Scandal Cy Walsh not guilty of murdering Phil Walsh due to mental incompetence

[the harry]

Still think it's a cop out.

Isn't mental incompetence no longer a defense? And Cy's plea was in before the change?

I'm not aware of any change in the law that prevents people claiming mental impairment and I would be shocked if that had happened in SA.

Essentially, although he admits to the act, the court has found that he was not in full control/was unaware that what he was doing was wrong.

Maybe the change in law you are thinking of is that of provocation? Which was used in instances of domestic violence and other matters where someone would be acting irrationally/hot headed.

 

[BORK]

Your ignorance is teetering on the edge of hilarious and sad.

When campaigners start using mental health as a shield(ahem.. Sydney Swans Football Club last year) it breeds scepticism in others even in more extreme cases like this one.

I think some people feel aggrieved at a perceived lack of punitive measures whether correct or not. I have little doubt that the Walsh mental health issues are legitimate however that does not have to remove the sour taste that people will have over this situation.

I imagine the situation of a high profile white woman being stabbed to death by a male family member whose mental health was in the exact situation of Cy Walsh would create a tsunami of outrage from parts of the community if deemed not guilty because of it even if kept locked up.

 

[freofc1994]

Again highlights shortcomings in Australia's MH system. I must say I agreed with everything written in the victim impact statement of Phil's wife. As a society we need to be mature enough to discuss where patient privacy and social safety intertwine and potentially expose innocent parties from both sides to harm.

You would hope that MH advisory boards can see where patients have poor or little insight into their conditions that their parents/family/friends are informed and involved in their treatment plans so that tragedies like this one may be prevented in the future.

 

[Milanista28]

I'm not aware of any change in the law that prevents people claiming mental impairment and I would be shocked if that had happened in SA.

Essentially, although he admits to the act, the court has found that he was not in full control/was unaware that what he was doing was wrong.

Maybe the change in law you are thinking of is that of provocation? Which was used in instances of domestic violence and other matters where someone would be acting irrationally/hot headed.

Perhaps yes on provocation, I just remember reading something not long ago.

 

[the harry]

When campaigners start using mental health as a shield(ahem.. Sydney Swans Football Club last year) it breeds scepticism in others even in more extreme cases like this one.

I think some people feel aggrieved at a perceived lack of punitive measures whether correct or not. I have little doubt that the Walsh mental health issues are legitimate however that does not have to remove the sour taste that people will have over this situation.

I imagine the situation of a high profile white women being stabbed to death by a male family member whose mental health was in the exact situation of Cy Walsh would create a tsunami of outrage from parts of the community if deemed not guilty because of it even if kept locked up.

Good point

That's probably pretty reasonable/understandable.

 

[schmuttt]

Well Milanista28 and Upgrayedd you've mind****ed me, it looks like Matthew Nicholls is arguing with himself in here.

 

[gangsta deluxe]

Get off the internet if you can't handle unqualified opinions.

Qualify your opinions, and use actual research rather than the intuitive pseudo moral psychology you dished up in another post (using the term 'mental state' as you did demonstrates your ignorance and fundamental lack of training).

You realise that your approach here isn't grounded in relevant research, and that persisting with it even after you have been called out is a form of stupidity, right? Why are you happy to be an idiot? Id like a genuine answer.

 

[BRWB]

Get off the internet if you can't handle unqualified opinions.

Welcome to an opinion based world, A forum.

Some people have an unfortunate condition with two effects.

1 - their perceived level of stupidity and ignorance increases in proportion to how often they speak.

2 - their self awareness of the first point is inversely proportional to how often they offer their opinion

The name for such a condition is 'dickhead'.

 

[jj1978]

As a parent, even though he killed his father I would think Phil would want what is best for his son and to be locked up in the appropriate institute that will hopefully rehabilitate his mental demons would be far better than him going into a regular prison.

 

[Sando22]

Just a sad situation

 

[FRUMPY]

As long as he isn't ever allowed out of wherever he is going I have no problem with it. To me anyone who commits murder must have a screw loose. Still gotta do the time if you do the crime (just not in jail in this case)

 

[Milanista28]

Qualify your opinions, and use actual research rather than the intuitive pseudo moral psychology you dished up in another post (using the term 'mental state' as you did demonstrates your ignorance and fundamental lack of training).

You realise that your approach here isn't grounded in relevant research, and that persisting with it even after you have been called out is a form of stupidity, right? Why are you happy to be an idiot? Id like a genuine answer.

I don't care if it comes across stupid or makes me look like an idiot, I'm allowed my opinion.

People blame something else for every mistake made now, It's always something else.

 

[JohnnyFontane90]

If you murder someone on a whim it's my opinion your mental state is absolutely flawed and compromised.

My opinion.

there's a difference between not guilty by reason of mental incompetence and being acquitted.

no one will disagree with you that anyone who kills someone at the drop of a hat regardless of their mental state can't be allowed to roam the streets freely. and he's won't. he'll spend the better part of his life in a mental institution now. it will be really hard to get him out of there because the person that signs off on that will have a lot to answer for if he's released and he kills again. for all intents and purposes he's in prison, he's not 'getting away' with anything.

 

[Cicero]

Theres clearly a lot the public isnt seeing and considering his family seemed to be supporting him why doesnt everyone just take a walk.

 

[Milanista28]

there's a difference between not guilty by reason of mental incompetence and being acquitted.

no one will disagree with you that anyone who kills someone at the drop of a hat regardless of their mental state can't be allowed to roam the streets freely. and he's won't. he'll spend the better part of his life in a mental institution now. it will be really hard to get him out of there because the person that signs off on that will have a lot to answer for if he's released and he kills again. for all intents and purposes he's in prison, he's not 'getting away' with anything.

I think it's the not guilty tag that annoys me, Why can't he be guilty but offered the same care in a mental institution?

 

[The 747]

He's a murderer!! Not a victim of undiagnosed schizophrenia.

Always something to blame but the person.

Well actually he's been found not guilty of murder.

 

[Milanista28]

Well actually he's been found not guilty of murder.

I think that's what is annoying me at the moment.

 

[Trip3101]

Those mental hospitals for criminals are hell on earth so he's not getting off on a free holiday or something. I worked in the kitchen staff at one of them and prison couldn't be much worse. Plus you have to actually interact and spend all day with genuinely insane psycopaths mentally living on another planet. I would prefer to be with just regular psychopaths in jail

 

[MC Bad Genius]

Some people have an unfortunate condition with two effects.

1 - their perceived level of stupidity and ignorance increases in proportion to how often they speak.

2 - their self awareness of the first point is inversely proportional to how often they offer their opinion

The name for such a condition is 'dickhead'.

I think you'll find its called the Dunning Kruger effect!

 

[MC Bad Genius]

I don't care if it comes across stupid or makes me look like an idiot, I'm allowed my opinion.

People blame something else for every mistake made now, It's always something else.

Pretty sure that not guilty verdicts due to mental incompetence isn't something new that's been dreamt up by Millenials...

 

[Cripps 'n' Blue Bloods]

Sad as in a young man is suffering issues extreme enough to no longer to be able distinguish right from wrong? Or sad because he should have hung?

Do I have any more options, or is that all you will allow me?
Hung seems like a bit of an extreme jump to make. Did I hint at that in my initial 3 word post? The result, not guilty on mental grounds, was predictable. The whole scenario is sad for various reasons.
It's sad that any human, especially an innocent one, loses their life, and in such tragic circumstances. It's sad that somebody can lose the mental capacity/cognitive awareness to fully control their actions and distinguish right from wrong.

I will admit that I didn't read the full result and it's good to see that he will be in the appropriate care. My issue is with the way the system effectively clears them of any wrong doing. At the end of the day he still murdered someone. It wasn't an accident and it wasn't self-defense. In my opinion, the finding should be 'guilty' due to mental incompetence, not 'not guilty'. People in this circumstance should still receive sentences that require detainment in a mental health care facility, instead of jail time, but the 'not guilty' verdict doesn't sit right with me. He's still guilty, there's just extenuating circumstances that prevent him from going to jail.

In my opinion of course.

 

[MC Bad Genius]

I cant imagine how distraught his wife still is or how horribly conflicted she would feel towards their son. Just an incredibly sad situation.

 

[JohnnyFontane90]

I think it's the not guilty tag that annoys me, Why can't he be guilty but offered the same care in a mental institution?

in legal context 'murder' actually means you need to prove not only that you killed someone but that you made the conscious decision to do it as well. that's why most often those 'king hits' you see on news don't result in murder charges even if someone dies.

if someone's mental health is seriously compromised they are deemed unable to be able to make that conscious decision and therefore the conditions of 'murder' are unsatisfied. so it's technicality more than anything. i mean, he's no murderer but he's still a killer if that helps...

 

[Proper Gander]

I think it's the not guilty tag that annoys me, Why can't he be guilty but offered the same care in a mental institution?

because guilt requires the appropriate mens rea.

 

[Milanista28]

Pretty sure that not guilty verdicts due to mental incompetence isn't something new that's been dreamt up by Millenials...

I'm mean that in much broader terms. Not isolated here.

I think what annoys me here is that not guilty tag, He technically is not a murderer, I feel that's wrong.

I can't word my thoughts as well as I would like and I'm a bit of a smart ass and come cross like a dickhead, Just trying to add to the BF fozza.