Unlimited Access. Try it Today! Your First 10 Days Always $0.99

Readers Respond

News Opinion Readers Respond

Mental illness and criminal responsibility [Letter]

As a criminal defense attorney with more than 13 years experience, I feel compelled to respond to Richard E. Vatz's recent op-ed ridiculing a Texas judge who accepted the claim of a defendant in a manslaughter case that he was a victim of the wealthy surroundings he'd grown up in and therefore unable to tell right from wrong ("'Affluenza': Just the latest way to shirk responsibility," Dec. 18).

While I do not question Mr. Vatz's expertise in his chosen field of psychology, his article makes clear what is either his ignorance of the law or a willful attempt to mislead readers of The Sun regarding the meaning of a "not criminally responsible" plea.

Fueling Mr. Vatz's outrage are judges who take into consideration such mitigating factors as whether or not a person is suffering from "extreme mental or emotional disorders."

Does Mr. Vatz feel that judges should not take into consideration such serious disorders when handing down sentences? State judges, in particular, have wide latitude in sentencing and are obligated to consider all facts and circumstances when making one of the most serious decisions entrusted to them by the public — that of curtailing the liberty of citizens.

To ignore the mental condition of the defendant would be to turn a blind eye to one of the actors a judge is bound by law to consider.

Mr. Vatz goes on to confuse sentencing mitigation factors, which by definition occur only after a verdict has been rendered, with the initial entry of a "not criminally responsible" plea.

Mr. Vatz states that "the entirety of insanity pleas ... is an opportunity to escape responsibility." On the contrary, these pleas do not provide an outlet for escaping responsibility but ensure that the state does not punish with incarceration people who, because of a mental disorder or mental retardation, lack substantial capacity to either appreciate the criminality of the conduct or conform that conduct to the requirements of the law.

A person cannot be at the same time both "escaping responsibility" and "incapable of responsibility."

I can only conclude that Mr. Vatz would have people found by independent, court-appointed psychiatrists to be so profoundly mentally retarded or impaired as to be unable to distinguish right from wrong to be as legally liable for their crimes as normally functioning members of society.

Presumably, Mr Vatz would also have these individuals suffer the same punishment. But to do so would be to return to a time in Western jurisprudence of which most thinking people in the 21st century are rightly ashamed.

Brian Young, Catonsville

-
To respond to this letter, send an email to talkback@baltimoresun.com. Please include your name and contact information.

Copyright © 2015, The Baltimore Sun
Related Content
  • 'Affluenza': Just the latest way to shirk responsibility [Commentary]
    'Affluenza': Just the latest way to shirk responsibility [Commentary]

    A Texas verdict that a drunk-driving teen was too rich to know better has people up in arms, but such rulings may be more common than many think

  • Get rid of bad cops
    Get rid of bad cops

    It's a sickening, recurring pattern in Baltimore: A citizen is arrested and while transporting the so-called suspect to the police precinct for booking, he gets the stuffing beat out of him. To further rub salt in the wound, the cops are ultimately exonerated from any wrongdoing ("Investigation...

  • Ignorance on immigration
    Ignorance on immigration

    Republicans have written to your newspaper claiming that President Barack Obama, former Gov. Martin O'Malley and other Democratic elected officials are trying to "give voting rights to millions of undocumented immigrants who came here illegally and don't belong in this country in the first place"...

  • Aid agencies sow seeds of hope
    Aid agencies sow seeds of hope

    I read the your report "Fierce clashes in Iraq as Islamic State seizes villages near Ramadi" (April 15) with a mixture of sadness, fear and exasperation.

  • MRIs for pets aren't so novel
    MRIs for pets aren't so novel

    I read your recent article about magnetic resonance imaging of pets at Johns Hopkins with great interest ("Johns Hopkins begins using high-tech equipment on pets," April 7).

  • How can Hillary Clinton be a champion of the middle class when she's part of the 1 percent?
    How can Hillary Clinton be a champion of the middle class when she's part of the 1 percent?

    Presidential hopeful Hillary Clinton says there is something wrong when CEOs make 300 times more than the typical worker. I can't help but wonder why she doesn't feel there isn't something wrong with making $300,000 for one speech.

  • NRA's paranoia is catching
    NRA's paranoia is catching

    The Sun's editorial reflecting on the National Rifle Association convention in Nashville is an important statement on how the NRA has devalued our lives and our society ("Guns and the 'permanent darkness,'" April 16).

  • Legislators have a mandate, too
    Legislators have a mandate, too

    A recent letter writer was quick to point out that Gov. Larry Hogan was sent to Annapolis to do the voters' bidding ("Hogan stands up to Democrats," April 15). What did the voters who elected members of the General Assembly get? Aren't they sent there to do the voters' bidding?

Comments
Loading

61°