, they are..not to mention defiant and obnoxious, rude and with a sense of entitilement that defies description.

I can't imagine this going to trial. There is no defense.

 

[Brini]

IMHO I have said from the start Casey sounded mentally ill, I was called a good Samaritan, or a humanitarian, and that Casey is just plain EVIL.
I still believe she is mentally ill, and her parents can NOT absorb this fact.

I do not think her attorney knows what he is doing.

FROM THE ARTICLE "MOMMY DEAREST": (Lots of information that I agree with).
The Mind of the Sociopath
According to Criminologist, James Alan Fox, professor of criminal justice at Northeastern University, some act on genuine psychotic delusions. Others can be motivated by selfish reasons if the child is perceived by them to be an obstacle in their relationship with a boyfriend, or preventing them from living the carefree lifestyle that they want.
>SNIP<
http://www.officer.com/web/online/Investigation/Mommy-Dearest/18$45493

Sociopathy is seen as more of a character deficiency than a mental illness, though. Agree that KC is a sociopath.

 

[Brini]

I'v been posting that psychiatry and the law are meshed together in these types of cases but insanity is not a defense. I wondered if and have posted the question of a possible defense for KC being, "Temporary Mental Derangement," and got one response of it could be. Looking at all the clues KC has seemed to plan to leave I can't imagine any form of a psychiatri defense for KC.

You're right! Too much planning, covering up, deception, over a protracted period of time.. KC knows EXACTLY what she's doing.

Unless she got OJ's jury, an insanity defense would never sell.

 

[Brini]

Casey's not insane. She's cunning. Devious. Manipulative. But not insane.
Insane is not lying and covering up the deed you've done.
Insane is Andrea Yates, who killed her 5 children, then called her husband and LE. She met LE at her front door and told them what she'd done.
Casey continued on with her daily life, lying to everyone about the whereabouts of Caylee. Little Caylee was out of sight, and out of mind.
Casey is a narcissistic , superficial sociopath.
Her behavior was crazy, but Casey is not.

:clap::clap::clap::clap::clap::clap::clap::clap::clap::clap::blowkiss:

 

[Brini]

The legal standard for insanity is the M'Naughten Rule.

M'Naughten Rule n. a traditional "right and wrong" test of legal insanity in criminal prosecutions. Under M'Naughten (its name comes from the trial of a notorious English assassin in the early 1800s), a defendant is legally insane if he/she cannot distinguish between right and wrong in regard to the crime with which he/she is charged. If the judge or the jury finds that the accused could not tell the difference, then there could not be criminal intent.

Casey's behavior to cover-up her crime would rule out an insanity defense.
I believe the legal system should revisit this standard in light of our current understanding of mental illness as compared to the early 1800's.

This is the crux.

 

[Brini]

Don't forget that it took two trials for a jury to find Andrea Yates insane. The insanity defense just doesn't seem to float with jurys.

Casey doesn't have a history of being on meds and having to be hospitalized because of a mental illness. She's never been on a 72 hour hold or anything.
A jury would never find her insane. I believe that she is a sociopath.

Andrea Yates was also floridly delusional. Didn't she believe she was sending her children to heaven? Looney as a tune, poor woman.

 

[Brini]

WOW!! Thank you lots of good information.
I do not understand what his game plan is his (Baez) strategy can not possibly go with her nanny story and blame the fevidence forund in her computer on ???
Either Casey is Crazy like a fox and knows that enough time has gone by that there is nothing that can tie her DIRECTLY to the crime, or she is mentally ill.
Her Lawyer is taking a dangerous gamble pleading innocent. IMO

Option three: she's too arrogant and entitled to believe that she will be convicted.

 

[Brini]

me too

I've never seen her look deranged. Detached, yes.

 

[Brini]

A few months back, before the remains were found, I posted that KC had a mental illness and I was corrected by other posters who say she has a personality disorder, not a mental illness. I tend to agree with that. There were also strong arguments that KC is not a sociopath because she doesn't fit the MO. Just throwing that out there.

As JBean reminded us, the psych dx thread is elsewhere (though, you guys KNOW I'd like to dive in on this).

What is going on in her head isn't the point. Whether she knew what she was doing is the point, in a court of law.

 

[Brini]

If KC really was insane, she wouldn't have felt the need to lie about killing her daughter, correct? If she didn't know right from wrong, she wouldn't have made up excuses and lies to mask her actions, which she knew were wrong. IMO, it's too late for an insanity plea.

Yep!

 

[Brini]

Couldn't she be guilty by reason of mental disease or defect? Surely, FL has that? That wouldn't mean insanity, ie she walks, but, she goes to prison/psych ward until/if ever judge mentally healthy again? I don't personally like that one and hope they don't use it, but, am just throwing it out there for discussion.

Won't fly. Too much evidence of planning and covering up. Over months.

 

[Brini]

In regards to determining sanity vs. insanity........or mental illness for trial for defense.......

I can see how Andrea Yates could have been evaluated and found insane, because it was just clear, clearly so...plus given her history, etc. In Andrea's case I felt very sorry for her. I did not want her to be found not guilty or even necessarily to get anything less than life in confinement, but I didn't feel she deserved to be dumped in prison with cold blooded killers, I saw a clear difference. Her mental illness doesn't lessen what she did, but I do think (and have read, but don't have links or remember where, I think it just comes up in researching articles about her) that Andrea, after some treatment, felt great remorse and horror at what she'd done.

But when you think about mental illness in the direction of personality disorders OR sociopaths...how can you truly evaluate these people?? They are not going to be suffering from delusions or hallucinations or admit to anything being wrong with them. How do you evaluate them? What kind of tests would they use on KC and how would you know she's not faking either being sane (so she can continue on thinking she will attain an acquittal) OR in some cases if someone wanted to plea insanity, how would you know if they are skewing the test results on purpose. ???

Skewing test results is easy-- if you are smart. We used to do it all the time in grad school.

There's a lot more to diagnostics than just the tests.

But, I won't say more. on this thread. Or, JBean might whack my knuckles with a ruler.

 

[Brini]

I believe as you do. I never have thought she was "innocent" but that she had to be insane and there must be something under the law that covers this, somewhere.

She's not legally insane.

 

[Brini]

Knowing is one thing.
Feeling is another thing.
there in lies a problem. JMO
When a person can not feel - something is not right.

However, most sociopaths are not murderers. I think I just read that it's now up to 10% of the population.

There's the distinction.

She may not be a whole. evolved person. But, she DID know she was committing murder.

 

[Brini]

I agree but you're missing a couple of points. She was a pathological liar and lived in a fantasy world. Something happened which caused her to murder her daughter. Whether or not that catalyst was PPD, a continuation of her pathalogical lying, or something else, I think her best shot is an insanity defense. There's certainly lots of material for a defense "expert" to diagnose her as insane.

Not unless the jury is delusional.

The evidence seems to indicate that the motives were: 1) spite against CA, after a big fight, and 2) she wanted to party, and having to take care of a kid got in the way. Also, her then boyfriend told her he didn't want a daughter. It happens a lot, unfortunately. Mothers do kill their kids.

She isn't delusional. She lies to make herself look better. She lied about having a job, but she knew she didn't REALLY have a job. She does that with everything.

She planned and covered up from the time of the crime to the present. She did and does know what she did.

There's no basis for legal insanity.

 

[Brini]

She fantasized. She didn't "live" in a fantasy world. She didn't lie because she thought her stories were true. She lied to manipulate people. There is a difference.

Casey is the same as the BTK killer or John Gacey or Susan Smith or Penny Beadreau or Scott Peterson or Devon Epp's mom. All of these liars fantasized. In every case their desires were put over the rights and lives of others.

Casey isn't unique.

JMO

You're right. She isn't unique. She's common as dirt.

 

[Brini]

Agreed, for the most part. I think she was living in fantasyland and they lying carried over into normal aspects of her life.

You and I are not the attorney's involved in the case. A flat out "not guilty" plea is where she is at now, and even if it is Casey making that decision, her dream team is negligent if they aren't trying to sway her to an insanity case.

No they aren't. They know better than to try. She is WAY short of criteria.