WHAT!? Loughner pleads NOT guilty?

[j_garcia]

It didn't say, but it is presumed by reason of insanity.

http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/us_congresswoman_shot

TUCSON, Ariz. – The man accused of carrying out a mass shooting in Tucson pleaded not guilty Monday to charges he tried to kill Rep. Gabrielle Giffords and two of her aides.

The plea by Jared Lee Loughner marked his second court appearance since he allegedly shot the congresswoman and 18 others at Giffords' meet-and-greet event on Jan. 8 outside a grocery store in Tucson. Six people died, and 13 others were wounded.

Loughner, 22, faces federal charges of trying to assassinate Giffords and attempting to murder two of her aides. He will later face state charges dealing with other victims.

U.S. District Judge Larry Burns of San Diego asked Loughner attorney Judy Clarke whether there was any question about her client's abilities to understand the case against him.

"We are not raising any issues at this time," Clarke said.

Investigators have said Loughner was mentally disturbed and acting increasingly erratic in the weeks leading up to the shooting. If he pleads not guilty by reason insanity and is successful, he could avoid the death penalty and be sent to a mental health facility instead of prison.

At least eight U.S. Marshals were present at the hearing in the Phoenix courthouse, where Loughner entered Monday afternoon smiling and wearing an orange prison suit and glasses.

Prosecutor Wallace Kleindienst estimated that he would know within the next 30 days whether additional federal charges would be filed against Loughner. Kleindienst said prosecutors provided defense lawyers with records taken from Loughner's computer and documents of about 250 interviews made in the case.

Sure seems like if he has enough ability to go to TWO different stores to purchase ammo and post "goodbye" that he knew exactly what he was doing. Erratic behavior does not constitute insanity.

 

[highfigh]

It didn't say, but it is presumed by reason of insanity.

http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/us_congresswoman_shot



Sure seems like if he has enough ability to go to TWO different stores to purchase ammo and post "goodbye" that he knew exactly what he was doing. Erratic behavior does not constitute insanity.

Typical- he goes through all of that trouble to act normal and then pleads 'not guilty by reason of mental disease or defect'. Of course, his psychiatrist will claim that his particular disease causes him to act normally, except when it doesn't and it's a completely unique case, never seen before.

I was just pulled over by a local cop, who saw me driving slowly through the subdivision. I have no problem with this because we have had some garage break-ins and I want them in my neighborhood. We had an interesting conversation about people being caught in the act, with witnesses, and the jury letting them go free.

Poor Jarrod- he was so misunderstood. With any luck, he'll encounter someone who thinks he's guilty.

 

[j_garcia]

I had to go into court for jury duty for a capital murder case with the death penalty on the line once. One of the questions they asked was "If the defendant is found guilty, would you be willing to consider mitigating factors in determining the level of punishment?" My answer was NO. He knew what he was doing. He murdered multiple victims, all of them brutally. If they were going to try to use temporary insanity, then he would have gotten the same thing - life in a mental institution instead of death. My answer was: "If he was found GUILTY, then what do any of these 'mitigating' factors matter? This isn't a case of accidental death or involuntary manslaughter." They immedately dismissed me They didn't tell us until after the fact that he had confessed and the trial ended up only being to determine punishment. He got the death penalty.

 

[Swerd]

In America everyone is innocent until proven guilty. You cannot be forced to incriminate yourself.

Of course, he will have to have an outstanding defense lawyer, what with all the eyewitnesses and store videos showing him shooting all those people.

 

[j_garcia]

He has Judy Clarke who has gotten life instead of death for a number of high profile cases:

Over a career spanning three decades, she has represented some of the nation's most notorious defendants. And while she has not gotten life sentences for all of them — her client Timothy McVeigh was executed in 2001 for his role in the Oklahoma City bombing — she has an impressive track record, including seemingly lost causes like [Ted] Kaczynski, the so-called 9/11 conspirator Zacarias Moussaoui and Atlanta Olympics bomber Eric Robert Rudolph. All three faced the death penalty; all three are now serving life sentences at ADX Florence, a supermax prison in Colorado.

However the article also says:

The insanity defense would not work. He knew the nature and consequence of his action. His mental condition should be instrumental in mitigating punishment, and that's where Judy Clarke comes in.

It isn't that I have issue with the death penalty either, but come ON, not guilty?

 

[indulger]

Defense: He didn't mean to kill anyone, only scare them....is it his fault he's such a horrible shot

 

[JerryLove]

It isn't that I have issue with the death penalty either, but come ON, not guilty?

I believe, in cases where the defendant does not enter a plea (as seems to have happened here) they always plead "not-guilty". Once can hardly plead "guilty" on someone else's behalf.

The options are
1) *He* admits guilt.
2) He claims innocence.
3) He says nothing, and they enter "not guilty" so they can determine if he did it or not (which seems "obviously yes" in this case)

 

[highfigh]

I believe, in cases where the defendant does not enter a plea (as seems to have happened here) they always plead "not-guilty". Once can hardly plead "guilty" on someone else's behalf.

The options are
1) *He* admits guilt.
2) He claims innocence.
3) He says nothing, and they enter "not guilty" so they can determine if he did it or not (which seems "obviously yes" in this case)

Is 'No Contest' allowed in a capital murder case? I don't know. It would save the taxpayers a lot of money if he would just suck it up and plead 'guilty'. OTOH, he didn't care about the people he shot, so I seriously doubt he gives a rat's patoot about the taxpayers.

 

[gholt]

I don't think a judge would let one plead no contest in a capital murder case. Too much is at stake for the guilty / or presumed innocent.

 

[nooshinjohn]

To bad the courts cannot set a new precident and institute "retroactive-abortion" for this jack-wagon. The families of those that lost loved ones and the community as a whole deserve better than to have this dragged through the courts for the next ten years or more.