Dogwalker's Sentencing

[Doktor Avalanche]

Is there such a thing as "willful blindness" when it comes to competence to understand legal process?

Don't we deal with people like that here on a daily basis?

[wserra]

Actually, if found incompetent, the defendant would go to a psychiatric hospital

Right. The entire story:

Determination and disposition.--If, after the hearing, the court finds by a preponderance of the evidence that the defendant is presently suffering from a mental disease or defect rendering him mentally incompetent to the extent that he is unable to understand the nature and consequences of the proceedings against him or to assist properly in his defense, the court shall commit the defendant to the custody of the Attorney General. The Attorney General shall hospitalize the defendant for treatment in a suitable facility--

(1) for such a reasonable period of time, not to exceed four months, as is necessary to determine whether there is a substantial probability that in the foreseeable future he will attain the capacity to permit the proceedings to go forward; and

(2) for an additional reasonable period of time until--

(A) his mental condition is so improved that trial may proceed, if the court finds that there is a substantial probability that within such additional period of time he will attain the capacity to permit the proceedings to go forward; or

(B) the pending charges against him are disposed of according to law;

whichever is earlier.

If, at the end of the time period specified, it is determined that the defendant's mental condition has not so improved as to permit proceedings to go forward, the defendant is subject to the provisions of sections 4246 and 4248.

[wserra]

http://www.concordmonitor.com/apps/pbcs ... 043/NEWS01

I guess Joe Haas showed you, Scoop.

Schiller!

[Judge Roy Bean]

IMHO, the problem is there is no course of therapy a clinician could point to that might improve Riley's ability to understand what was happening to him. Typically part of the hearing includes a review of any prospect for improvement or at least management of the condition.

Riley's fully competent; he's just in denial and likes the attention he gets from the people that have fed him the BS.

[ErsatzAnatchist]

http://www.concordmonitor.com/apps/pbcs ... 043/NEWS01

I guess Joe Haas showed you, Scoop.

Schiller!

No doubt Joe will show up to the sentencing to watch another of his disciples go down in flames. Congrats Joe. You pushed another one further down the road of martyrdom, all in the name of dumbass paranoia.

[The Observer]

IMHO, the problem is there is no course of therapy a clinician could point to that might improve Riley's ability to understand what was happening to him. Typically part of the hearing includes a review of any prospect for improvement or at least management of the condition.

Riley's fully competent; he's just in denial and likes the attention he gets from the people that have fed him the BS.

But that still brings us back to the chicken-or-egg question: Is "willful" denial merely an action of free will or is it a symptom that clinical psychology should be defining as an indicator of mental incompetence/willfulness. This was touched upon in Schiff's case, albeit briefly (And ironically also by Schiff, not just his attorney) and I cannot remember how that turned out. I could argue in favor of willful denial in Riley's case if there was evidence to show that Riley had reason to have some sincere misbelief about the tax system, but the lengths that he has gone to and the mere fact that he has been convicted, is in prision and facing a lengthy sentence without any sign that he has having doubts about his theories seems to show that maybe, just maybe, he has a mental disorder.

[Dezcad]

IMHO, the problem is there is no course of therapy a clinician could point to that might improve Riley's ability to understand what was happening to him. Typically part of the hearing includes a review of any prospect for improvement or at least management of the condition.

Riley's fully competent; he's just in denial and likes the attention he gets from the people that have fed him the BS.

But that still brings us back to the chicken-or-egg question: Is "willful" denial merely an action of free will or is it a symptom that clinical psychology should be defining as an indicator of mental incompetence/willfulness. This was touched upon in Schiff's case, albeit briefly (And ironically also by Schiff, not just his attorney) and I cannot remember how that turned out. I could argue in favor of willful denial in Riley's case if there was evidence to show that Riley had reason to have some sincere misbelief about the tax system, but the lengths that he has gone to and the mere fact that he has been convicted, is in prision and facing a lengthy sentence without any sign that he has having doubts about his theories seems to show that maybe, just maybe, he has a mental disorder.

Perhaps he does, but we shouldn't confuse Narcissistic Personality Disorder with incompetence.

[grixit]

IMHO, the problem is there is no course of therapy a clinician could point to that might improve Riley's ability to understand what was happening to him. Typically part of the hearing includes a review of any prospect for improvement or at least management of the condition.

Riley's fully competent; he's just in denial and likes the attention he gets from the people that have fed him the BS.

The problem is that he long ago reached the point of internalizing the indoctrination. If any doubts should arise, his response is to lock his mind in the back room and repeat the brainwashing mantras.

[LaVidaRoja]

Is narcissistic personalty disorder a recognized mental illness?

[ErsatzAnatchist]

Is narcissistic personalty disorder a recognized mental illness?

Answer:

Diagnostic Criteria according to the American DSM-IV criteria.

A pervasive pattern of grandiosity (in fantasy or behaviour), need for admiration, and lack of empathy, beginning in early adulthood and present in a variety of contexts, as indicated by five (or more) of the following:

1. has a grandiose sense of self-importance (e.g., exaggerates achievements and talents, expects to be recognized as superior without commensurate achievements, high ego)
2. is preoccupied with fantasies of unlimited success, power, brilliance, beauty, or ideal love
3. requires excessive admiration
4. has a sense of entitlement, i.e., unreasonable expectations of especially favourable treatment or automatic compliance with his or her expectations
5. is interpersonally exploitative, i.e., takes advantage of others to achieve his or her own ends
6. lacks empathy: is unwilling to recognize or identify with the feelings and needs of others
7. is often envious of others or believes that others are envious of him or her
8. shows arrogant, haughty behaviors or attitudes

Boy, that is a slam dunk for Ed Brown. He has got 8 of 8 traits.

[The Observer]

Boy, that is a slam dunk for Ed Brown. He has got 8 of 8 traits.

If there was an event for narcissim in the Olympics, Ed would have been the equivalent of Michael Phelps.

[Famspear]

Boy, that is a slam dunk for Ed Brown. He has got 8 of 8 traits.

If there was an event for narcissim in the Olympics, Ed would have been the equivalent of Michael Phelps.

Hey, that's a pretty bold statement! What about PeterEricBlowhardMeister Hendrickson? Get those two together in one room and you might have the tax protester equivalent of critical mass. Kaboom!

Hard to say which one would be considered "more" narcissistic than the other -- although I suppose I would give the edge to Ed, since he seems to be the more delusional of the two.

[Demosthenes]

10/21/2008 Minute Entry for proceedings held before Chief Judge George Z. Singal: denying 548 Motion to Withdraw as Attorney as to Daniel Riley (1); denying 549 Motion to Extend Time to Object/Respond as to Daniel Riley (1); MOTION HEARING as to Daniel Riley held on 10/21/2008 re 548 MOTION for Sven D. Wiberg to Withdraw as Attorney.. (Court Reporter: Dennis Ford) (Govt Atty: Arnold Huftalen) (Defts Atty: Sven Wiberg, Daniel Riley)(Total Hearing Time: 19 mins) (jar) (Entered: 10/21/2008)

[Demosthenes]

Danny's sentencing is tomorrow morning.

Anyone know who Wayne Crowley is?

http://www.cheatingfrenzy.com/riley555.pdf

[LPC]

Anyone know who Wayne Crowley is?

http://www.cheatingfrenzy.com/riley555.pdf

From the referenced document:

I am writing in regard to your submissions entitled "Due Presentment Under Notary Seal/Demand for Payment/Demand for Performance," which was received on October 20, 2008 and addressed to the Honorable Chief Judge George Z. Singal and to Clerk James R. Starr. [snip]

The submissions having no legal effect or significance, no substantive response to the content of your submission is necessary or warranted. Please note that similar future submissions will not be responded to by this office.

That's when you know you're winning.

[Demosthenes]

Ah.

Wayne Crowley of Round Lake, N.Y., had received a state permit to use the Capitol steps for a 25-person Klan rally that would begin at 2 P.M. But for almost an hour there was no sign of the Klan, and the 1,500 counter-demonstrators had sole use of the Capitol grounds for singing, speaking and chanting.

[.]

Perfect.

[ErsatzAnatchist]

Danny's sentencing is tomorrow morning.

Anyone going (or by now gone)?

I was hoping to go, but work (and a visit to another court) has limited my time immensely.

My predictions:

Danny's Lawyer argues that the mandatory minimum for the weapons/bomb charges are more than adequate to satisfies the need to punish Danny and serve as a deterrent to future nut cases. The attorney will further argue that Danny's diminished mental capacity prevents him from making smart decision and he should be pitied for that. (about the only argument he can make). The whole argument takes less than 10 minutes. Given Danny's age, this is a reasonable argument and sways the judge.

Danny make an *ss of himself by continuing his nitwit legal theories. He rants on and on about the other legal, secret, legal system, bonds, the U.S. Bankruptcy, and other crackpot schemes. Joe Haas, sitting in the peanut gallery is delighted. The Court is less than impressed, and Danny loses most of the benefit of his lawyer's argument.

The Court, in a moment of pity sentences Danny to 33 years.

Joe Haas files complaints with the Office of Attorney Discipline (or related entities) against Danny's lawyer and the Judge. He also writes a long rant on the Concord Monitor's website in response to Scoops article.

My final prediction: The sun will rise tomorrow morning.

[wserra]

My prediction: there will be an argument that the sentence violates the Rule Against Perpetuities. As it should.

[Imalawman]

My prediction: there will be an argument that the sentence violates the Rule Against Perpetuities. As it should.

Nice legal joke there, but I question the widespread appeal of a joke which relies on a basic understanding of the RAP in order to find it funny. I like it though.