James Holmes

This is okay, but water boarding a suspected terrorist isn't? Damn liberal-logic.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by theGinsue

Saw it on the local TV news just a few minutes ago. I understand what OneGuy is saying, but it's still wrong to subdue someone mentally by drugs for the purpose of interviewing/interrogating. Where do you draw the line? What happens when it's YOU or a family member they're doing this to for a non-murder charge just to be able to get more information? This is a violation of Civil Rights, nothing less. Once the line is crossed even one time, it opens the door to being able to do it for so many more things.

---

Here is the exception for him. He was caught red-handed, has confessed and is now trying to use the insanity plea. If he were not trying to plead insanity, this would be a non-issue.

The order states "to ensure lucidity". There is probably some bs 25 page document on the administration of the drugs, and another 25 pages on the definition of lucidity to which none of this is addressed in the article.
What would you recommend them do with this or any nutjob?

Ginsuey,

This isn't the first time this has occurred, where a judge had made the determination to medicate a suspect. It isn't an interrogation that is going to be conducted; it is a series of interviews by a medical doctor specializing in psychiatry, who will be involved. The questions being asked aren't going to be concerning guilt or innocence, it is going to be whether or not he is or was insane. If he is or was insane at the time, then ethically, the prosecution cannot go forward with a prosecution of him as he did not have the mens rea to be responsible for the crimes.