Sponsored by

Comments on

Loughner to get 4 more months of treatment in prison hospital

Ruling that “measurable progress” has been made in restoring accused Jan. 8 shooter Jared Loughner to competency, a federal judge said Monday that he should receive four more months of treatment in a prison hospital.... Read more»

have your say   

6 comments on this story

1
607 comments
Feb 6, 2012, 3:58 pm
-1 +1

Concerning this story, Dylan’s job is getting easier and easier. Since Burns won’t do the right thing and order Loughner’s trial to finally start, all Dylan has to do is copy-and-paste his story from four months prior.

See you all in May, when Burns will undoubtedly order another four months of unnecessary foot-dragging, totally disrespecting Loughner’s victims, their families, and this community.

2
1 comments
Feb 6, 2012, 4:25 pm
-2 +3

If the judge tried him now, any verdict could be overturned on appeal based upon his competency. Better to do it right the first time, and cheaper, too.

3
607 comments
Feb 6, 2012, 9:05 pm
-1 +2

I disagree.

Let’s take a look at something here. Burns is claiming Lougher is incompetent because apparently Burns feels that Loughner was unable to understand the charges against him, unable to understand the court proceedings, and unable to assist his lawyers. Well, let’s examine the things that the so-called crazy Loughner did understand, shall we?

-He understood that Giffords was holding an event that day
-He understood where it was at and how to get there
-He understood how to obtain a 30-round clip and ammo for his gun, and he understood the right kind to buy (no, you can’t mix and match)
-He understood that he wasn’t coming back from this task, so he left idiotic goodbye notes
-He understood how to drive most of the way there
-He understood how to work that Game and Fish cop that pulled him over on the way to his task.
-He understood how to get a cab
-He understood that he should get the cab driver change so he’d leave peacefully, understanding that if he shot the cab driver first then Giffords would have been hastily escorted from the scene before Loughner had his shot
-He understood to immediately invoke his fifth-amendment rights.
-And, he understood all these things working together to complete his tragic task.

So, if he is/was cognizant enough to understand all of those things, then I’m more-than-confident that he understands the court proceedings, the charges against him, and that he’s able to assist his lawyers.

I say again…Loughner is working the system, and anyone stupid enough to get worked by him has absolutely zero business on the bench.

4
28 comments
Feb 7, 2012, 8:36 am
-2 +2

The fact that Jared was physically able to commit the crime does not mean that he is competent enough to understand the charges against him.  This is someone who, although seemingly intelligent, is suffering from schizophrenia.  We really don’t know what he saw, heard or thought the morning of the shooting. This is someone who requires medication in order to “be human” - take away the meds and you get January 8th. It takes time to restore competency, something which appears to be completely contingent upon the meds.  If he is not medicated, he will never be restored to competency, meaning we will NEVER see a trial.  These things take time, to get Jared from psychotic to competent may never happen.  Sadly, no matter how much time goes by, January 8th cannot be taken back or undone.  I feel the need to reiterate this: I am not trying to “stick up” for a killer, nor am I directing any disrespect toward the victims, or their families.  We all want this trial to get started.  Hopefully it can in another four months.  I don’t see how more treatment for Loughner is a bad thing.  More medication = four more months, according to the court.  Justice will just have to wait, and given the circumstances of the tragedy, I’m not really even sure what “justice” would look like.  The whole thing is dark.

5
607 comments
Feb 7, 2012, 9:28 am
-1 +1

@justsayin

I am not trying to “stick up” for a killer, nor am I directing any disrespect toward the victims, or their families.

Justice will just have to wait

Well, which one is it? You can’t have it both ways…

6
28 comments
Feb 7, 2012, 11:03 am
-0 +0

Please understand that I by no means think Loughner is innocent.  I want nothing more than for him to face the consequences due to him.  I simply disagree that the trial ought to be rushed simply to ease the pain of injustice.  I am all for Loughner being medicated, even if it means four more months. If it is brought to trial now, it would most likely get thrown out on the basis of him being mentally unfit. I say this because he was, yet again, deemed mentally unfit to stand trial as of a few days ago. He would be able to play the insane card, as you put it, much easier if he went to trial now, don’t you think?  Get him “mentally fit” - whatever that may mean for him - and then put him on trial.  I agree that his case has been tied up for a long time, but I see that as more of an indicator of the depths of his mental illness; not some conspiracy theory or him “working the system”.  @Bret Linden

Sorry, we missed your input...

You must be logged in or register to comment

Click to enlarge

U.S. Marshals Service

Loughner

Categories

news, politics & government, crime, health, local, arizona, breaking
Sponsored by

Top Commenters

  • Bret Linden: 607
  • Dylan Smith: 247
  • Roberto De Vido: 241
  • buddhaboy: 202
  • Quietwoman2: 172
  • Brittanicus: 141
  • Joan: 83
  • scar: 80
  • azjimn2son: 63
  • tiponeill: 38
Sponsored by

User Guidelines

Please be respectful and relevant. Thought-provoking. Or at least funny.

We want comments to advance the discussion and we need your help. Debate, disagree, yell (digitally) or laugh, but do it with respect.

We won't censor your comments if we don't agree with you; we want viewpoints from across the political spectrum. We're dedicated to sparking an open, active discussion. We believe people with differing opinions can spark debate and effect change.

Comments are open to registered users of TucsonSentinel.com.

Keep in mind:

  • A conversation involves sharing and respect. Support your viewpoint with facts, not attacks.
  • Ask questions. Search out answers.
  • Remember that being part of a community requires tolerance for differing views.
  • We can't ensure that all comments are based in truth. The only comments we endorse are those we write ourselves.

TucsonSentinel.com does not allow:

  • Hate speech. Blatantly racist, sexist or homophobic slurs or calls for violence against a particular type of person, etc. will be removed.
  • Obscenity & excessive cursing. Sometimes a well-placed curse word - if you're creative enough to get it past our auto-censor - can express your point in just the right way. But we say '%*$& no' to cursing for cursing's sake. And lose the explicit sexually-descriptive language. It doesn't contribute to the debate and there are plenty of other places on the Internet to find it.
  • Flaming. During a heated discussion, unkind words may be spoken. We can live with a certain amount of rudeness in the name of provocative conversation, but a pattern of personal attacks (name-calling, mocking, or baiting) is not acceptable nor are threatening or harassing comments. Show some respect, please.
  • Spam. Solicitation of products or services isn't allowed; contact us about advertising, we'd love to talk to you. Links to off-topic sites may be deleted.
  • Copyright or IP infringement. Lengthy quotes and violations of 'Fair Use' aren't allowed. Anything you post should be your own work.
  • Overposting. Don't bore people and waste electrons with identical comments on multiple stories or repetitive comments that don't advance a conversation.
  • Trolling, sockpuppetry, and other abusive behavior. Please don't feed the trolls and don't pretend to be someone you're not.
  • Gossip. Don't bring up others who can't defend themselves. We don't give out personal information; you shouldn't either.

Comments that violate these guidelines may be removed. We reserve the right to make up the rules as we go along.

Flagging

Commentors are solely responsible for the opinions they express and the accuracy of the information they provide. Users who violate these standards may lose their privileges on TucsonSentinel.com.

Sentinel editors can't read every comment. Trolls, spammers and other troublemakers can slide under the bridge. We rely on you to help maintain a healthy conversation - more than likely, you're reading these comments before the editors.

What if you see something inappropriate? Use the 'Flag' button to send it to a moderation queue. Help us out and tell us why you're reporting it; please don't report someone just because you disagree with them. Boy who cried wolf and all that. We'll take appropriate action on violations.

We will not edit comments to alter their meaning or censor comments because of political content.

We will not remove comments solely because they are heartless, cruel, coarse, foolish or just plain wrong. Your disapproval can maintain a decent signal to noise ratio. Ultimately, however, self-policing is the best method.

Bottom line, don't be a jerk.

  • A
  • A
  • A
  •   Share:
  • more»
Show previews