Competency Hearing #2

[Friendsplacect]

My friend has been in the psych ward for almost 60 days now after the Court found her incompetent.
So now in the psych ward they want to give her another test and I told her that she should have her lawyer, or a witness present or tape record the actual hearing and they are refusing to grant her this.
The first test was by Judges order (Even though he didnt sign the order) this second test as far as I know has not been ordered by the Judge.
Would anyone here agree or disagree that she has a right to at least have her lawyer present during the test?

[aksis]

She has a right to get a second opinion. Bring another psychologist.


Much Love,

Christopher Theodore: Rhodes

[gldskr]

I would guess that the reason for the second test is because the judge failed to sign the first order, rendering that test inadmissable.

She has the right to have an attorney present in all phases of the proceedings, particularly in one as crucial as this, in addition to a second opinion.

gldskr

[Friendsplacect]

would guess that the reason for the second test is because the judge failed to sign the first order, rendering that test inadmissable.

She has the right to have an attorney present in all phases of the proceedings, particularly in one as crucial as this, in addition to a second opinion.

gldskr

Thanks for your responses, I told her to be polite and not to refuse the test not to cause any conflict. She told them that she is not refusing the test but would like to have either
A) Her Lawyer present
B) A Witness from the outside of the nut house
C) A recording device to tape the hearing
They refused to grant her all 3 I told her to request to see the order from the Judge, They denied. I told her if you dont see the order signed by the Judge then there is no Order.
They said "Then you are refusing the Test". she had to tell them no I want to take the test under these COnditions.

Its funny how they like to medicate people and have hearings with them medicated not knowing what the hell is going on.

[Tor Gilbo]

I would watch out for this particular LOOP HOLE in our legal system. Pleading insanity or Incompetent to stand trial is often a very dangerous and hazardous practise. I would advise 2 things: 1} make sure that the person has a concurrent Social Security Disability Claim on file. The filing for insanity can only be corroborated by this very fact. Otherwise the judge and prosecutor are going to question why there had been no previous diagnosis.
2}Furthermore if it is a DRUG or ALCOHOL ABUSE problem; tell the court this; Some States, especially California are quite lenient on drug issues if the USER seeks help...
Insanity can open the doors to a mad-house reality of bedlam and non-sensical activity. Unless you are a psychologically strong person - this is the WRONG WAY. Entering a world where mere existence is a crime and everyone and thing hates you and so forth ain't worth it.
I guess to be honest EXPECT A HELL WORSE THAN PRISON!

[Friendsplacect]

Thanks for your concern, the Court Ordered (But didnt sign the Order) the Competency Evaluation. she is already enrolled in the Mental Heallth System but looking to get out of it.
After doing a little research on those potent drugs they give them in the Mental Ward ive read Case Studies where the medicine actually makes the person worse than before being admitted and can actually cause permanent brain damage. The Psychiatrists connection with the drug companies is way too close and ripe for corruption.

[Friendsplacect]

She is charged with;

Sec. 53a-181. Breach of the peace in the second degree: Class B misdemeanor. (a) A person is guilty of breach of the peace in the second degree when, with intent to cause inconvenience, annoyance or alarm, or recklessly creating a risk thereof, such person: (1) Engages in fighting or in violent, tumultuous or threatening behavior in a public place; or (2) assaults or strikes another; or (3) threatens to commit any crime against another person or such other person's property; or (4) publicly exhibits, distributes, posts up or advertises any offensive, indecent or abusive matter concerning any person; or (5) in a public place, uses abusive or obscene language or makes an obscene gesture; or (6) creates a public and hazardous or physically offensive condition by any act which such person is not licensed or privileged to do. For purposes of this section, "public place" means any area that is used or held out for use by the public whether owned or operated by public or private interests.

(b) Breach of the peace in the second degree is a class B misdemeanor.

But the point is, if she was incompetent at arraignment and she was incompetent when she allegedly committed this offense how can you be held liable if you were incompetent at the time of the offense. The Statute talks about intent and it also calls for it to happen in a public place. now what is the definition of a "Public Place" would it be a place where the general public has access to? Because if this is the case, it was not in a place where the general public has access to.

This Statute if anything seems more appropriate;
Sec. 53a-181a. Creating a public disturbance: Infraction. (a) A person is guilty of creating a public disturbance when, with intent to cause inconvenience, annoyance or alarm, or recklessly creating a risk thereof, he (1) engages in fighting or in violent, tumultuous or threatening behavior; or (2) annoys or interferes with another person by offensive conduct; or (3) makes unreasonable noise.

(b) Creating a public disturbance is an infraction.

[farmer_giles_of_ham]

I know nothing about this but what happened to the legendary "cant commit to mental institution without consent absent conviction"... I mean what are the rules of procedure for cases like this? How long can she be held, etc.

All these drugs are bad, period. I like what "Steve762" said about asking for a God-fearing headshrinker... this is why traditionaly one of the qualification for civil rights like holding a public office was to at least profess Dieism.

Of course it depends which God we are talking about...

[farmer_giles_of_ham]

Again I know nothing on this but for all the time your friend is spending in captivity and all the hassle, might as well try to plead this one out with DA because she might already have a "time served" situation, and anyway better jail than the loony-bin.

good luck anyway and best results.

[Friendsplacect]

Sec. 54-56d. (Formerly Sec. 54-40). Competency to stand trial. (a) Competency required. Definition. A defendant shall not be tried, convicted or sentenced while the defendant is not competent. For the purposes of this section, a defendant is not competent if the defendant is unable to understand the proceedings against him or her or to assist in his or her own defense.

(b) Presumption of competency. A defendant is presumed to be competent. The burden of proving that the defendant is not competent by a preponderance of the evidence and the burden of going forward with the evidence are on the party raising the issue. The burden of going forward with the evidence shall be on the state if the court raises the issue. The court may call its own witnesses and conduct its own inquiry.

(c) Request for examination. If, at any time during a criminal proceeding, it appears that the defendant is not competent, counsel for the defendant or for the state, or the court, on its own motion, may request an examination to determine the defendant's competency.

(d) Examination of defendant. Report. If the court finds that the request for an examination is justified and that, in accordance with procedures established by the judges of the Superior Court, there is probable cause to believe that the defendant has committed the crime for which the defendant is charged, the court shall order an examination of the defendant as to his or her competency. The court may (1) appoint one or more physicians specializing in psychiatry to examine the defendant, or (2) order the Commissioner of Mental Health and Addiction Services to conduct the examination either (A) by a clinical team consisting of a physician specializing in psychiatry, a clinical psychologist and one of the following: A clinical social worker licensed pursuant to chapter 383b or a psychiatric nurse clinical spe******t holding a master's degree in nursing, or (B) by one or more physicians specializing in psychiatry, except that no employee of the Department of Mental Health and Addiction Services who has served as a member of a clinical team in the course of such employment for at least five years prior to October 1, 1995, shall be precluded from being appointed as a member of a clinical team. If the Commissioner of Mental Health and Addiction Services is ordered to conduct the examination, the commissioner shall select the members of the clinical team or the physician or physicians. If the examiners determine that the defendant is not competent, the examiners shall then determine whether there is a substantial probability that the defendant, if provided with a course of treatment, will regain competency within the maximum period of any placement order under this section. If the examiners determine that there is a substantial probability that the defendant, if provided with a course of treatment, will regain competency within the maximum period of any placement order under this section, the examiners shall then determine whether the defendant appears to be eligible for civil commitment, with monitoring by the Court Support Services Division, pursuant to subdivision (2) of subsection (h) of this section. The court may authorize a physician specializing in psychiatry, a clinical psychologist, a clinical social worker licensed pursuant to chapter 383b or a psychiatric nurse clinical spe******t holding a master's degree in nursing selected by the defendant to observe the examination. Counsel for the defendant may observe the examination. The examination shall be completed within fifteen days from the date it was ordered and the examiners shall prepare and sign, without notarization, a written report and file such report with the court within twenty-one business days of the date of the order. On receipt of the written report, the clerk of the court shall cause copies to be delivered immediately to the state's attorney and to counsel for the defendant.

(e) Hearing. The court shall hold a hearing as to the competency of the defendant no later than ten days after the court receives the written report. Any evidence regarding the defendant's competency, including the written report, may be introduced at the hearing by either the defendant or the state. If the written report is introduced, at least one of the examiners shall be present to testify as to the determinations in the report, unless the examiner's presence is waived by the defendant and the state. Any member of the clinical team shall be considered competent to testify as to the team's determinations. A defendant and the defendant's counsel may waive the court hearing only if the examiners, in the written report, determine without qualification that the defendant is competent.

(f) Court finding of competency or incompetency. If the court, after the hearing, finds that the defendant is competent, the court shall continue with the criminal proceedings. If the court finds that the defendant is not competent, the court shall also find whether there is a substantial probability that the defendant, if provided with a course of treatment, will regain competency within the maximum period of any placement order permitted under this section.

(g) Court procedure if finding that defendant will not regain competency. If, at the hearing, the court finds that there is not a substantial probability that the defendant, if provided with a course of treatment, will regain competency within the period of any placement order under this section, the court shall follow the procedure set forth in subsection (m) of this section.

(h) Court procedure if finding that defendant will regain competency. Placement of defendant for treatment. Civil commitment. (1) If, at the hearing, the court finds that there is a substantial probability that the defendant, if provided with a course of treatment, will regain competency within the period of any placement order under this section, the court shall either (A) order placement of the defendant for treatment for the purpose of rendering the defendant competent, or (B) order placement of the defendant at a treatment facility pending civil commitment proceedings pursuant to subdivision (2) of this subsection.

Thats part of it...
I noticed from the transcript of the hearing that the Prosecutor talked to her "Social Worker" prior to the hearing, I dont believe there was any consent by her for them to communicate, I found that kind of strange also.