If you have the Irving's media on line? This story is here -
https://www.telegraphjournal.com/daily-gleaner/story/46252799/fredericton-man-faces-incarceration
There's a lot of unanswered questions in this case....What a Summary Count of Sexual Assault????
The prosecutor want him to be sentence to life without being in public where kids are present? DNA for life??? It was his first offense? He lives in a special care home. Many unanswered questions!!!
Just for the record...I DON'T SUPPORT WHAT HE DID!!! HE WAS 100% WRONG!!!!
I saw the Courts how they handle Mental issues < such as mine > Allowing the Fredericton Police to intimidate people with mental illness in a Court of law. These are orders from so-called Judge Mary Jane Richards >
Here's a video the low life uneducated redneck and myself made a few days ago!!-
The whole defence of mental disorder needs revising - case law and legislation. When a person is driven by anti-social needs and desires are they really criminally responsible? Governments are making people mentally ill and doing nothing to help those with issues and then convicts them of acts that may never have happened in a society that cares and helps.
ReplyDeleteThis particular case is an interesting from the point of view that a legal paradox exist, on one hand you have an individual who operates at a 13 to 14 year old level, yet his chronicle biological age is at 22.
ReplyDeleteThe law has two different system to deal with offenders of different age groups. If you are under 18 and under the courts treat you as a young offender, but if you are over 18 you are treated as an adult, it appears that that legal system chooses the chronological biological age model over the actual mental and emotional age of the offender regardless of the offence committed to determine whether one should be tried a young offender, or whether one should be tried as an adult. What can compound this paradox is what if you have someone who is 14 years old but their mental age and emotional age is that of a 22 year old. (Note: in this particular situation however rare, some 14 year olds have been tried in adult court).
The physical body and the brain are two separate entities yet are symbiotic. The brain is dependent on the body for its survival. The part of the brain that is responsible for the vital body function is the brain stem controls functions such as: Consciousness, Cardiac function, Breathing, Hunger, Swallowing, Movement of the eyes and mouth and so forth. Pretty well every living animal has a brainstem like architecture. Where the difference lies between humans and other animals is the size of the neocortex (new brain), for example if you look at the brain of a mouse it is relatively smooth compared to that of the human brain which look like crinkle up paper which translates into more surface area in a limited space (the cranium).
Related to the neocortex is the cerebrum. The cerebrum is the largest part of the brain and it is responsible for higher functions such as: Judgment, Reasoning, Problem solving, Emotions, Learning.
So if something impedes the normal development of the cerebrum, whether its genetics, trauma, substance abuse, brain cancer and so on, it will be reflected in the persons behavior. With some people, they may mentally, intellectually and emotionally operate at age that is significantly disproportional to their biological age.
In order for the crown to succeed and finding one guilty there are two things that they have to show, one is the mens rea, the other is the actus reus. The actus reus, is the act itself, the more abstract is the mens rea, “The guilty mind”. So if a person has a mental age of a child then assessing the mens rea should be based on the mental age rather than the biological age if age decides the outcome of the judicial process? A person doesn’t choose their mental capacity that is a “Hardware issue”
-- André Faust