Unfuckingbelievable.....

 

Shame on us?  Sorry, but drunk driving has killed more people and ruined more lives than the criminally insane ever will.

 

I know someone who's dead because of an impaired driver - the driver got five years. In five years he'll be out of custody and not under any kind of supervision.

 

Please read the article from the Free Press that was posted in this thread.

Mark - sorry to hear about your friend. That's horrible. I just didn't see and still don't see how drunk driving is related to this topic. We could introduce one hundred red herrings about stupid decisions made by humans that led to the death of other humans and how those people were put in jail and are now out, but it doesn't really relate to this specific story. Anyway, once again, sorry to hear about your friend.

I read the article, and I get the fact that this guy was found NCR. I also get that it's "naïve" of anyone to question the doctors making the decisionto let him go out unsupervised as of course they are the intelligent experts and we're all dumb so our opinions don't matter, and of course, we all lack "common sense", whatever the hell that is. We just have to keep our emotions in check here and see what happens. And that's the reality here, no one knows what is going to happen. Hopefully in 20 years, the name of Vince Li is forgotten, and his reintegration into society was successful. Maybe you guys will one day end up sitting beside him at a Jets game, or buying him a beer at a wedding social, and not even know it. We don't know if he will re-offend, but we do know what he is capable of if he does. So that's that.

 

 

I'm amazed that you don't see the connection between those two scenarios.

 

Peace - I have nothing further to add to this thread.

For what it's worth, people who kill someone by driving drunk should get stiffer penalties too. This does boil down to philosophical differences in how the justice system should work though, it's unlikely that you'll change anyones mind. 

For what it's worth, people who kill someone by driving drunk should get stiffer penalties too. This does boil down to philosophical differences in how the justice system should work though, it's unlikely that you'll change anyones mind. 

 

There will be pros and cons no matter how you set up the justice system.  It just bothers me that people who should be better informed are calling for an appeal.  An appeal based on what?  

I'm amazed that you don't see the connection between those two scenarios.

 

Peace - I have nothing further to add to this thread.

And I'm amazed that you want to introduce red herrings into this thread. If that's all you want to do, then please add nothing further to this thread.

There will be pros and cons no matter how you set up the justice system.  It just bothers me that people who should be better informed are calling for an appeal.  An appeal based on what?

I guess I agree on this one - you can't really appeal the NCR, and the only other issue is letting him out unsupervised to be re-integrated, only five years after the fact. As I said earlier, no one really knows what is going to happen. I don't think that there is one person here who can truthfully say they'd be comfortable with their son or daughter taking a cross-Canada Greyhound bus ride with him, no matter what the doctors and mental health experts say. That's human nature, and in my view, nothing to be ashamed of, especially given the horrific nature of the crime.

So never mind no medication at all, he could have been taking the wrong medication for his condition.

I think that is pretty much a given. This guy needed to be on heavy meds for schizophrenia but instead he checked out of/ran away from the Ontario facility before he could be diagnosed. It raises an interesting question - just how much should the state interfere in the rights of the individual if they don't want to seek help for mental issues? Do we as citizens just sit back and wait until the mentally ill chop up and eat someone before we commit them to a facility? The problem with Li was that he didn't do enough to be forcibly committed, and didn't trust "western medicine" so he fell through the cracks, sort of.

 

So never mind no medication at all, he could have been taking the wrong medication for his condition.

I think that is pretty much a given. This guy needed to be on heavy meds for schizophrenia but instead he checked out of/ran away from the Ontario facility before he could be diagnosed. It raises an interesting question - just how much should the state interfere in the rights of the individual if they don't want to seek help for mental issues? Do we as citizens just sit back and wait until the mentally ill chop up and eat someone before we commit them to a facility? The problem with Li was that he didn't do enough to be forcibly committed, and didn't trust "western medicine" so he fell through the cracks, sort of.

 

This is where the biggest key comes in, gotta improve the ability to see mental problems before something bad happens and make sure that people know there is help available and that it's an OK thing to seek out. Prevention is absolutely the biggest thing. Now how you go about doing that who knows, but there's experts who should be able to figure that all out. 

 

 

Yeah well, drunk people have also been known to do some crazy things, especially while behind the steering wheel.  

 

 

Or people on hallucinogenic drugs (for example).  I don't even want to think of the crazy people (not mentally crazy, but insane/murderous etc) that have gotten released once they serve his time. 

 

I highly, HIGHLY doubt doctors (you know, medically trained professionals....) would release he was at even a low risk to reoffend. 

 

Can you be absolutely sure? You can't. 

 

 

Sorry I came back after the weekend - but obviously you can't GUARANTEE that nothing will ever happen again.  There SO MANY people committing violent acts (murder, rape, etc) who are released "after doing their time". You cannot guarantee sexual predators will not reoffend - yet so many are released (as an example).  Murderers are released every day.  Karla Homolka assisted in violent serial killings, but was "abused" and as such was offered a plea bargain and was released after only 12 years. Comments like this - 'I don't trust Li.' - that's fine.  YOU are not a mental health professional in any way, shape, or form.   If you trust him or not - it does. not. matter.  I don't trust a single person who has raped, murdered, driven drunk, beat the **** out of someone on drugs, etc - doesn't mean our society will release them back into the general population.

 

The WFP article about NCR's was a good one.  It is very clear that if there was any strong history of violent crimes committed by those found NCR, it would not even exist.

 

You seem to be "offended" by the actual act - the beheading and "eating" -  when he was clearly very disturbed.  Would you be as disturbed if he'd instead, say, shot someone?  Someone is still dead.  The offender is still mentally disturbed.  Here are other cases where a legal system and PROFESSIONALS (not you, remember?) deemed them NCR.  Is this ok because they didn't behead someone and eat them?

 

http://www.cbc.ca/news/canada/not-criminally-responsible-6-cases-1.2500574

 

As to people saying that he was right-****** in jail/remand center afterwards... how would you feel if you realized while you were completely unaware, you had brutally murdered someone?  That would absolutely mess you up (in addition to being mentally ill).  

 

Our country's mental health system is very troubling, and as seen in the case of Li, serious illnesses often take years to properly diagnose, and doctors are overwhelmed - in MANY cases it takes drastic events to get help.  Patients check themselves in and out, there are extremely long wait lists, there is the inherent difficulty of getting the right medication - the issues go on and on. 

 

You seem to be "offended" by the actual act - the beheading and "eating" -  when he was clearly very disturbed.  Would you be as disturbed if he'd instead, say, shot someone?  Someone is still dead.  The offender is still mentally disturbed.  Here are other cases where a legal system and PROFESSIONALS (not you, remember?) deemed them NCR.  Is this ok because they didn't behead someone and eat them?

 

 

 I just want to touch on this topic, but yes the actual act is worse than simply shooting someone dead. Shooting someone is a pretty straight forward act, pull the trigger and it's done, Yeah it's still horrible to kill someone but the act only takes an instant. I wouldn't be lenient on anyone but there is a pretty significant difference between acts. 

 

 

You seem to be "offended" by the actual act - the beheading and "eating" -  when he was clearly very disturbed.  Would you be as disturbed if he'd instead, say, shot someone?  Someone is still dead.  The offender is still mentally disturbed.  Here are other cases where a legal system and PROFESSIONALS (not you, remember?) deemed them NCR.  Is this ok because they didn't behead someone and eat them?

 

 

 I just want to touch on this topic, but yes the actual act is worse than simply shooting someone dead. Shooting someone is a pretty straight forward act, pull the trigger and it's done, Yeah it's still horrible to kill someone but the act only takes an instant. I wouldn't be lenient on anyone but there is a pretty significant difference between acts. 

 

 

To me, a person who knowingly murders a person is just as bad as someone who is mentally disturbed and performs gruesome acts.  If anything, the fact they are so gruesome attests to the fact that Li was extremely disturbed. I just think especially in this case, while it is completely understandable to be horrified at what Li did, it is also impeding many people from looking at it from a purely logical point of view.  Does that make sense?  I admit I'm having a hard time explaining exactly what I mean.  For example look at the disgusting, horrific things people are doing on bath salts and meth these days... I shudder just thinking about it.  Admittedly, I too was initially shocked that he was going to be released, but I took a step back to look at the whole picture. 

Dead is dead but he ate his victim. And he would have done the same to others. He could do the same again. There is no guarantee he will  never stop taking his pills, kill & eat people again. Because there is such a fine line here based on the effects of meds between insanity & sanity of the guy he should never be released into the public again. For safety.

 

 

 

You seem to be "offended" by the actual act - the beheading and "eating" -  when he was clearly very disturbed.  Would you be as disturbed if he'd instead, say, shot someone?  Someone is still dead.  The offender is still mentally disturbed.  Here are other cases where a legal system and PROFESSIONALS (not you, remember?) deemed them NCR.  Is this ok because they didn't behead someone and eat them?

 

 

 I just want to touch on this topic, but yes the actual act is worse than simply shooting someone dead. Shooting someone is a pretty straight forward act, pull the trigger and it's done, Yeah it's still horrible to kill someone but the act only takes an instant. I wouldn't be lenient on anyone but there is a pretty significant difference between acts. 

 

 

To me, a person who knowingly murders a person is just as bad as someone who is mentally disturbed and performs gruesome acts.  If anything, the fact they are so gruesome attests to the fact that Li was extremely disturbed. I just think especially in this case, while it is completely understandable to be horrified at what Li did, it is also impeding many people from looking at it from a purely logical point of view.  Does that make sense?  I admit I'm having a hard time explaining exactly what I mean.  For example look at the disgusting, horrific things people are doing on bath salts and meth these days... I shudder just thinking about it.  Admittedly, I too was initially shocked that he was going to be released, but I took a step back to look at the whole picture. 

 

I think where the logic breaks down for you compared to other people is that you take a more sympathetic stance which is geared towards rehabilitation, whereas other people see the justice system as a method for punishing offenders. But if you want to get into that debate it's going to completely change things and turn into a huge argument because neither side will give an inch. 

Robynjt, I'm not offended per se. I am offended that some people treat the life of others with such little value & that we place more importance on the rights of the accused than the rights of the victim & his/her family. I am worried about public safety. That myself, my immediate family, friends & even all of you here who don't agree with my stance, that when you go out in public that it is safe to do so. 

I think where the logic breaks down for you compared to other people is that you take a more sympathetic stance which is geared towards rehabilitation, whereas other people see the justice system as a method for punishing offenders. But if you want to get into that debate it's going to completely change things and turn into a huge argument because neither side will give an inch.

I toured an old jail in Fremantle Australia last year. The Aussies said during the tour that since the jail had closed the tactics in treating criminals in jail had changed and the prisoners were made to be much more comfortable and the focus was on rehabilitation instead of punishment, which they also said had made the re-offend rate increase by 20%.

That's irrelevant in this case as Vince Li was never in jail (at least not for long) and if he goes off the deep end and turns into Hannibal Lecter again he won't care about jail time.

My head hurts after reading the last four pages.

Strong opinions. 

to be perfectly honest I think it was as level headed a discussion on a controversial topic as you are likely to see on the internet. 

I am really impressed with how civil this discussion is.  Respect to people on both sides.

I do hope you are not insinuating in any way shape or form I do not value human life over the accused.  I feel incredibly so for any victim - WHETHER the accused was mentally ill or not.  To me, it comes down to a lack of understanding of mental illness.  As much as you may not understand mental illness, it can truly make a person do things they would never consider doing when they were healthy.  They are extremely sick.  The system failed Li as they have failed so many others (see the link I posted before) - and then they are left with the question of what to do once they have been rehabilitated.  Think of the young lady who was seriously ill and drowned her two infants - heartbreaking.  Instead of worrying about Li - how about worrying about the rest of the people in Canada who desperately need help for mental illness, and find it almost impossible to get? 

 

 

Robynjt, I'm not offended per se. I am offended that some people treat the life of others with such little value & that we place more importance on the rights of the accused than the rights of the victim & his/her family. I am worried about public safety. That myself, my immediate family, friends & even all of you here who don't agree with my stance, that when you go out in public that it is safe to do so. 

 

I do hope you are not insinuating in any way shape or form I do not value human life over the accused.  I feel incredibly so for any victim - WHETHER the accused was mentally ill or not.  To me, it comes down to a lack of understanding of mental illness.  As much as you may not understand mental illness, it can truly make a person do things they would never consider doing when they were healthy.  They are extremely sick.  The system failed Li as they have failed so many others (see the link I posted before) - and then they are left with the question of what to do once they have been rehabilitated.  Think of the young lady who was seriously ill and drowned her two infants - heartbreaking.  Instead of worrying about Li - how about worrying about the rest of the people in Canada who desperately need help for mental illness, and find it almost impossible to get? 

 

 

I think there's room in this debate for both. There should be a better system for spotting and treating mental illness, but once the line has been crossed I don't care how crazy a person is it's game over. 

 

I think there's room in this debate for both. There should be a better system for spotting and treating mental illness, but once the line has been crossed I don't care how crazy a person is it's game over. 

 

 

I can see that.  I can see both sides... but in the end, I think mental health professionals are the most qualified to make that decision.  I do know I am likely in the **minority** after seeing the surprise/outrage in the past few days since the story broke.

 

- changed majority to minority because I'm an idiot.

Instead of worrying about Li - how about worrying about the rest of the people in Canada who desperately need help for mental illness, and find it almost impossible to get?

I agree that this is a legitimate issue and if nothing else comes of this case, the publicity it attracts should help to shed a light on the plight of the mentally ill in this country. I've been reading some articles too about how immigrants with mental illnesses have an especially hard time getting help as they don't trust their systems back home and so therefore don't trust ours either. Li was definitely in that category, as he was known to shun "western" medicine.

It would be interesting if someone would put a dollar figure on just how much more money should be spent in this area. I know no matter what sector of the government you ask, the answer is always "more", be it teachers, cops, ambulance drivers, doctors or janitors. Whatever we spend, it's never enough. But this does seem to be an area that is chronically underfunded, and very much misunderstood.

I'm surprised I missed this thread.

I'm VERY torn

Aren't most killers mentally Ill on some level?

I agree that he is sick. And if you do something wrong because you're sick it's not your fault.

But we lock up sick people every day. This case is different because it's high profile.

On one hand you could argue that people like Li are released under similar conditions all the time but we never hear about it. On the other I wonder if Li would be up for release of it wasn't so high profile. Are these doctors using him to advance their position and opinions? That worries me.

If he feels better one day and doesn't take his mess, that worries me.

I would ask these doctors "would up honestly be fine with this guy living next door to your kids or sitting on a bus beside your child?"

But then does a sick person, in an enlightened society, not have the right to get healthy?

Off topic but consider this, if we as a society spent whatever was. Ended to educate and eliminate FASD in one generation we would reap unimaginable financial befits because jails would be half full. We put sick people away all the time.