Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
Ca has always allowed a mental illness defense. Up til this bill a plea of mental illness resulted in the person being reprimanded to a state mental health facility until such time that the individual is deemed mentally fit. Once fit the normal penalty shall also be served out. The difference under the new proposal is that after two years of a diversion program the entire incident is wiped clean of the violators record. Also the extent of the illness is irrelevant (alcoholism would be acceptable defense).
Most chronic alcoholics who commit crimes are also mentally ill. This is not an insanity defense, it's pre-trial diversion and it won't be automatically granted, the courts will determine who is eligible. They will be monitored by a conservator and have to cooperate and participate in treatment whether inpatient or outpatient, if after two years they haven't cooperated or improved they will be tried criminally.
All jabs aside, diversion programs (of any kind) aren't just a free-for-all... they usually come with stringent requirements for acceptance and "graduation," so it's not like anyone convicted of murder could just sign up and go free in 2 years. Also, they have been proven to work much better than simple incarceration. I know, I know; facts are boring!
Thats a good point, plus, its naturally going to be different fore everyone, in relation to the amount of time it takes for some level of rehabilitation.
Ca legislators will vote on a bill , AB1810. in short it will allow for anyone arrested for a violent crime and who may have any mental issue (can include alcohol addiction for example) to go through a 2 year diversion program. Upon completion of the program the charges will be dropped and record expunged. Since there are no stipulations or limits as to what crimes it would include murder, rape, mayhem etc
I'm sure there are studies that prove this is an effective way to reduce recidivism and fight crime and that there are PhD's and professors lined up a mile long ready to swear to it. And lawyers up the wazoo striving their mightiest to make it happen.
I'm sure there are studies that prove this is an effective way to reduce recidivism and fight crime and that there are PhD's and professors lined up a mile long ready to swear to it. And lawyers up the wazoo striving their mightiest to make it happen.
Diversion programs are effective, 24 states have diversion programs for the mentally ill, but you talk like this is some grand experiment that has never been tried before.
Im still not sure why we dont have violent criminal registries, Ive never even heard anyone call for such a thing either?!! You would think majority of people would want to know if someone convicted of a violent crime was living or working nearby...but I guess not.
I think people should know if someone has a history of violent behavior. I would support a registry for that if a person was convicted for a felony violent crime. Some people are walking time bombs.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
