Greyhound Bus Cannibal rehabilitated after 4 years?

11011121315

Comments

  • dignin said:

    dignin said:

    I appreciate the road you are taking here, but I just personally dont believe the two diseases (and the person's ability to control their respective tendencies or impulses) are comparable. It really is that simple.

    This type of psychosis is incredibly rare. Alcoholism is rampant. Most, if not all, courts agree that diminished capacity due to drunkeness, whether due to a one time binge or a disease, is not a viable legal excuse, and I tend to agree with that.

    I know we disagree here, but I do think they can be compared.

    In both cases, you have people who's actions can be attributed to their affliction. While one might be extremely rare in comparison, that doesn't make it more legitimate- especially for the individual struggling with alcohol that makes a fatal decision under the influence.

    And I don't hold much respect for our courts (as you know). I mean, why should I? In our city, we very recently had a guy with multiple driving offences and a suspended license kill a woman at a crosswalk trying to get to a casino. Initially, a judge really threw the book at him and sentenced him to 6 months in jail.

    Seen as absurdly unjust, an appeal saw another idiot judge overturn that sentence and reduced the sentence to 6 months house arrest (critical of the first sentence as well). Hahahaha. He got grounded! Why? His aboriginal background needed to be taken into account. Why not just give him nothing- make him say sorry or something? A colossal joke... and hardly 'unique'.

    Again... our courts are a joke.



    http://www.cbc.ca/kamloops/mt/2015/02/17/kamloops-mans-aboriginal-background-factors-into-reduced-sentence-for-fatal-traffic-accident/
    You can cherry pick absurdly stupid rulings all you want to make your point, but for every idiot decision made by one judge, there are 10,000 others that make sense but aren't reported on.

    As much as health professionals call alcoholism a disease, which i disagree with, but for the discussion let's say it is. The main difference here is alcoholics KNOW they are ill, and are fully capable of making the choice to seek help for their addiction before they kill someone. Someone in Li's situation, however, did not have the luxury of knowing he needed help.

    On that difference alone, these two cannot be compared.
    Your 10,000 comment is extreme exaggeration. If you feel our court system serves justice then we can agree to disagree. The small scale case I cited was used to complement the catalog of high profile cases that have most Canadians I know slapping their foreheads incredulously.

    But to your other point and on topic: are you saying that the health experts are right when they speak of mental illness as a disease, but wrong when they cite the opinion that alcoholism is a disease? You have consistently vouched for the competency and professionalism of the health experts as they support NCR verdicts, yet (at least here) seem prepared to dismiss them when their opinion is contrary to your beliefs.

    Li KNEW he was hearing voices he had never heard before which to most might seem quite odd and certainly something to investigate at the very least. According to the media, he was not a dumb man with higher education in his background. The fact that he ignored them until they overcame him seems at a minimum as negligent as ignoring the intense physical and mental urges an alcoholic must battle on a daily basis.

    These cases cannot be compared if you choose not to compare them. At a core level... two individuals stricken with a mind altering affliction that leads them to making decisions they normally wouldnt make IS comparable.
    It almost feels like you are just arguing a point just for the sake of it.

    Alcoholics know they have an affliction and can make the choice to get help.
    Yeah, it sounds unbelievable and difficult for us non-voice-hearers to grasp, but it is a real thing.

    So do you have the same opinion about being gay/lesbian?

    Blanket statements usurp people to question.
    Say what?

    I have nothing to say to someone that stands firm in saying "people who have C-sections for non-medical reasons are idiots"

    expand your mind or troll elsewhere
    Says the person somehow linking this topic to "gay/lesbian"

    You sure are taking the c-section thing personal.

    And I'm pretty sure I have a good grasp as to who the troll is around here. Glad to see you're out of the penalty box.

    I used the word troll since it seems to be a common accepted word to call someone around this forum when people rub each other the wrong way.

    I am only linking this topic to "gay/lesbian" temporarily to provide an example of choices people make and genetic derived decisions that may go against public scrutiny.

    the C-section is personal as I have 4 healthy children, 3 of them a c-sec for non-medical reasons.
    So I guess I amend my statement to "I have a hard time communicating with someone who thinks that people are idiots for having c-secs for non-medical reasons.

    So as not to de-rail,
    this head chopping, crazy, zombie jebus loving cannibal needs to be locked up and key thrown away along with his quackery of doctors.
  • PJfanwillneverleave1PJfanwillneverleave1 Posts: 12,885
    edited March 2015

    I appreciate the road you are taking here, but I just personally dont believe the two diseases (and the person's ability to control their respective tendencies or impulses) are comparable. It really is that simple.

    This type of psychosis is incredibly rare. Alcoholism is rampant. Most, if not all, courts agree that diminished capacity due to drunkeness, whether due to a one time binge or a disease, is not a viable legal excuse, and I tend to agree with that.

    I know we disagree here, but I do think they can be compared.

    In both cases, you have people who's actions can be attributed to their affliction. While one might be extremely rare in comparison, that doesn't make it more legitimate- especially for the individual struggling with alcohol that makes a fatal decision under the influence.

    And I don't hold much respect for our courts (as you know). I mean, why should I? In our city, we very recently had a guy with multiple driving offences and a suspended license kill a woman at a crosswalk trying to get to a casino. Initially, a judge really threw the book at him and sentenced him to 6 months in jail.

    Seen as absurdly unjust, an appeal saw another idiot judge overturn that sentence and reduced the sentence to 6 months house arrest (critical of the first sentence as well). Hahahaha. He got grounded! Why? His aboriginal background needed to be taken into account. Why not just give him nothing- make him say sorry or something? A colossal joke... and hardly 'unique'.

    Again... our courts are a joke.



    http://www.cbc.ca/kamloops/mt/2015/02/17/kamloops-mans-aboriginal-background-factors-into-reduced-sentence-for-fatal-traffic-accident/
    You can cherry pick absurdly stupid rulings all you want to make your point, but for every idiot decision made by one judge, there are 10,000 others that make sense but aren't reported on.

    As much as health professionals call alcoholism a disease, which i disagree with, but for the discussion let's say it is. The main difference here is alcoholics KNOW they are ill, and are fully capable of making the choice to seek help for their addiction before they kill someone. Someone in Li's situation, however, did not have the luxury of knowing he needed help.

    On that difference alone, these two cannot be compared.
    Your 10,000 comment is extreme exaggeration. If you feel our court system serves justice then we can agree to disagree. The small scale case I cited was used to complement the catalog of high profile cases that have most Canadians I know slapping their foreheads incredulously.

    But to your other point and on topic: are you saying that the health experts are right when they speak of mental illness as a disease, but wrong when they cite the opinion that alcoholism is a disease? You have consistently vouched for the competency and professionalism of the health experts as they support NCR verdicts, yet (at least here) seem prepared to dismiss them when their opinion is contrary to your beliefs.

    Li KNEW he was hearing voices he had never heard before which to most might seem quite odd and certainly something to investigate at the very least. According to the media, he was not a dumb man with higher education in his background. The fact that he ignored them until they overcame him seems at a minimum as negligent as ignoring the intense physical and mental urges an alcoholic must battle on a daily basis.

    These cases cannot be compared if you choose not to compare them. At a core level... two individuals stricken with a mind altering affliction that leads them to making decisions they normally wouldnt make IS comparable.
    It almost feels like you are just arguing a point just for the sake of it.

    Alcoholics know they have an affliction and can make the choice to get help.
    Yeah, it sounds unbelievable and difficult for us non-voice-hearers to grasp, but it is a real thing.

    So do you have the same opinion about being gay/lesbian?

    Blanket statements usurp people to question.
    um, no, sexual orientation is biological.

    Alcoholics can choose to seek treatment. True statement. Thats not a blanket statement. A blanket statement would be if i said something that thirty claimed i said, for example, tgat "all alcoholics are weak", which i do not believe, and know to be untrue. I also said i know how difficult it is to do so, and not only that, but to be successful is equally if not more difficult.

    Dont let your passionate misinterpretation of something i said cause you to insult me.

    Good day.

    Schizto Head Loppers can choose to seek treatment. True statement?

    This is crazy. I still don't understand you position on whether you think the decision to let the
    de-nogginizer cannibal out into society is the right decision.

    What is your position?

    My passionate misinterpretation of what your say is my fault as what you are saying I am not understanding correctly. Not an insult.
  • oftenreadingoftenreading Posts: 12,845

    Pure madness. This loony bin and his quack shrink need to be both put away. All I took away from the entire article is as follows;



    Q. Do you have a spirituality?

    A. I believe in Jesus Christ. He is my saviour. I try to follow God.

    Q. When did you begin to experience schizophrenia?

    A. I thought I heard the voice of God telling me to write down my journey. The voice told me that I was the third story of the Bible. That I was like the second coming of Jesus. I was to save people from a space-alien attack. That is why I travelled around the country. I am not sure of all the places I went to. I now know that it was schizophrenia I was suffering from.

    Q. What helps you deal with stress?

    A. Taking my medication. Exercising and doing Bible study with the chaplain here.

    Q. How would you know you were getting sick again?

    A. Hearing voices, stopping my medication and starting to believe in aliens. God would not tell me to do something bad.

    Who is Chris Summerville?
    CEO, Schizophrenia Society of Canada
    executive director, Manitoba Schizophrenia Society certified psychosocial rehabilitation practitioner
    ordained pastor with the Associated Gospel Churches of Canadanon-government director,
    has served as a pastor, chaplain, teacher, administrator and mental-health service provider in Canada and the U.S.

    Who is the "quack shrink" you are referring to? You do realize that the interview isn't by his psychiatrist, right?
    Yes, I know the interview is not by the psych. The quack shrink is the person/people? responsible for having reviewed this interview (along with other evidence I digress) and still deem it necessary to set this monster free. Quackism at its highest level.
    You appear to have an idiosyncratic definition of "quack". Most of us would understand it to mean someone without any actual training who fraudulently peddles an ineffective treatment, rather than a subspecialized physician who has successfully treated a patient's symptoms with an evidence-based medication.
    I guess my idiosynchronism has pointed out a faith healer. Only a quack can surmise with the utmost professional contempt to dare say that a patient of theirs now accepts jebus as their saviour and therefore is cured.

    I hope this is not considered de-railing the thread but a complicated subject like this loon must have all aspects discussed.
    You are totally losing me here with your arguments. The psychiatrist, or "quack" in your terminology, isn't claiming that Li is "cured" because of religious faith. Nothing you've posted provides any information on what the psychiatrist may have claimed; the article was only Li's point of view, and he clearly says that he's being treated with medication.

    The psychiatrist, if we had actually heard from him or her, wouldn't claim that he was cured, only successfully treated, with medication.

    But FYI, having a social support network, like within a church, will lower his risk of re-offending further.
    my small self... like a book amongst the many on a shelf
  • Pure madness. This loony bin and his quack shrink need to be both put away. All I took away from the entire article is as follows;



    Q. Do you have a spirituality?

    A. I believe in Jesus Christ. He is my saviour. I try to follow God.

    Q. When did you begin to experience schizophrenia?

    A. I thought I heard the voice of God telling me to write down my journey. The voice told me that I was the third story of the Bible. That I was like the second coming of Jesus. I was to save people from a space-alien attack. That is why I travelled around the country. I am not sure of all the places I went to. I now know that it was schizophrenia I was suffering from.

    Q. What helps you deal with stress?

    A. Taking my medication. Exercising and doing Bible study with the chaplain here.

    Q. How would you know you were getting sick again?

    A. Hearing voices, stopping my medication and starting to believe in aliens. God would not tell me to do something bad.

    Who is Chris Summerville?
    CEO, Schizophrenia Society of Canada
    executive director, Manitoba Schizophrenia Society certified psychosocial rehabilitation practitioner
    ordained pastor with the Associated Gospel Churches of Canadanon-government director,
    has served as a pastor, chaplain, teacher, administrator and mental-health service provider in Canada and the U.S.

    Who is the "quack shrink" you are referring to? You do realize that the interview isn't by his psychiatrist, right?
    Yes, I know the interview is not by the psych. The quack shrink is the person/people? responsible for having reviewed this interview (along with other evidence I digress) and still deem it necessary to set this monster free. Quackism at its highest level.
    You appear to have an idiosyncratic definition of "quack". Most of us would understand it to mean someone without any actual training who fraudulently peddles an ineffective treatment, rather than a subspecialized physician who has successfully treated a patient's symptoms with an evidence-based medication.
    I guess my idiosynchronism has pointed out a faith healer. Only a quack can surmise with the utmost professional contempt to dare say that a patient of theirs now accepts jebus as their saviour and therefore is cured.

    I hope this is not considered de-railing the thread but a complicated subject like this loon must have all aspects discussed.

    But FYI, having a social support network, like within a church, will lower his risk of re-offending further.
    Glad his risk is lowered.
  • oftenreadingoftenreading Posts: 12,845

    benjs said:

    So, besides Thirty, what is the issue for you?

    1) the perception that Li is being let off scott free for a horrific crime, or
    2) the concern for public safety, or
    3) a bit of both

    Admittedly, as I have said countless times, this crime rocked me in ways I care not discuss, but taking emotion of the event out of it, what do you do with someone who was found completely bonkers at the time of the crime, and now understands what happened and what he needs to do to prevent that again moving forward? Clearly, our justice system is set up to punish those with intent to commit the crime, which he had none. His brain turned on him, the same way other organs in our body do on a daily basis. He now knows how to control it. And despite what you may think, he will be heavily monitored for the rest of his life.

    Do you keep him locked up for all eternity to placate the fearful/vengeful? If he is deemed no longer a danger to society, and by law he committed no crime,mthen he must ge released.

    Keep in mind. This not our weak, "bleeding heart" parole system at play here. This is a team of mental health experts that have watched this man 24/7 for 7 years. This was not something that was carried out lightly. We aren't dealing with Hannibal Lecter here.

    He chopped off a head. Deal with it.
    thanks for adding so much to the discussion.

    I am merely trying to be as direct to you as this problem is to society and the legal system. All of a sudden this guy after getting arrested gets dropped into some ones hands and is in essence being told "deal with this because I won't/can't"

    What do you do with that? Forget the studies, empirical evidence, statistics et al. You chop off a head and eat flesh there is no rehab, there is no medicine, there is no PHD guy that can save you in the court - banished from society for life nothing else. Any judge behind a bench passes judgement on the facts the lawyers present - as well as a touch of their moral conviction.
    I would hope that any attorney/doctor that is successful in advocating for a monster as such should verily be held accountable should a re-offence occur. We all know this won't happen. This is scary that society can now "cure" head loppers and cannibals with success.

    Shame.
    Sorry if this sounds offensive, but it has to be said: you clearly have very little, if any, understanding of this case. Or possibly mental illness as a whole.

    Not making it personal to you man. I answered your quip directly with a more verbose response. It doesn't sound offensive what you think has to be said. I am offended that society can defend a cannibal eating de-noganizer and give itself a pat on the back for being empathetic.
    I don't believe in apologizing for empathetic behaviour. If you believe in the mind that can be changed throughout a lifetime, then you believe rehabilitation is a viable option for someone with clear mental illness. Simply put, if demons in your head are what made you act in a horrific way (which clearly medical experts believe to be the case), those demons should not be cause for a life sentence or death penalty (assuming you respond positively to medically-proposed treatment).
    So these demons that come and go....
    Are they real? and to who?
    Clearly the medicine people believe with sound mind that demons can be eradicated. What is the name of the drug to cure them called again?
    If you do actually want to know the name of the medication he is being treated with, I believe it was olanzapine, which is an oral antipsychotic medication. It's easily detected in the blood and a lab that tests for it will have a quantitative value within hours, which not only allows the treatment team to see if the patient is taking the medication or not, but gives an idea of how much is being taken. So for all of those who have been worried about "what happens if he goes off his medication?", the answer is - the treatment team would have proof very quickly if he went off his medication, and would intervene, likely to bring him back to hospital.
    my small self... like a book amongst the many on a shelf
  • benjs said:

    So, besides Thirty, what is the issue for you?

    1) the perception that Li is being let off scott free for a horrific crime, or
    2) the concern for public safety, or
    3) a bit of both

    Admittedly, as I have said countless times, this crime rocked me in ways I care not discuss, but taking emotion of the event out of it, what do you do with someone who was found completely bonkers at the time of the crime, and now understands what happened and what he needs to do to prevent that again moving forward? Clearly, our justice system is set up to punish those with intent to commit the crime, which he had none. His brain turned on him, the same way other organs in our body do on a daily basis. He now knows how to control it. And despite what you may think, he will be heavily monitored for the rest of his life.

    Do you keep him locked up for all eternity to placate the fearful/vengeful? If he is deemed no longer a danger to society, and by law he committed no crime,mthen he must ge released.

    Keep in mind. This not our weak, "bleeding heart" parole system at play here. This is a team of mental health experts that have watched this man 24/7 for 7 years. This was not something that was carried out lightly. We aren't dealing with Hannibal Lecter here.

    He chopped off a head. Deal with it.
    thanks for adding so much to the discussion.

    I am merely trying to be as direct to you as this problem is to society and the legal system. All of a sudden this guy after getting arrested gets dropped into some ones hands and is in essence being told "deal with this because I won't/can't"

    What do you do with that? Forget the studies, empirical evidence, statistics et al. You chop off a head and eat flesh there is no rehab, there is no medicine, there is no PHD guy that can save you in the court - banished from society for life nothing else. Any judge behind a bench passes judgement on the facts the lawyers present - as well as a touch of their moral conviction.
    I would hope that any attorney/doctor that is successful in advocating for a monster as such should verily be held accountable should a re-offence occur. We all know this won't happen. This is scary that society can now "cure" head loppers and cannibals with success.

    Shame.
    Sorry if this sounds offensive, but it has to be said: you clearly have very little, if any, understanding of this case. Or possibly mental illness as a whole.

    Not making it personal to you man. I answered your quip directly with a more verbose response. It doesn't sound offensive what you think has to be said. I am offended that society can defend a cannibal eating de-noganizer and give itself a pat on the back for being empathetic.
    I don't believe in apologizing for empathetic behaviour. If you believe in the mind that can be changed throughout a lifetime, then you believe rehabilitation is a viable option for someone with clear mental illness. Simply put, if demons in your head are what made you act in a horrific way (which clearly medical experts believe to be the case), those demons should not be cause for a life sentence or death penalty (assuming you respond positively to medically-proposed treatment).
    So these demons that come and go....
    Are they real? and to who?
    Clearly the medicine people believe with sound mind that demons can be eradicated. What is the name of the drug to cure them called again?
    If you do actually want to know the name of the medication he is being treated with, I believe it was olanzapine, which is an oral antipsychotic medication. It's easily detected in the blood and a lab that tests for it will have a quantitative value within hours, which not only allows the treatment team to see if the patient is taking the medication or not, but gives an idea of how much is being taken. So for all of those who have been worried about "what happens if he goes off his medication?", the answer is - the treatment team would have proof very quickly if he went off his medication, and would intervene, likely to bring him back to hospital.
    I don't post this stuff. I just google it.
    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Olanzapine
  • benjs said:

    So, besides Thirty, what is the issue for you?

    1) the perception that Li is being let off scott free for a horrific crime, or
    2) the concern for public safety, or
    3) a bit of both

    Admittedly, as I have said countless times, this crime rocked me in ways I care not discuss, but taking emotion of the event out of it, what do you do with someone who was found completely bonkers at the time of the crime, and now understands what happened and what he needs to do to prevent that again moving forward? Clearly, our justice system is set up to punish those with intent to commit the crime, which he had none. His brain turned on him, the same way other organs in our body do on a daily basis. He now knows how to control it. And despite what you may think, he will be heavily monitored for the rest of his life.

    Do you keep him locked up for all eternity to placate the fearful/vengeful? If he is deemed no longer a danger to society, and by law he committed no crime,mthen he must ge released.

    Keep in mind. This not our weak, "bleeding heart" parole system at play here. This is a team of mental health experts that have watched this man 24/7 for 7 years. This was not something that was carried out lightly. We aren't dealing with Hannibal Lecter here.

    He chopped off a head. Deal with it.
    thanks for adding so much to the discussion.

    I am merely trying to be as direct to you as this problem is to society and the legal system. All of a sudden this guy after getting arrested gets dropped into some ones hands and is in essence being told "deal with this because I won't/can't"

    What do you do with that? Forget the studies, empirical evidence, statistics et al. You chop off a head and eat flesh there is no rehab, there is no medicine, there is no PHD guy that can save you in the court - banished from society for life nothing else. Any judge behind a bench passes judgement on the facts the lawyers present - as well as a touch of their moral conviction.
    I would hope that any attorney/doctor that is successful in advocating for a monster as such should verily be held accountable should a re-offence occur. We all know this won't happen. This is scary that society can now "cure" head loppers and cannibals with success.

    Shame.
    Sorry if this sounds offensive, but it has to be said: you clearly have very little, if any, understanding of this case. Or possibly mental illness as a whole.

    Not making it personal to you man. I answered your quip directly with a more verbose response. It doesn't sound offensive what you think has to be said. I am offended that society can defend a cannibal eating de-noganizer and give itself a pat on the back for being empathetic.
    I don't believe in apologizing for empathetic behaviour. If you believe in the mind that can be changed throughout a lifetime, then you believe rehabilitation is a viable option for someone with clear mental illness. Simply put, if demons in your head are what made you act in a horrific way (which clearly medical experts believe to be the case), those demons should not be cause for a life sentence or death penalty (assuming you respond positively to medically-proposed treatment).
    So these demons that come and go....
    Are they real? and to who?
    Clearly the medicine people believe with sound mind that demons can be eradicated. What is the name of the drug to cure them called again?
    If you do actually want to know the name of the medication he is being treated with, I believe it was olanzapine, which is an oral antipsychotic medication. It's easily detected in the blood and a lab that tests for it will have a quantitative value within hours, which not only allows the treatment team to see if the patient is taking the medication or not, but gives an idea of how much is being taken. So for all of those who have been worried about "what happens if he goes off his medication?", the answer is - the treatment team would have proof very quickly if he went off his medication, and would intervene, likely to bring him back to hospital.
    no one seems to believe what I, and Li's own medical team, have been saying all along: being heavily monitored for life does not equate to checking in with a parole officer by phone once a week.

    Thank you for those details, oftenreading.

    new album "Cigarettes" out Spring 2025!

    www.headstonesband.com




  • benjs said:

    So, besides Thirty, what is the issue for you?

    1) the perception that Li is being let off scott free for a horrific crime, or
    2) the concern for public safety, or
    3) a bit of both

    Admittedly, as I have said countless times, this crime rocked me in ways I care not discuss, but taking emotion of the event out of it, what do you do with someone who was found completely bonkers at the time of the crime, and now understands what happened and what he needs to do to prevent that again moving forward? Clearly, our justice system is set up to punish those with intent to commit the crime, which he had none. His brain turned on him, the same way other organs in our body do on a daily basis. He now knows how to control it. And despite what you may think, he will be heavily monitored for the rest of his life.

    Do you keep him locked up for all eternity to placate the fearful/vengeful? If he is deemed no longer a danger to society, and by law he committed no crime,mthen he must ge released.

    Keep in mind. This not our weak, "bleeding heart" parole system at play here. This is a team of mental health experts that have watched this man 24/7 for 7 years. This was not something that was carried out lightly. We aren't dealing with Hannibal Lecter here.

    He chopped off a head. Deal with it.
    thanks for adding so much to the discussion.

    I am merely trying to be as direct to you as this problem is to society and the legal system. All of a sudden this guy after getting arrested gets dropped into some ones hands and is in essence being told "deal with this because I won't/can't"

    What do you do with that? Forget the studies, empirical evidence, statistics et al. You chop off a head and eat flesh there is no rehab, there is no medicine, there is no PHD guy that can save you in the court - banished from society for life nothing else. Any judge behind a bench passes judgement on the facts the lawyers present - as well as a touch of their moral conviction.
    I would hope that any attorney/doctor that is successful in advocating for a monster as such should verily be held accountable should a re-offence occur. We all know this won't happen. This is scary that society can now "cure" head loppers and cannibals with success.

    Shame.
    Sorry if this sounds offensive, but it has to be said: you clearly have very little, if any, understanding of this case. Or possibly mental illness as a whole.

    Not making it personal to you man. I answered your quip directly with a more verbose response. It doesn't sound offensive what you think has to be said. I am offended that society can defend a cannibal eating de-noganizer and give itself a pat on the back for being empathetic.
    I don't believe in apologizing for empathetic behaviour. If you believe in the mind that can be changed throughout a lifetime, then you believe rehabilitation is a viable option for someone with clear mental illness. Simply put, if demons in your head are what made you act in a horrific way (which clearly medical experts believe to be the case), those demons should not be cause for a life sentence or death penalty (assuming you respond positively to medically-proposed treatment).
    So these demons that come and go....
    Are they real? and to who?
    Clearly the medicine people believe with sound mind that demons can be eradicated. What is the name of the drug to cure them called again?
    If you do actually want to know the name of the medication he is being treated with, I believe it was olanzapine, which is an oral antipsychotic medication. It's easily detected in the blood and a lab that tests for it will have a quantitative value within hours, which not only allows the treatment team to see if the patient is taking the medication or not, but gives an idea of how much is being taken. So for all of those who have been worried about "what happens if he goes off his medication?", the answer is - the treatment team would have proof very quickly if he went off his medication, and would intervene, likely to bring him back to hospital.
    The country never paid for his mutilated victim's funeral, but is set to not only release Li into the public, but support him financially as well as structure a team of professionals to guarantee the product of their work. Interesting.

    I have to question the level of certainty Li's team of health professionals possess when at the same time they speak of his low level of risk to the public... they speak of the safeguards they are structuring to ensure he doesn't relapse. It sounds as if they are really going to take extra precautions with Li to support their claims; however, if they are so certain Li is sound to reintegrate back into society and truly does not pose any risks.. then why the extra careful monitoring?

    The typical monitoring of mentally ill adults yields occurrences of relapses- it's not perfect. Why dies Li receive the extra support? Obviously, it's because of the potential he possesses. The risk management plan most assuredly has calculated the risk Li carries and as such, the additional precautions have been implemented.

    What am I trying to say? I'm saying if he warrants extra support or his own custom curriculum... then he is not ready to be unsupervised.

    Has anybody bothered pointing out the fact that originally, Li thought he was hearing God's voice before things twisted out of control. And now he's more devout than ever? Are we certain that he would be able to distinguish 'that voice' as a symptom of his illness versus a message from his lord? Typically, religious people find the lord speaking to them in a variety of manners (cloud shapes, timely songs on the radio, etc.). I'm not so sure 'that voice' would be something triggering a need to tell medical help versus perhaps embracing it as a special moment in his relationship with the god he worships.


    * As a side, I discovered the Westboro Baptist Church made plans to protest McLean's funeral. Man I think these people are some of the lowest forms of life on the planet.

    http://www.ctvnews.ca/extremist-church-to-be-blocked-at-border-report-1.314065
    "My brain's a good brain!"
  • oftenreadingoftenreading Posts: 12,845
    I am heading out to a 7:00 meeting so will answer in more detail later, as your points deserve a proper response, TBU. Briefly, my response would be that the treatment/monitoring proposed by Li's treatment team and discussed at his RB hearings is not unusual for a RB client being gradually reintegrated back into society; in fact, from what I've seen it seems to be pretty typical.

    And I can wholeheartedly agree with you about the Westboro Baptist Church.
    my small self... like a book amongst the many on a shelf
  • oftenreadingoftenreading Posts: 12,845
    So just briefly going with that tangent - the Westboro woman actually said "Here's what I know. He is dead and God does not do that to people that serve in his truth".

    So no member of the Westboro church has ever died? And if they did die, what does that mean about their "service in his truth"??? Inexplicable logic indeed.
    my small self... like a book amongst the many on a shelf
  • Living, breathing, pieces of excrement. No other way to desribe the WBC.
    new album "Cigarettes" out Spring 2025!

    www.headstonesband.com




  • oftenreadingoftenreading Posts: 12,845
    Back to your points, TBU - you've essentially said that if Mr. Li really is high risk, why is he getting intensive services to support his reintegration?

    The provincial Review Boards are inherently very conservative (small "c") bodies. Virtually everyone progresses slowly (if at all) through this system. If they are initially in hospital on a custodial order it generally takes some time of stability before being considered for a conditional discharge (which can still involve hospitalization while awaiting an appropriate community placement), and then typically much more time living in the community with intensive supports before consideration would be given to stepping down those supports to see how proactive the individual was in taking care of their own health without support staff leading that. I haven't seen any details on exactly what is proposed for Li, but it would be entirely typical even for an individual found NCR on a lesser charge (say, a simply assault or even a non-violent crime) to move from no access outside the hospital, to supervised grounds access, to unsupervised grounds access, to supervised brief times in the community, extending to longer periods, before there would be consideration given for any unsupervised visits.

    Ideally, where services exist, this is also done for the non-forensic psychiatric population moving from an inpatient stay toward discharge, where warranted by the clinical picture.

    And let's be honest here - there's been outrage from some members of this forum, and some members of the public, over what is proposed at this point. Do you seriously expect that the hospital could get away with proposing limited or no supervision or support even they felt it was clinically warranted? You can't have your cake and eat it too.
    my small self... like a book amongst the many on a shelf
  • Back to your points, TBU - you've essentially said that if Mr. Li really is high risk, why is he getting intensive services to support his reintegration?

    And let's be honest here - there's been outrage from some members of this forum, and some members of the public, over what is proposed at this point. Do you seriously expect that the hospital could get away with proposing limited or no supervision or support even they felt it was clinically warranted? You can't have your cake and eat it too.

    1. That's not what I was saying. I said if Li is 'not' a risk... why the 'extra' intensive services to support his reintegration (from what I have read, his release would receive an extra quality of servicing)?

    2. You spoke to what I was saying in your second passage. Ultimately, this is a sell job- just one I'm not buying.

    I disagree with the decisions being made, however I'm going to have to accept them. In the event things go well for a very, very long time... I'll concede that I was wrong and tip my hat to the experts and to people such as yourself.

    Of course, if things do not go well, the 'experts' might have to go crawl under a rock (I guess yourself too).


    I'm glad we agree that the WBC are brutal.

    "My brain's a good brain!"
  • oftenreadingoftenreading Posts: 12,845

    Back to your points, TBU - you've essentially said that if Mr. Li really is high risk, why is he getting intensive services to support his reintegration?

    And let's be honest here - there's been outrage from some members of this forum, and some members of the public, over what is proposed at this point. Do you seriously expect that the hospital could get away with proposing limited or no supervision or support even they felt it was clinically warranted? You can't have your cake and eat it too.

    1. That's not what I was saying. I said if Li is 'not' a risk... why the 'extra' intensive services to support his reintegration (from what I have read, his release would receive an extra quality of servicing)?

    Yes, sorry - that was my typo - I did mean to have the "not" so my sentence didn't really make sense. I try to proof read, but.....
    my small self... like a book amongst the many on a shelf
  • oftenreadingoftenreading Posts: 12,845

    Back to your points, TBU - you've essentially said that if Mr. Li really is high risk, why is he getting intensive services to support his reintegration?

    And let's be honest here - there's been outrage from some members of this forum, and some members of the public, over what is proposed at this point. Do you seriously expect that the hospital could get away with proposing limited or no supervision or support even they felt it was clinically warranted? You can't have your cake and eat it too.

    1. That's not what I was saying. I said if Li is 'not' a risk... why the 'extra' intensive services to support his reintegration (from what I have read, his release would receive an extra quality of servicing)?

    2. You spoke to what I was saying in your second passage. Ultimately, this is a sell job- just one I'm not buying.

    I disagree with the decisions being made, however I'm going to have to accept them. In the event things go well for a very, very long time... I'll concede that I was wrong and tip my hat to the experts and to people such as yourself.

    Of course, if things do not go well, the 'experts' might have to go crawl under a rock (I guess yourself too).


    I'm glad we agree that the WBC are brutal.

    You get to tip a hat and I get a rock?? Tough crowd.
    my small self... like a book amongst the many on a shelf
  • Back to your points, TBU - you've essentially said that if Mr. Li really is high risk, why is he getting intensive services to support his reintegration?

    And let's be honest here - there's been outrage from some members of this forum, and some members of the public, over what is proposed at this point. Do you seriously expect that the hospital could get away with proposing limited or no supervision or support even they felt it was clinically warranted? You can't have your cake and eat it too.

    1. That's not what I was saying. I said if Li is 'not' a risk... why the 'extra' intensive services to support his reintegration (from what I have read, his release would receive an extra quality of servicing)?

    2. You spoke to what I was saying in your second passage. Ultimately, this is a sell job- just one I'm not buying.

    I disagree with the decisions being made, however I'm going to have to accept them. In the event things go well for a very, very long time... I'll concede that I was wrong and tip my hat to the experts and to people such as yourself.

    Of course, if things do not go well, the 'experts' might have to go crawl under a rock (I guess yourself too).


    I'm glad we agree that the WBC are brutal.

    You get to tip a hat and I get a rock?? Tough crowd.
    Hahaha!

    Tell you what? PJ40... you and Hugh can pelt me with smaller rocks for 15 seconds.
    "My brain's a good brain!"
  • oftenreadingoftenreading Posts: 12,845
    They would have to be very small rocks. The kind that would float.

    I'm anti-violence, you know.
    my small self... like a book amongst the many on a shelf
  • They would have to be very small rocks. The kind that would float.

    I'm anti-violence, you know.

    Then I will listen to Nickleback on my headphones for the trip down.
    "My brain's a good brain!"
  • oftenreadingoftenreading Posts: 12,845
    That's pretty harsh. Wouldn't you rather have the rocks?
    my small self... like a book amongst the many on a shelf
  • That's pretty harsh. Wouldn't you rather have the rocks?

    Of course, but I'm trying to find the middle way. Something non-violent... yet somehow still a consequence of some significance.

    Li will likely eat someone anyways. I'm feeling safe.

    (kidding)
    "My brain's a good brain!"
  • oftenreadingoftenreading Posts: 12,845

    That's pretty harsh. Wouldn't you rather have the rocks?

    Of course, but I'm trying to find the middle way. Something non-violent... yet somehow still a consequence of some significance.

    Li will likely eat someone anyways. I'm feeling safe.

    (kidding)
    Well, I appreciate you respecting my sensibilities but man, Nickleback falls under cruel and unusual.

    We'll just have to find another way to get you stoned.
    my small self... like a book amongst the many on a shelf
  • http://www.winnipegfreepress.com/local/forgiving-the-unthinkable-294784701.html?cx_navSource=d-popular-views

    MORDEN -- George Penner, then a young high-school teacher in Gimli, had just returned from an end-of-term lunch with colleagues when he spotted two police officers walking through the school halls with his principal.

    Those officers delivered news that shattered Penner's life. That afternoon, June 25, 1980, Penner's neighbour and former student, in the grip of a psychotic episode, shot and killed Penner's young wife, Margaret, and their toddler son, Karl. The couple's oldest son suffered a gunshot wound to the head and was rushed to hospital in Winnipeg. What followed for Penner was a blur of bitterness and anger.

    "That was the worst summer of my life," said Penner, now the retired assistant superintendent of the Garden Valley School Division. "Even to this day, you think back, you have feelings. It doesn't go away."

    Despite that, Penner says it's pointless and cruel to lock up people, including Vince Li, who commit violent acts caused by psychosis. Instead, he said people such as Li ought to be afforded forgiveness, high-quality treatment and the chance to reclaim some kind of life, even if there are no iron-clad guarantees the person won't slide back into violence.

    "But then, there are no guarantees for any of us," said Penner, who thinks back to the turmoil he suffered in the years following the death of his wife and son. "Under certain conditions of stress we're all capable of doing the unthinkable. But for the grace of God, I could have gone over the deep end, too."


    Late Friday, a provincial review board ruled Vince Li could be granted more freedoms, including unsupervised visits to Winnipeg and perhaps an eventual move from a hospital psychiatric unit to a high-security group home.

    Li was found not criminally responsible for stabbing, mutilating and beheading 22-year-old Tim McLean on a Greyhound bus to Winnipeg in July 2008. Since then, Li has been confined to the Selkirk Mental Health Centre but has been gradually reintegrating into society as his symptoms abated. News of his increased freedoms sparked a new round of controversy last week, as many Winnipeggers, including Shelly Glover, Manitoba's senior federal cabinet minister, said Li poses too great a risk to public safety and ought to be locked up indefinitely.

    The Penner family's case sparked the same kind of public outrage 35 years ago. Arnold Charles Franz, the young man who killed Penner's wife and son, was diagnosed with paranoid psychosis, a mental illness that worsened in the months leading up to the shooting, in part because he stopped taking his medication. Penner said the young man was often seen yelling to himself in his yard, and confronted Margaret on at least one occasion, leaving her fearful.

    The young man seemed fixated on women he suspected of wearing skimpy attire to sexually persecute him, including Penner's wife, who would weed the garden in shorts and a halter-top in the summer. The man, 24 at the time, also suffered from auditory hallucinations and tried and failed to shoot himself with the same gun he'd used to kill Margaret and Karl. He was later found not-guilty of two counts of first-degree murder by reason of insanity.

    In the years following the shooting, Penner met and married his second wife, Peg, then a young widow with children of her own. Together, they raised five kids, including Mark, who was left with left-side paralysis and who is now a computer engineer and father of three.

    In the months after the incident, thanks to his burgeoning friendship with Peg, Penner attended a church seminar about coping with tragic events and then had a life-changing encounter with the seminar's leader.

    "He simplified it for me. He said you make a choice to forgive. And when you make a choice, you act on it," said Penner. "Many of us are people of faith. What does it say when we cannot forgive?"

    After the shooting, Penner left teaching for several years, working instead as an employment counsellor at the Eden Mental Health Centre in Winkler, where he studied client files, spent mornings in intake meetings with psychiatrists and social workers and helped find clients jobs.

    He said, with the proper treatment and careful monitoring, there is no reason someone like Li can't work.

    "I'm sure, with a sympathetic employer, that can happen," said Penner.

    Penner believes the man who killed Margaret and Karl spent several years at the institution in Selkirk, receiving treatment and being slowly reintegrated into society, much as Li has been. Penner said, through family and friends, he occasionally gets word about the man's status. It's believed he is living a solitary life in Winnipeg, but visits his large family in Gimli and Selkirk.

    "As far as we know, he's never been in trouble," said Penner.

    About eight years ago, Peg was dropping off some items at a nursing home in Selkirk when a friend there mentioned seeing the man occasionally come in to visit his father. On a later trip, the same friend pointed out the man, sitting down the hall.

    "He looked like a very lonely, sad guy," said Peg.
    new album "Cigarettes" out Spring 2025!

    www.headstonesband.com




  • before the obvious is pointed out, yes, in this case, the accused willfully stopped taking his meds. but he wasn't being monitored after committing a crime. he could not be lawfully forced to take them, as Li will be. so yes, there is a difference here.
    new album "Cigarettes" out Spring 2025!

    www.headstonesband.com




  • Another perspective (it's not the entire piece):

    It happened nearly seven years ago and for nearly seven years the legal system and mental health care system and politically correct phony system has tried to put layer after layer of plastic on the corpse of justice. First the Crown and defence agreed there would be no trial and no murder conviction because Vince Li, an immigrant from China, was not mentally fit to stand trial and could not have been mentally sound on that hot summer night near Portage where he destroyed the life and dignity of Tim McLean. Vince Li was found not criminally responsible and ever since then the Justice system has turned itself inside out to make it easy for Vince Li to re-enter society.

    Let’s tell the truth. If Vince Li had been declared Not Criminally Responsible for the death of Tim McLean but was forced to serve a life sentence in a psychiatric institution, most of us could live with that. But the idea that he is not criminally responsible and we are responsible for protecting and pampering Vince Li for the rest of his days – teaching him to speak a better English, training him to improve his computer skills, while attacking anyone who opposes this treatment by declaring them insensitive to mental illness, is a package of insanity that forces us to call out. We call out those who pretend that Tim McLean has received justice, when he hasn’t. We call out those who pretend that it is safe to have Vince Li living among us when we know it isn’t. We side with Tim’s family who lost a son and with the family of a Mountie who lost a son who took his own life after having seen what he was forced to see while on duty near Portage nearly seven years ago.

    And finally let’s tell the truth about the mentally ill, most of whom struggle for a measure of dignity every day of their lives while posing a threat to nobody. Let’s call out those in the legal and mental health systems who insult the dignity of these people by making Vince Li their poster child. They deserve better than this. They have earned it with the lives they have lived. What has Vince Li earned? Nothing. Absolutely nothing.


    http://www.cjob.com/2015/02/25/hanging-our-head-in-shame-for-tim-mclean/

    * A cop took his life after being on the scene where Li committed his offence?
    "My brain's a good brain!"
  • Mom's feelings on the recent developments:

    Psychiatrist Dr. Steven Kremer told the review board at a hearing earlier this week that Li has had no hallucinations in more than a year, he takes his medication and he has had "profound improvement" in his mental status.

    The board also said it may consider eventually allowing Li to live in a group home.

    "I'm not surprised by it but I am frustrated and angry and sad," Carole de Delley, Tim McLean's mom, said after hearing the news.

    "Now he's going to be walking the streets of Winnipeg. I'm horrified by that. I am absolutely horrified that he has that opportunity."

    Li’s new privileges only last so long as he remains on his medication and keeps a working cell phone with him.
    "My brain's a good brain!"
  • Ken Barker was the retired RCMP that killed himself. He suffered from PTSD and when Li was published in the news media, he began having flashbacks:

    http://www.thestar.com/news/canada/2014/07/17/exmountie_commits_suicide_years_after_bus_beheading.html
    "My brain's a good brain!"
  • Another perspective (it's not the entire piece):

    It happened nearly seven years ago and for nearly seven years the legal system and mental health care system and politically correct phony system has tried to put layer after layer of plastic on the corpse of justice. First the Crown and defence agreed there would be no trial and no murder conviction because Vince Li, an immigrant from China, was not mentally fit to stand trial and could not have been mentally sound on that hot summer night near Portage where he destroyed the life and dignity of Tim McLean. Vince Li was found not criminally responsible and ever since then the Justice system has turned itself inside out to make it easy for Vince Li to re-enter society.

    Let’s tell the truth. If Vince Li had been declared Not Criminally Responsible for the death of Tim McLean but was forced to serve a life sentence in a psychiatric institution, most of us could live with that. But the idea that he is not criminally responsible and we are responsible for protecting and pampering Vince Li for the rest of his days – teaching him to speak a better English, training him to improve his computer skills, while attacking anyone who opposes this treatment by declaring them insensitive to mental illness, is a package of insanity that forces us to call out. We call out those who pretend that Tim McLean has received justice, when he hasn’t. We call out those who pretend that it is safe to have Vince Li living among us when we know it isn’t. We side with Tim’s family who lost a son and with the family of a Mountie who lost a son who took his own life after having seen what he was forced to see while on duty near Portage nearly seven years ago.

    And finally let’s tell the truth about the mentally ill, most of whom struggle for a measure of dignity every day of their lives while posing a threat to nobody. Let’s call out those in the legal and mental health systems who insult the dignity of these people by making Vince Li their poster child. They deserve better than this. They have earned it with the lives they have lived. What has Vince Li earned? Nothing. Absolutely nothing.


    http://www.cjob.com/2015/02/25/hanging-our-head-in-shame-for-tim-mclean/

    * A cop took his life after being on the scene where Li committed his offence?

    charles adler is an ultra-conservative fucking asshole of a dinosaur who lives and breathes on pissing people off with his radio rants.

    new album "Cigarettes" out Spring 2025!

    www.headstonesband.com




  • Ken Barker was the retired RCMP that killed himself. He suffered from PTSD and when Li was published in the news media, he began having flashbacks:

    http://www.thestar.com/news/canada/2014/07/17/exmountie_commits_suicide_years_after_bus_beheading.html

    read about that when it happened. very sad indeed. a cop friend of mine is getting the help he needs. he almost destroyed his own family because of the stigma revolving around mental illness as a police officer.

    new album "Cigarettes" out Spring 2025!

    www.headstonesband.com




  • Another perspective (it's not the entire piece):

    It happened nearly seven years ago and for nearly seven years the legal system and mental health care system and politically correct phony system has tried to put layer after layer of plastic on the corpse of justice. First the Crown and defence agreed there would be no trial and no murder conviction because Vince Li, an immigrant from China, was not mentally fit to stand trial and could not have been mentally sound on that hot summer night near Portage where he destroyed the life and dignity of Tim McLean. Vince Li was found not criminally responsible and ever since then the Justice system has turned itself inside out to make it easy for Vince Li to re-enter society.

    Let’s tell the truth. If Vince Li had been declared Not Criminally Responsible for the death of Tim McLean but was forced to serve a life sentence in a psychiatric institution, most of us could live with that. But the idea that he is not criminally responsible and we are responsible for protecting and pampering Vince Li for the rest of his days – teaching him to speak a better English, training him to improve his computer skills, while attacking anyone who opposes this treatment by declaring them insensitive to mental illness, is a package of insanity that forces us to call out. We call out those who pretend that Tim McLean has received justice, when he hasn’t. We call out those who pretend that it is safe to have Vince Li living among us when we know it isn’t. We side with Tim’s family who lost a son and with the family of a Mountie who lost a son who took his own life after having seen what he was forced to see while on duty near Portage nearly seven years ago.

    And finally let’s tell the truth about the mentally ill, most of whom struggle for a measure of dignity every day of their lives while posing a threat to nobody. Let’s call out those in the legal and mental health systems who insult the dignity of these people by making Vince Li their poster child. They deserve better than this. They have earned it with the lives they have lived. What has Vince Li earned? Nothing. Absolutely nothing.


    http://www.cjob.com/2015/02/25/hanging-our-head-in-shame-for-tim-mclean/

    * A cop took his life after being on the scene where Li committed his offence?

    charles adler is an ultra-conservative fucking asshole of a dinosaur who lives and breathes on pissing people off with his radio rants.

    I just offered it as a different perspective. Whether right or wrong... there are multiple perspectives on this issue.

    Filter as you please.

    I appreciated the piece you offered. I think it is worth noting that the core of the 'forgiveness' piece was rooted in religion. While both you and I (and others) have spoken against religion rather vociferously lately, your man Penner found peace through the grace of God. I wonder if he would have found the same place had he not been inspired by faith?
    "My brain's a good brain!"
  • Ken Barker was the retired RCMP that killed himself. He suffered from PTSD and when Li was published in the news media, he began having flashbacks:

    http://www.thestar.com/news/canada/2014/07/17/exmountie_commits_suicide_years_after_bus_beheading.html

    read about that when it happened. very sad indeed. a cop friend of mine is getting the help he needs. he almost destroyed his own family because of the stigma revolving around mental illness as a police officer.

    Let's give him all the support he needs.
    "My brain's a good brain!"
Sign In or Register to comment.