When the prosecution's evidence in a major criminal case depends heavily on a jailhouse informant, you know as surely as night follows day that there will be a claim of nondisclosure of evidence regarding the informant. Zoe Tillman has this post at BLT on the Chandra Levy case. The US Attorney's Office says the allegations are "baseless."
The DC Circuit today issued a per curiam decision in Judicial Watch v. Department of Defense, No. 12-5137:
Judicial Watch filed a Freedom of Information Act request seeking disclosure by the Central Intelligence Agency of 52 post-mortem images of Osama bin Laden. The agency refused on the ground that the images were classified Top Secret. Judicial Watch sued, and the district court granted summary judgment for the agency. We affirm because the images were properly classified and hence are exempt from disclosure under the Act.
Continue reading The Case of the Classified Corpse.
The US Supreme Court today took up once again the problem of searches by consent when one lawful occupant of the property consents and another, the defendant, refuses. In Fernandez v. California, No. 12-7822, the Court decided to review the decision of the California Court of Appeal in a Los Angeles case, People v. Fernandez, 208 Cal. App. 4th 100, 145 Cal. Rptr. 3d 51 (2012). An excerpt follows the jump.
Continue reading Cotenant Consent to Enter Premises.
The US Supreme Court today unanimously reversed a decision of the Sixth Circuit, overturning a Michigan murderer's conviction on habeas corpus. The Michigan Legislature passed a reform of mental defenses in 1975, but the state Court of Appeals failed to recognize that the statute had abolished the "diminished capacity" defense. It was not until 2001 that the Michigan Supreme Court corrected that error, and the underlying question in Metrish v. Lancaster was whether that correction could apply in the retrial for a 1993 murder. The case is described in more detail in my post after the oral argument.
The Supreme Court's jurisprudence on retroactivity of court decisions (as opposed to statutes), is less than crystal clear, and one might make a reasonable argument on the merits that this retroactive application crosses the fuzzy line. Under Congress's 1996 reform of federal habeas corpus (AEDPA), though, that is not the question for the federal court. The Michigan state courts decided the merits question, adversely to Lancaster. "To obtain habeas corpus relief from a federal court, a state prisoner must show that the challenged state-court ruling rested on 'an error well understood and comprehended in existing law beyond any possibility for fair minded disagreement.' Harrington v. Richter, 562 U. S. ___, ___ (2011) (slip op., at 12-13)."
Where the merits question is close, the AEDPA question is easy. The state court decision was well within the bounds of "fair minded disagreement." The Sixth Circuit decision to the contrary was beyond wrong. It was lawless.
The Supreme Court's jurisprudence on retroactivity of court decisions (as opposed to statutes), is less than crystal clear, and one might make a reasonable argument on the merits that this retroactive application crosses the fuzzy line. Under Congress's 1996 reform of federal habeas corpus (AEDPA), though, that is not the question for the federal court. The Michigan state courts decided the merits question, adversely to Lancaster. "To obtain habeas corpus relief from a federal court, a state prisoner must show that the challenged state-court ruling rested on 'an error well understood and comprehended in existing law beyond any possibility for fair minded disagreement.' Harrington v. Richter, 562 U. S. ___, ___ (2011) (slip op., at 12-13)."
Where the merits question is close, the AEDPA question is easy. The state court decision was well within the bounds of "fair minded disagreement." The Sixth Circuit decision to the contrary was beyond wrong. It was lawless.
Technically, the California Legislature has not actually legalized theft. It has, however, reduced the consequences to the point that, for some people, it might as well be legal.
Ben Boychuk has this article in the City Journal on the brazen theft of his expensive new laptop from beneath his fingers at a Starbucks in Fontana.
Ben Boychuk has this article in the City Journal on the brazen theft of his expensive new laptop from beneath his fingers at a Starbucks in Fontana.
It isn't easy looking at a photo lineup. But one mug shot was unmistakable. I paused for a long moment, and I must have had a strange look because the officer asked if I recognized someone. "Yes," I said. "That's the driver." Of all the forlorn faces staring up at me, his was the only one smiling.
"He was probably smiling because he knew he got one over on you with your computer," the officer said.
"I guess so. But why would he be smiling now, when he's under arrest?"
Continue reading Legalizing Theft.
It looks like this.
Lafler's principal problem is not that it incentivizes even more lying and sharp practice than goes on right now, although that's one outcropping sure to lie ahead. This was on graphic display yesterday, as OJ and his present crew of lawyers tore into his last crew (and Yale Galanter in particular) for allegedly telling OJ it was legal to use self-help (and armed self-help at that) when OJ was "recovering" what he claimed was his property in a Las Vegas hotel room.
For his efforts, OJ earned an armed robbery conviction and a 9 to 33 year sentence. He is now seeking a new trial, claiming, inter alia, that Mr. Galanter failed to convey a plea bargain that, had OJ known about it, would have created a much more lenient outcome for him.
Ineffective assistance of counsel claims have always produced the ugly spectacle of the current batch of defense lawyers gnawing at the last batch, with the client's most recent (and fabricated or not fabricated, take your choice) version of events providing the teeth. With Lafler having furnished yet another avenue for losing defendants to game the system, the aesthetics, not to mention the honesty, of criminal representation is about to take a nosedive it can ill afford.
Lena Sun reports in the WaPo on the 5th edition of the American Psychiatric Association's Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders, to be released tomorrow. She also discusses the controversies, some of which we have noted on this blog here, here, and here.
Well, at least they dumped the Roman numerals.
Update: According to the listing at Amazon, the book will actually be available for purchase on May 27.
Well, at least they dumped the Roman numerals.
Update: According to the listing at Amazon, the book will actually be available for purchase on May 27.
CA Corrections Tries to Sugarcoat Realignment: Paige St. John of the Los Angeles Times reports on a new study by the California Department of Corrections promoted by a press release announcing that arrests are down under Realignment. What was not mentioned by the press release is that repeat offenses are up. Roughly half the criminals released from prison before Realignment were rearrested more than once for new crimes. After Realignment 63% of those released are rearrested more than once. Our review of the study found that felony arrests for criminals released after Realignment were up significantly. Also omitted from CDCR's press release is the fact that the number of parolees arrested for new felonies is up. The total arrests are down a little because a decrease in arrests for supervision violations offsets the increase in felony arrests.
Court to Rule on Mississippi Murderer's Second Conviction: A Mississippi man who had his execution for the 1992 murders of two college students stayed by the state Supreme Court earlier this month will receive a ruling on his post-conviction claims for two other murders in late June. AP reporter Jack Elliott writes that Willie Jerome Manning was within hours of execution on May 7th when the state high court issued a stay to allow a DNA test Manning claims will exonerate him. His conviction and death sentence for the 1993 murders of two elderly woman were upheld on direct appeal. A judge's ruling on his post conviction claim that prosecutors withheld evidence will be announced on June 28.
Court to Rule on Mississippi Murderer's Second Conviction: A Mississippi man who had his execution for the 1992 murders of two college students stayed by the state Supreme Court earlier this month will receive a ruling on his post-conviction claims for two other murders in late June. AP reporter Jack Elliott writes that Willie Jerome Manning was within hours of execution on May 7th when the state high court issued a stay to allow a DNA test Manning claims will exonerate him. His conviction and death sentence for the 1993 murders of two elderly woman were upheld on direct appeal. A judge's ruling on his post conviction claim that prosecutors withheld evidence will be announced on June 28.
It didn't take defense-oriented types long to come up with the theory that Dzhokhar Tsarnaev was merely the teenage tag-along to his charismatic older brother when he planted the Boston Marathon bomb. He wasn't really a Muslim radical, you see, just a fun-loving, impressionable kid.
That was then. Today comes news that Dzhokhar scrawled a note inside the boat where he hid out. Here's the ABC News headline:
"F*** America, Boston Marathon Suspect Wrote in Boat."
The story begins:
As police searched for him, and as he lay bleeding in his boat hideout, Boston Marathon bombing suspect Dzhokhar Tsarnaev wrote "F*** America" on the side panel of the boat, police in Massachusetts told ABC News.
Officers said they also discovered the phrase "Praise Allah" on the boat's side panels and several anti-American screeds, including references to Iraq, Afghanistan and "the infidels."
A BostonHerald.com story notes that Dzhokhar referred to the victims, including an eight-year old boy, as "collateral damage," echoing Timothy McVeigh's famous phrase.
With any luck, Dzhokhar will be joining Timmy real soon.
It's not just California. Fox News carries this story, which begins:
Hundreds of illegal immigrants with criminal records were released earlier this year as the Obama administration prepared for budget cuts, according to newly released data that challenged claims the program involved "low-risk" individuals ****Of the 2,226 detainees that were released in February, the department revealed, "622 have been identified as having some type of criminal conviction."
Down the page, the story relates:
Nelson Peacock, assistant secretary for legislative affairs, said ICE focused on [releasing] those that "posed no significant threat to public safety."
What makes me think that no "significant" threat means that those released are thought to be likely to break into someone's house other than Mr. Peacock's?
Florida prisons must provide inmate Bruce Rich with kosher meals under the Religious Land Use and Institutionalized Persons Act (RLUIPA), the Eleventh Circuit has held. Jacob Gershman has this post at WSJ Law Blog. "Mr. Rich ... is a lifelong Orthodox Jew who observes the Sabbath and 'believes that keeping kosher is fundamental to the Jewish faith and is
necessary to conform to God's will as expressed in the Torah,' his
attorneys stated in an appellate brief."
Lifelong? He has not always been so scrupulous about obeying God's will, such as "Honor your father and mother..." and "You shall not murder." Exodus 20:12-13. At least he didn't ask for sympathy because he is an orphan, the classic example of chutzpah.
I'm kind of surprised that Florida officials resisted as long as they did. This is precisely why Congress included prisoners in RLUIPA, for better or worse.
Lifelong? He has not always been so scrupulous about obeying God's will, such as "Honor your father and mother..." and "You shall not murder." Exodus 20:12-13. At least he didn't ask for sympathy because he is an orphan, the classic example of chutzpah.
I'm kind of surprised that Florida officials resisted as long as they did. This is precisely why Congress included prisoners in RLUIPA, for better or worse.
Jeffrey Williams was executed in Texas for the murder of Houston police officer Troy Blando in 1999. Allan Turner has this story in the Houston Chronicle. The US Supreme Court order denying a stay and a writ of certiorari is here. No dissent is noted.
The problem with the grotesque tale out of Cleveland in which Ariel Castro kidnapped, raped, starved, chained, beat and abused three young women for ten years is not Mr. Castro. It's with those who have prejudged him.
That's the story from his snarling defense lawyers. In today's story, they have this to say (emphasis added):
"The initial portrayal by the media has been one of a 'monster' and that's not the impression that I got when I talked to him for three hours," [defense counsel Craig Weintraub] said to Cleveland's WKYC-TV. "I know that family members who have been interviewed by the media have expressed that as well."
Craig argues that Ariel is a loving father who is committed to his daughter.
He is "extremely committed to the well being and positive future for his daughter, who he loves dearly. And if people find that to be a disconnect from what he's alleged to have done, then the people will just have to deal with it. We just know how he feels about his little girl."
There's the old story of the fellow who murders his parents and then pleads for mercy because he's an orphan, but Castro's defense team has topped that. He deserves mercy, you see, because he (allegedly) loves the girl who came into this world by means of his raping her terrified, chained, teenage mother.
OK, fine. I trust the comments section will be filled by those explaining how this unbelievably vile rendition is really just, ya know, defending the Constitution, etcetera. Have at it, gentlemen.
Gov. Brown's New Budget Has Little Impact on Realignment: Andrew Edwards of the Daily Bulletin reports that Gov. Brown's Revised budget proposal will make few changes to current realignment policy. Under the new budget a county could exchange felons facing sentences of three years in county jail with prison inmates whose remaining terms were less than three years. This is a weakened version of recently killed legislation that would have required offenders sentenced to more than three years to serve that time in state prison rather than a county jail. The proposal also allocates a small increase in funds for county probation departments.
What punishment should society impose on a prisoner, already in for life, who murders a correctional officer?
1) Death.A jury in Everett, Washington made the correct choice today. Steve Miletich has this story for the Seattle Times.
2) No punishment at all (i.e., a meaningless additional prison sentence).
Had enough of OJ?
No, you haven't. Not content with getting away with double murder almost 20 years ago, OJ is back in court, claiming ineffective assistance of counsel by the lawyer in his 2008 armed robbery trial.
The story is hard to decipher. Apparently, it's some sort of a Lafler claim. But three things are quite clear, not that we should be surprised by any of them.
First, nothing that happened was OJ's fault. It was his lawyer, and OJ was only acting on the advice of counsel. Second, a system that is already vastly over-litigated and overspending is willing to tolerate apparently unending concoctions to soak up yet more time and money. Third, the defense bar relishes its re-birth as the modern incarnation of cannibalism, as one crew of defense lawyers munches on the carcass of the last crew.
In short, the current goings-on display a good deal of what's wrong with the practice of criminal law in this country, and the picture is not pretty.
One of the principal arguments for legalizing drugs is that they are "victimless." This is false even when the argument concerns only the user. It is all the more so when one considers the large number of non-user deaths and injuries caused by drug-impaired driving.
There is another category of victims seldom mentioned, however. They are in an even poorer position to protect themselves from the consequences of drug abuse than the driver or pedestrian suddenly slammed into by whomever felt like getting high that day. A story about them appeared on Yahoo News this last Sunday.
I have no illusions that the awful facts the story recounts will give pause to the Drugs Are Wonderful lobby. That's because the lobby has never been about facts. It's about nostalgia for a long-gone youth full of pot smoking, now combined with a snarling ideology that mistakes license for liberty.
CBS is reporting that abortionist/butcher Kermit Gosnell has been sentenced to life imprisonment on two of the three first degree murder charges of which he was convicted. The deal is that he escapes the death penalty in exchange for his agreement to forego all appeals.
I hate to say it, but this is probably a wise move for the prosecutors. Given Gosnell's age (72), the possibility that all the controversy about abortion might have produced at least one holdout juror, and that getting from conviction to actual execution in Pennsylvania takes years, if it ever happens, I reluctantly conclude that this was the smart thing to do.
Only three people have been executed in the Keystone State since Gregg effectively reinstated the death penalty in 1976. The last execution there was of Gary Heidnik, in 1999, eleven years after his conviction and sentence (and Heidnik was a "volunteer").
Gosnell's cruelty was savage, and his murders multiple, but even had the jury decided on death, he very likely would have run out the clock before departing this planet on his own. The only consolation, if one wants to call it that, is that his time in prison is likely to be less than fully pleasant.
NE Death Penalty Repeal Dies: The Associated Press reports that a bill to repeal Nebraska's death penalty, which had been thought inevitable, was killed Tuesday. The bill was filibustered, a vote to end the filibuster fell five votes short. Though the death penalty remains in Nebraska, some lawmakers expressed frustration with the already hampered process. The state, which has 11 death row inmates, has not carried out an execution since 1997.
WA Prison Guard Killer's Fate Being Considered: The Associated Press reports, that the jury that convicted Byron Scherf for the murder of a prison guard at Washington State Prison began the sentencing trial Monday. Already serving a life term for multiple rapes, Scherf strangled Jayme Biendl to death in the chapel at the prison. In Washington, aggravated murder carries the death penalty or life in prison without parole. Continued from this News Scan.
CA Lax Oversight Leads to Convicts Becoming Counselors: Jim Miller of the Press-Enterprise reports that the Senate Office of Oversight and Outcomes announced findings Monday indicating that California's no-background check policy for hiring substance abuse counselors has resulted in convicts filling positions. The investigation uncovered convicted sex offenders, child molesters, substance abusers, and embezzlers working as counselors. The report says the power held by such individuals puts those seeking help at great risk. Senate President Pro Tem Darrell Steinberg says the state must take action to keep children and other vulnerable parties safe. Past efforts to legislate more rigorous background checks have died in committee.
WA Prison Guard Killer's Fate Being Considered: The Associated Press reports, that the jury that convicted Byron Scherf for the murder of a prison guard at Washington State Prison began the sentencing trial Monday. Already serving a life term for multiple rapes, Scherf strangled Jayme Biendl to death in the chapel at the prison. In Washington, aggravated murder carries the death penalty or life in prison without parole. Continued from this News Scan.
CA Lax Oversight Leads to Convicts Becoming Counselors: Jim Miller of the Press-Enterprise reports that the Senate Office of Oversight and Outcomes announced findings Monday indicating that California's no-background check policy for hiring substance abuse counselors has resulted in convicts filling positions. The investigation uncovered convicted sex offenders, child molesters, substance abusers, and embezzlers working as counselors. The report says the power held by such individuals puts those seeking help at great risk. Senate President Pro Tem Darrell Steinberg says the state must take action to keep children and other vulnerable parties safe. Past efforts to legislate more rigorous background checks have died in committee.
Howard Mintz reports for the San Jose Mercury-News:
Gov. Jerry Brown on Monday followed through with his vow to turn to the U.S. Supreme Court in a bid to end years of judicial control over California's overcrowded prison system.Unlike most cases, where parties must ask the Supreme Court to take the case (a petition for writ of certiorari), Congress has placed prisoner release orders into that select group of cases where a party can appeal to the Supreme Court as a matter of right. If the jurisdictional prerequisites are met, the high court has to take it.
In a three-page filing, the governor and his top prison officials notified a three-judge panel the state is appealing an April order requiring California to shed at least 10,000 more inmates by the end of December. The attorney general's office now has 60 days to file its full legal arguments with the Supreme Court.
The special three-judge panel has threatened the governor with contempt if his administration does not comply with a 2009 order requiring California to reduce its inmate population to about 110,000 inmates to satisfy concerns that prisons are so overcrowded they fail to provide adequate medical and mental health care.
Brown, however, said in Monday's filing that the court "did not fully or fairly consider the evidence showing that the state's prison health care now exceeds constitutional standards."
PA Abortion Doctor Guilty: Sarah Hoye of CNN reports that on Monday Pennsylvania abortionist Dr. Kermit Gosnell was convicted of three counts of murder in the first degree. Gosnell performed illegal late term abortions at his "house of horrors" Philadelphia clinic, 21 of which he was convicted for. In addition to other charges, he is accused of killing babies post-birth. Gosnell could face the death penalty. Continued from this News Scan.
OK Sex Offender Restrictions May Ease: Fox News' Mark Taylor reports on a May 8 federal ruling in favor of convicted sex offender Charles Goodwin, granting him access to Internet use. The ruling currently only applies to federal convictions, but may set a precedent for sex offenders convicted in Oklahoma's lower courts. According to legal analyst David Slane, future convictions may be less restrictive on sex offenders, prohibiting only specific activities related to their offenses.
OK Sex Offender Restrictions May Ease: Fox News' Mark Taylor reports on a May 8 federal ruling in favor of convicted sex offender Charles Goodwin, granting him access to Internet use. The ruling currently only applies to federal convictions, but may set a precedent for sex offenders convicted in Oklahoma's lower courts. According to legal analyst David Slane, future convictions may be less restrictive on sex offenders, prohibiting only specific activities related to their offenses.
Astonishing. Dean Erwin Chemerinsky of UC Irvine Law writes an entire article in NLJ on the subject of what the law "requires" in terms of Miranda and the Tsarnaev interrogation, yet he seems to be entirely unaware of a critical distinction and does not mention at all the primary Supreme Court case on the point. He says the questioning of Dzhokhar Tsarnaev for hours without being Mirandized is "disturbing for what this says as to [the Justice Department's] view of the Constitution." At the end of the article, he writes, "But the Constitution is not a luxury to be indulged until the ends
justify other means. The Fourth, Fifth and Sixth Amendment rights of all
criminal defendants must be obeyed, no matter how heinous the crime and
regardless of whether it is labeled an act of terrorism. The Bush
administration repeatedly forgot this, and it is a shame that in
treating Tsarnaev the Obama administration did, too."
There is a distinction between the law requiring someone to do something as an affirmative obligation and requiring the same act as a mere condition to something else. Chemerinsky writes, "The law is clear that when a suspect is taken into custody, he or she must be given Miranda warnings, and all questioning must cease when the suspect requests a lawyer. Any statements gained in violation of these requirements must be suppressed and cannot be introduced as evidence." The second statement is true, with some important exceptions, but it does not follow that failure to Mirandize is a violation of the Constitution by itself.
There is a distinction between the law requiring someone to do something as an affirmative obligation and requiring the same act as a mere condition to something else. Chemerinsky writes, "The law is clear that when a suspect is taken into custody, he or she must be given Miranda warnings, and all questioning must cease when the suspect requests a lawyer. Any statements gained in violation of these requirements must be suppressed and cannot be introduced as evidence." The second statement is true, with some important exceptions, but it does not follow that failure to Mirandize is a violation of the Constitution by itself.
Continue reading A Clueless "Expert" on Tsarnaev and Miranda.
The US Supreme Court announced three opinions today, all in civil cases. On the orders list, there was one grant of certiorari, also in a civil case. Burnside v. Walters, No 12-7892, is a federal civil procedure case arising out of a 42 USC §1983 suit against the police claiming a wrongful arrest. The question has to do with whether procedural amendments in the Prison Litigation Reform Act preclude the plaintiff from amending his complaint to avoid dismissal in the screening process. The Prisons & Corrections Section of the Michigan Bar has the certiorari petition here.
TX Two-Strikes Child Sex Offender Bill Passes House: According to a report from Glenn Evans of the News-Journal, House Bill 1302, a two-strikes bill for child sex offenders, passed unanimously in the Texas House, Tuesday. If the bill becomes law sex offenders convicted of sexual violence against children under age 14 would be sentenced to life in prison without parole upon second offense. The measure will also prohibit-first time offenders from holding job positions where it is determined they may interact with children.
L.A. Compliance Checks Result in Arrests, Discovery of Violations: CBSLA reports on a three-week compliance check operation in Los Angeles which resulted in the arrests of 21 probationers, all with sex crimes on their records. The 137 checks also found children present at a residence where an offender convicted of sexual offense against children was living. Additionally computers, phones, and drugs were seized during the operation. Probation Department Assistant Chief Margarita Perez says over 61 percent of probationers are high risk to very high risk; Only one to two percent are assessed as low risk. Perez states that the figures are contrary to the situation presented by the media.
L.A. Compliance Checks Result in Arrests, Discovery of Violations: CBSLA reports on a three-week compliance check operation in Los Angeles which resulted in the arrests of 21 probationers, all with sex crimes on their records. The 137 checks also found children present at a residence where an offender convicted of sexual offense against children was living. Additionally computers, phones, and drugs were seized during the operation. Probation Department Assistant Chief Margarita Perez says over 61 percent of probationers are high risk to very high risk; Only one to two percent are assessed as low risk. Perez states that the figures are contrary to the situation presented by the media.
Last February, I noted a bizarre ruling out of King County, Washington (Seattle and vicinity), in which a trial judge said it was improper for a prosecutor to consider the strength of the evidence in deciding whether to seek the death penalty. Utter nonsense. Residual doubt should be, and is, considered by both prosecutors and juries.
Sara Jane Green reports in the Seattle Times on argument before the Washington Supreme Court yesterday:
Sara Jane Green reports in the Seattle Times on argument before the Washington Supreme Court yesterday:
A King County judge overstepped his bounds when he ruled that prosecutors can't seek the death penalty against the two people accused of killing a family of six on Christmas Eve 2007 in Carnation, the state Supreme Court was told Thursday.And of course the defense plays the race card:
King County Senior Deputy Prosecutor James Whisman argued that under the state's death-penalty statute, "discretion is placed with the prosecutor" to decide whether to seek capital punishment.
Continue reading Strength of the Evidence.
Some conservative groups have believed for some time that they were unfairly singled out by the IRS for special scrutiny of their nonprofit status.
Turns out that is actually true, Zachary Goldfarb and Karen Tumulty report in the WaPo. An IRS official said the actions were "not motivated by partisan concerns," but that seems doubtful.
Is this a crime? Possibly a violation of 18 U.S.C. §241, conspiracy against exercise of constitutional rights.
Turns out that is actually true, Zachary Goldfarb and Karen Tumulty report in the WaPo. An IRS official said the actions were "not motivated by partisan concerns," but that seems doubtful.
Is this a crime? Possibly a violation of 18 U.S.C. §241, conspiracy against exercise of constitutional rights.
Allen Frances, chairman of the DSM-IV and a strong critic of the forthcoming DSM-V, has this strong editorial regarding the recent decision by NIMH to abandon the DSM. Dr. Frances states:
The flat out rejection of DSM-5 by National Institute of Mental Health is a sad moment for mental health and an unsafe one for our patients. The APA and NIMH are both letting us down, failing to be safe custodians for the mental health needs of our country.
DSM-5 certainly deserves rejecting. It offers a reckless hodgepodge of new diagnoses that will misidentify normals and subject them to unnecessary treatment and stigma.
The NIMH director may have hammered the nail in the DSM-5 coffin when he so harshly criticized its lack of validity.
This is misleading and dangerous stuff that is bad for the patients both institutions are meant to serve.
NIMH has gone wrong now in the very same way that DSM-5 has gone wrong in the past -- making impossible to keep promises. The new NIMH research agenda is necessary and highly desirable -- it makes sense to target simpler symptoms rather than complex DSM syndromes, especially since so far we have come up empty. And the new plan will further, and be furthered, by the big, new Obama investment in brain research. But the likely payoff is being wildly oversold. There is no easy solution to what is in fact an almost impossibly complex research problem.
Isaac Newton said it best almost 250 years ago; 'I can calculate the motions of the heavens, but not the madness of men." Figuring out how the universe works is simple stuff compared to figuring out what causes schizophrenia. The ineffable complexity of brain functioning has defeated past DSM hopes and will frustrate even the best NIMH efforts.
Progress in understanding mental disorders will necessarily be slow, retail, and painstaking -- with no grand slam home runs, just occasional singles, no walks, and lots of strikeouts. No sweeping explanations -- no Newtons, or Darwins, or Einsteins.
Experience teaches that there is very little low hanging fruit when you try to translate the results of exciting basic science into meaningful clinical advances. This is true in all of medicine, not just psychiatry. We have been fighting the war on cancer for 40 years and are still losing most of the battles.
Good stuff and it's worth reading the whole thing as they say, but I'd also read Neuroskeptic's always insightful post on the issue. This may not really be a seismic shift after all and what may replace the DSM at NIMH may be just as bad.
When the story of the Cleveland horror first broke, I said that the crimes, however horrible, could not be capital because there was no murder.
Now we have learned more. There may indeed have been murders in the house of horrors. Brandon Blackwell reports for the Plain Dealer:
Now we have learned more. There may indeed have been murders in the house of horrors. Brandon Blackwell reports for the Plain Dealer:
The man accused of kidnapping and imprisoning Amanda Berry, Gina DeJesus and Michelle Knight in his home could face the death penalty, says Cuyahoga County Prosecutor Timothy J. McGinty.
McGinty said Thursday that he will pursue charges against Ariel Castro "for each act of aggravated murder he committed by terminating pregnancies" during the women's decade of captivity.
Continue reading Murder Charges in the Cleveland Horror.
CA Former Lt. Gov. Rails Against AB109: Paige St. John and Seema Mehta of the Los Angeles Times report that former Lt. Gov. Abel Maldonado is beginning a campaign to overturn realignment. Maldonado says AB109 is effectively an early release program for criminals as counties are not able to handle the influx of state prisoners to their jails. Hoping to get a repeal initiative on the ballot, Maldonado has suggested building more prisons to house inmates, a plan already adopted by previous Gov. Arnold Schwarzenegger until Gov. Brown cancelled it. Maldonado hopes that by repealing AB109 the state will be able to comply with federal standards without compromising public safety.
Fed. Prosecutors Seeking to Reinstate Death Penalty for MA Killer: Lane Lambert of the Patriot Ledger reports that federal prosecutors are seeking reinstatement of the death penalty for Gary Sampson, convicted of three Massachusetts homicides in 2003. Because the state does not have a death penalty, Sampson was prosecuted under federal law. In October 2011, U.S. District Court Judge Mark Wolf overturned the sentence citing a juror's falsification of her family's criminal history. Federal prosecutors argued Wednesday that the sentence should be reinstated as the juror's failure to disclose information had no bearing on Sampson's case.
Fed. Prosecutors Seeking to Reinstate Death Penalty for MA Killer: Lane Lambert of the Patriot Ledger reports that federal prosecutors are seeking reinstatement of the death penalty for Gary Sampson, convicted of three Massachusetts homicides in 2003. Because the state does not have a death penalty, Sampson was prosecuted under federal law. In October 2011, U.S. District Court Judge Mark Wolf overturned the sentence citing a juror's falsification of her family's criminal history. Federal prosecutors argued Wednesday that the sentence should be reinstated as the juror's failure to disclose information had no bearing on Sampson's case.
