Trav Le Bleu Posted 16 April 2012 Posted 16 April 2012 Has anyone else been following today? I say I've been following it, but have been dipping in and out of the story as the major points have been brought out - but I have to say there is a bit of a paradox as to his sanity. Different psychologists have been giving different answers and their points are sound, which are basically as follows. Sane - he must be sane because he meticulously planned all this for years. Insane - surely only someone who was mentally unstable could contemplate such actions. Seeing him sit emotionless through most of the trial most of the trial, only to start crying when his propganda video was shown suggests to me that he is nothing more than a crackpot. The unfortunate thing about that is, if he IS a nut-job, then he'll get a softer sentance. Which is something I've never understood. I'd rather have someone who killed one person for a premeditated reason having the possibilty of rehabilitation, then someone who indescriminately killed many on a nonsensical whim. What do you all think?
21st Century Fox Posted 16 April 2012 Posted 16 April 2012 I was thinking this today. I can't see how he isn't you don't do that if you're rational.
Trav Le Bleu Posted 16 April 2012 Author Posted 16 April 2012 I was thinking this today. I can't see how he isn't you don't do that if you're rational. I've never been to Norway in my life!
21st Century Fox Posted 16 April 2012 Posted 16 April 2012 I've never been to Norway in my life! Do you have a stylish chin strap beard though?
21st Century Fox Posted 16 April 2012 Posted 16 April 2012 I'm thinking of growing one. Just don't go out in a wet suit as well, you might be able to subtly get away with it.
Uncle Phil Posted 16 April 2012 Posted 16 April 2012 I don't know, where do you draw the insanity line?
Haydos Posted 16 April 2012 Posted 16 April 2012 Insane is just a label. I'd class anyone who would do this as having an unhealthy mind whether they are mentally unstable or not. On another note, being 'insane' doesn't mean he couldn't have planned it all. It's not like insanity/psychopathy and intelligence are mutually exclusive.
Trav Le Bleu Posted 16 April 2012 Author Posted 16 April 2012 Insane is just a label. I'd class anyone who would do this as having an unhealthy mind whether they are mentally unstable or not. On another note, being 'insane' doesn't mean he couldn't have planned it all. It's not like insanity/psychopathy and intelligence are mutually exclusive. I'm not qualified to say. But this is what those who are qualified to say are saying... they're contradicting themselves (within their fraternity - for want of a better word.) Is psychology just a load of bollocks? That's another question entirely I guess.
Rincewind Posted 16 April 2012 Posted 16 April 2012 The people with the knowledge have different views. Reason could be because they research and study different cases and have their own methods of doing it.
21st Century Fox Posted 16 April 2012 Posted 16 April 2012 He put years of effort into planning it and still accepts that he did it and why, which I think is what's leading them to believing he's sane but then his Knight's Templar organisation is apparently baseless, it's just him and again a rational person doesn't go to those lengths. It's going to be an interesting trial which its morbid in itself.
Haydos Posted 16 April 2012 Posted 16 April 2012 But this is what those who are qualified to say are saying... they're contradicting themselves (within their fraternity - for want of a better word.) Is psychology just a load of bollocks? That's another question entirely I guess. I suppose it is, obviously it's up to interpretation but when it's respected people in that field saying it, well.... Why this particular case anyway, surely there's other terrible crimes that have required planning? Back to my earlier point though, it is just a label that people in the psychological and medical professions define through use of behaviour characteristics. Ergo, if his behavior matches the predetermined traits or insanity then he's 'insane' and if they don't then he's 'not insane'. Asking the public is very subjective and I suspect you'll get a very different (and interesting) view on what others deem as 'insane'.
Tielemans63 Posted 16 April 2012 Posted 16 April 2012 He appears to be neither sane nor insane. It'll be very interesting to see how this case progresses.
Fox92 Posted 16 April 2012 Posted 16 April 2012 Anybody that kills another human being(s) is insane/unstable.
sphericalfox Posted 16 April 2012 Posted 16 April 2012 Anybody that kills another human being(s) is insane/unstable. Oh oh... most factually incorrect statement of the year...already?
21st Century Fox Posted 16 April 2012 Posted 16 April 2012 Anybody that kills another human being(s) is insane/unstable. There's massive grey area there. Genuine self defence, soldiers etc, etc, etc.
Webbo Posted 16 April 2012 Posted 16 April 2012 Anybody that kills another human being(s) is insane/unstable. That's a bit of a blanket statement. There are lots of reason why people kill.
Finnegan Posted 16 April 2012 Posted 16 April 2012 Why would meticulously planning something render you sane by default? Plenty of criminally insane people have been ruthlessly efficient and intricate. Oh. And just to dispel any myths, it's not believed by the psychiatric community that every "insane" person can be fixed or cured or rehabilitated. Some people, particularly those with psychopathic / sociopathic tendencies are pretty much given up on. If rendered insane it's just as likely, if not more so, that the guy will never see the light of day again regardless. He's clearly never going to be free again.
21st Century Fox Posted 16 April 2012 Posted 16 April 2012 Yep he'll be in indefinitely if he's found insane. It's easy to see how difficult it is to differentiate his mental state as he's stated that being incarcerated in a mental institution would be the worst thing imaginable to him, but that's because he believes he's a martyr and was carrying out a necessity both of which would lead you to think he's capable of rationalising the situation but that he's also deluded by his 'calling'. Apparently the defence are calling Islamic and Right-Wing extremists to testify that his world view is shared by others.
sphericalfox Posted 16 April 2012 Posted 16 April 2012 Yep he'll be in indefinitely if he's found insane. It's easy to see how difficult it is to differentiate his mental state as he's stated that being incarcerated in a mental institution would be the worst thing imaginable to him, but that's because he believes he's a martyr and was carrying out a necessity both of which would lead you to think he's capable of rationalising the situation but that he's also deluded by his 'calling'. Apparently the defence are calling Islamic and Right-Wing extremists to testify that his world view is shared by others. If that's the case, I really hope the judge has a brain, as more shit will hit the fan if this ideological mentalist opens a mouthpiece for more nutters from either side through the courts of all places!
Bellend Sebastian Posted 16 April 2012 Posted 16 April 2012 Well I didn't press her for too much detail as I didn't want to distract her from Corrie/the kid's jigsaw she's doing but I asked the psychologist sat on the settee next to me what constitutes insanity and she said that it would usually involve psychosis, i.e. seeing and/or hearing things that aren't there, which apparently this bloke hasn't shown any signs of from what I've read. Her diagnosis based on 2 minutes of Channel 5 News is he's a psychopath, which is classed as a personality disorder. So there you go
21st Century Fox Posted 16 April 2012 Posted 16 April 2012 If that's the case, I really hope the judge has a brain, as more shit will hit the fan if this ideological mentalist opens a mouthpiece for more nutters from either side through the courts of all places! I know his testimony won't be televised because they don't want him having a platform,but I'm not sure about these witnesses.
acooling08 Posted 16 April 2012 Posted 16 April 2012 He isn't insane. He just believes whole-heartedly in his extreme views and will do anything to try and achieve what he believes in. Hope he doesn't get out of going to prison for his whole life.
Fox92 Posted 16 April 2012 Posted 16 April 2012 There's massive grey area there. Genuine self defence, soldiers etc, etc, etc. Soldiers/forces are in a job where, under command, they kill people. Some of which don't like doing it, if not probably all. Self defence is a tricky one. I agree we should have the power to defend ourselves, especially in our own homes, but I suppose how bad the situation is.. I mean, if somebody has a gun, for instance? What I just meant is, when someone takes a weapon and kills somebody else, what goes through their mind? They have got to be insane or something?
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.