Prosecutor Refuses to Put “Mentally Ill” Man on Trial

“Trying the case wasn’t the proper thing to do. I couldn’t ethically prosecute the case,” he said.

Mentally Ill Defendant Puts State In a Bind

What followed the prosecutor’s ethical decision not to prosecute illustrates why states need to examine the intersection of the Olmstead Ruling and Criminal Justice (There is commentary on this issue on the Advocate’s Workshop page.)  States also need to develop laws and procedures for the proper disposition and long-term case management of NGRI acquittees.  States should not deal with NGRI as if it is like any other verdict.  The law needs to remember the context that gives rise to NGRI in the first place.  The absence of rational disposition policies and procedures in the linked-to article contributed to the controversial actionMs of the District Attorney, Prosecutor, and Judge.

May 7, 2018 – subsequent to posting this blog post, an advocate posted the following article to FB.  Aside from the unfortunate reference to “criminally” insane, this article provides an excellent overview of how one state incorporates case management into its version of NGRI.

Long Term Case Management of NGRI acquitees



Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s