UK - Neelu Berry opens my eyes

[Arthur Rubin]

Mahajan was handed an indefinite period of imprisonment for the public protection after reports indicated he posed a high risk of serious harm to members of the legal profession.

I didn't think the "legal profession" was a protected class...

[ArthurWankspittle]

Mahajan was handed an indefinite period of imprisonment for the public protection after reports indicated he posed a high risk of serious harm to members of the legal profession.

I didn't think the "legal profession" was a protected class...

I think it is more that he seems to hold a grudge against anyone in the legal profession, making them at risk to his actions. It's a bit like someone I heard about years ago. He was in a psychiatric unit but there appeared to be nothing wrong with him. Except when released previously he would immediately start to track down a relative with the intention of killing them.

[longdog]

It's a bit like someone I heard about years ago. He was in a psychiatric unit but there appeared to be nothing wrong with him. Except when released previously he would immediately start to track down a relative with the intention of killing them.

Therein lies the great problem for the MH services. What do you do with somebody who's clearly dangerous but not mentally ill? If intending to commit murder or actually doing so were definitive evidence of a treatable mental illness then all of our murderers would be in hospital not jail.

Perhaps the person has a perfectly rational reason to want to murder the relative. People do all manner of terrible things for rational reasons all the time. It doesn't make their actions right of course.

[Zeke_the_Meek]

It's a bit like someone I heard about years ago. He was in a psychiatric unit but there appeared to be nothing wrong with him. Except when released previously he would immediately start to track down a relative with the intention of killing them.

Therein lies the great problem for the MH services. What do you do with somebody who's clearly dangerous but not mentally ill? If intending to commit murder or actually doing so were definitive evidence of a treatable mental illness then all of our murderers would be in hospital not jail.

Perhaps the person has a perfectly rational reason to want to murder the relative. People do all manner of terrible things for rational reasons all the time. It doesn't make their actions right of course.

Indeed, it feels somewhat redundant to ask if a serial killer, mass murderer or hellbent stalker is mentally ill. By proxy, they're not quite right in the head.

My legal knowledge is sparse compared to some of my esteemed colleagues here, but isn't the legal definition of mentally ill exceptionally narrow? I.e you genuinely don't have any idea what's going on or what you've done/why it's wrong? I understand that's why the insanity defence is almost impossible to make stick, counter to popular culture.

[longdog]

My legal knowledge is sparse compared to some of my esteemed colleagues here, but isn't the legal definition of mentally ill exceptionally narrow? I.e you genuinely don't have any idea what's going on or what you've done/why it's wrong? I understand that's why the insanity defence is almost impossible to make stick, counter to popular culture.

As I understand it that's about right. As a legal defence you not only have to be mentally ill you also have to be almost completely lacking insight into the illness. If, like many (most?) people with a mental illness, you are mad and know you are mad it's harder to make the defence stick.

[exiledscouser]

Insanity defences are still bound by the M’Naghton Rules (sometimes called the McNaughton Rules) which date back to 1843.

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/M'Naghten_rules

That this is still the yardstick all these years later suggests either that they got it right back then or it should or could be updated to reflect advances in our understanding of mental illnesses.

[SteveUK]

Being found insane is a double edged sword. Sure, you avoid jail, in its purest sense, but are open to be detained, potentially indefinitely at an appropriate institution.

[Pottapaug1938]

Insanity defences are still bound by the M’Naghton Rules (sometimes called the McNaughton Rules) which date back to 1843.

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/M'Naghten_rules

That this is still the yardstick all these years later suggests either that they got it right back then or it should or could be updated to reflect advances in our understanding of mental illnesses.

In the US, the M'Naghten Rule has generally been modified by statute, or otherwise replaced. There is the "Durham Rule", the "Irresistible Impulse Rule", and the Model Penal Code Rule. Under Durham, which exists only in New Hampshire, a criminal act must be the result of a mental disease or defect, at the time when the act was committed, for the rule to apply; and clear and convincing evidence must be produced for the rule to apply. For the Irresistible Impulse Rule to apply, the defendant's mental illness must make distinguishing between right and wrong impossible, and that the crime was the direct product of the mental illmess. Under the MPC Rule, the defendant's mental illness must make them unable to appreciate the criminality of their conduct, or conform their conduct to the requirements of the law.

[Tevildo]

That this is still the yardstick all these years later suggests either that they got it right back then or it should or could be updated to reflect advances in our understanding of mental illnesses.

See Loake v CPS for a recent judicial discussion of the rules.

[T]he existing law has long been the subject of academic criticism as being unfair, out of date and failing to reflect advances made in medicine, psychology and psychiatry. Various bodies have reviewed the defence of insanity and recommended reform, but the substance of the defence has remained unchanged.

In other words, it could be improved, but working out how to improve it is quite a tricky matter.

[Pottapaug1938]

That this is still the yardstick all these years later suggests either that they got it right back then or it should or could be updated to reflect advances in our understanding of mental illnesses.

See Loake v CPS for a recent judicial discussion of the rules.

[T]he existing law has long been the subject of academic criticism as being unfair, out of date and failing to reflect advances made in medicine, psychology and psychiatry. Various bodies have reviewed the defence of insanity and recommended reform, but the substance of the defence has remained unchanged.

In other words, it could be improved, but working out how to improve it is quite a tricky matter.

My last post shows three attempts, in the US, to try to improve it.

[YiamCross]

https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/articl ... years.html

Didn't Tom / Sue , Colon , Ravenscroft have a daytrip down to Hampstead ?

Yes. I played some of the video to the judge when I was in court with the lovely Amanda, Tom and pony tailed twat. Colon was doing back flips trying to stop me showing it to the judge as I was "just trying to make him look bad." It must clearly have done so since the judge rather amusingly questioned how he could claim I had harmed his reputation when he was promoting non payment of bills through fraudulent means and obviously had no good name to ruin. Made me laugh anyway.

[notorial dissent]

They all want the attention until it turns around and bites them in the butt. Their own words and actions do them in.

[The Seventh String]

As well as the matter of whether someone was compus mentis when they commited the crime, there’s also the different question of whether they are mentally fit to stand trial when hauled into court.

In Neelu’s case I’m amazed her courtroom and police station rantings haven’t been regarded as indicating reality really isn’t her thing and commitment for psychiatric evaluation ordered. Also her “legal advisor” EWE.

[longdog]

Neelu has been on a Section 135 at least once and they released her as delusional but not mentally ill.

To be detained on a Section 2 or 5 she has to be determined at assessment within 36 hours to be...

1) Suffering from a mental health problem recognised by psychiatry.

AND either...

2) Being ill treated or neglected.

OR

3) Unable to look after her self.

Even if 1) applied 2) and 3) don't as far as I can tell.

Yes she's a nuisance to all and sundry and she's quite clearly utterly delusional but she's not at risk of harm either from herself or through neglect by others and therefore she can't be held on a section.

If her family were involved there might be some slim chance of getting her involuntarily committed but with the state of MH services at the moment even then it would be highly unlikely.

[The Seventh String]

I was thinking more along the lines of s36 MHA 1983. Though that’s only applicable to criminal cases while Neelu generally specialises in spouting endless nonsense in the civil courts.

While I’m not a doctor and usually hesitate to proffer long-range amateur diagnoses, I think I’ve seen and read enough of Neelu’s outpourings to suggest she’s a strong candidate for a diagnosis of delusional disorder. That’s assuming she doesn’t turn off all the Swissindo/“FRAUD”/Sgt Bertie/Satanists running amok stuff when she has nothing to gain and maybe much to lose by her usual behaviour, of course.

[Notsogreen]

Oh dear lord..

https://youtu.be/YywVd_cm5Ug

Could bear more than a few minutes of this.. something about an international tribunal for natural justice looking like it is taped in someone's front room...

[hucknallred]

At the start I had a flashback to Joss Ackland in Lethal Weapon 2 shouting "Diplomatic immunity!", alas Danny Glover didn't come along & shoot him in the head.

For the kids - https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=kwC_IaY3BmY

[AnOwlCalledSage]

ITJN is quite old. That is from last August. (Correction: Neelu's video was in September)

What is weird is that she has been very quiet recently by her standards. I think her last trip to the police station to help with enquiries may have had some effect.

[AndyPandy]

ITJN is quite old. That is from last August. (Correction: Neelu's video was in September)

What is weird is that she has been very quiet recently by her standards. I think her last trip to the police station to help with enquiries may have had some effect.

Or could it be the combination of being homeless and the recent 9 year sentence of her partner in the Hoaxstead saga has finally jolted some sanity into her, one can only hope !

[rosy]

Sanity and Neelu don't inhabit the same realities, sadly.

Right now she's making a call to arms for people to attend Jake Clarke's 'trial' tomorrow (actually it's an appeal against his conviction for harassing two individuals in the Hampstead area).



All the usual suspects in the cc line, but Utility Warehouse is a surprise addition. UW is a gas and electric distributor that operates in a similar way to a pyramid scheme, but just on the correct side of legal.