Try digitalPLUS for 10 days for only $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
  • No dancing on Red Line's grave

    No dancing on Red Line's grave

    Spare us the dancing on the grave of the Red Line by those who have no right to call it a boondoggle ("Red Line was a boondoggle," June 30). We'll never know if it was or not since it won't be built in my lifetime. Certainly, I can't foresee any of Baltimore's myriad social problems improving without...

  • Ban smokeless tobacco from baseball

    Ban smokeless tobacco from baseball

    It is time for Major League Baseball to take a stand and ban smokeless tobacco, period. It is a foul, disgusting and dangerous addiction. It's never talked about until you hear of a player or former player who is diagnosed with mouth cancer or a player such as Tony Gwynn dies from the disease (...

  • EPA mercury ruling was even-handed

    EPA mercury ruling was even-handed

    The Sun's article on mercury limits incorrectly asserts that the U.S. Supreme Court split on ideological grounds ("Justices rule against EPA power plant mercury limits," June 29). On the contrary, the Supreme Court split was one between original intent, honest interpretations of the Constitution...

  • Reimer was The Sun's best

    Reimer was The Sun's best

    Congratulations to Susan Reimer on her retirement. I will definitely miss her column. It was the only thing worth reading in what they call The Sun ("Susan Reimer signs off," June 25).

  • Clean air with taxes, not regulations

    Clean air with taxes, not regulations

    Though the recent Supreme Court ruling against the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency's power plant emissions regulations was disappointing, I was happy to see The Sun emphasize the example our state has set by implementing strict anti-pollution laws in the article, "Justices rule against EPA...

  • Schools need resources, not reform

    Schools need resources, not reform

    There are so many assumptions embedded within Donald Manekin's recent commentary that I find problematic that I'm not sure where to even begin ("Reinventing Baltimore's schools," June 29).

Comments
Loading

72°