No, until the doctors at whatever institution she would be committed to are satisfied that she is properly treated and no longer at risk of psychotic episodes.
Most doctors will not risk their license or reputation by releasing a person found not guilty by reason of insanity. For the most part, it's considered a life sentence.
On July 30th, 2008, Vincent Li stabbed and killed Tim McClean on a Greyhound bus from Edmonton to Winnipeg in Canada. He then proceeded to decapitate Tim, display his head to people outside the bus, and cut off other portions of his body and eat them before the police showed up and arrested him.
In the trial that followed, it was determined that Vincent Li was not criminally responsible due to having undiagnosed schizophrenia (apparently people just assumed he was a very devout Christian convert when he told people that Jesus spoke to him). He was remanded to a mental institution in 2009.
By 2012 (3 years later), he was allowed to take supervised trips into the nearby town. By 2014 (5 years later) he was allowed to take unsupervised trips into the nearby town. By 2015 (6 years later) he was allowed to take unsupervised day trips to Winnipeg so long as he kept a cell phone on him at all times. By 2016 (7 years later) he was allowed to live independently outside of the prison. In 2017, 8 years after being committed, he was given a full non-conditional discharge, with no legal obligations or responsibilities above and beyond those of any other citizen.
While I am usually pretty quick to be critical of the Canadian justice system this seems reasonable. He was determined to have committed the crime as the result of a psychotic episode, doctors determined the issue was resolved, slowly reintegrated him into society and he has not committed any crimes since.
This seems better than the alternative of locking up a now healthy person for decades at the expense of the tax payer.
While I would not be opposed to ongoing check ins with psychiatrists being required I generally trust doctors to know if a person needs continued care better than I trust the general public. Like it would be in their interest to say he needs care even if he doesn't so it's not like they are doing this for some corrupt reasoning.
Sure, but a lot of people were furious when he was released, and also, it shows that doctors absolutely will release patients found not criminally responsible due to mental health reasons.
People's anger isn't super relevant to me on the matter, and they should be released if they are found to be not responsible because of mental health reasons and then after extensive care those issues are found to be resolved. It is also a very different situation in Canada and the US.
31
u/apirateship 3h ago
So, now?
No more kids to kill