Board index
›
General Discussion
›
Bipolar, Tourettes, Schizophrenia, and other Psychological Conditions
Ian Huntley mental problems?
Page 1 of 1 [ 4 posts ]
Jamesy
Veteran
Joined: 24 Oct 2008
Age: 36
Gender: Male
Posts: 8,589
Location: Near London United Kingdom
I might be very unpopular and being in the minority for saying this but do you think the Soham killer Ian Huntley had bad mental health problems and needed too be helped more so than criticized for the murder of those 2 girls?
It’s like Rolf Harris as well maybe he had a mental problem which made him commit those sexual acts on young women.
Regarding Huntley:
Quote:
Mental health assessment
To determine Huntley's state of mental health, he was detained under Section 48 of the Mental Health Act for almost two months at Rampton Secure Hospital. Here, his mental state was extensively assessed by a consultant forensic psychiatrist named Dr. Christopher Clark to determine whether he suffered from any form of mental illness and whether he was mentally competent to stand trial. Dr. Clark concluded in October that Huntley did not suffer from any major mental or psychotic illness. Resultingly, on 8 October, Huntley was deemed mentally competent to stand trial.[
Although Mr Huntley made clear attempts to appear insane, I have no doubt that the man currently, and at the time of the murders, was both physically and mentally sound and therefore, if he is found guilty, carried out the murders totally aware of his actions.
Dr. Christopher Clark. Consultant forensic psychiatrist reciting the conclusions of his assessment of Ian Huntley's mental state (2002)
Having been declared mentally fit to stand trial, Huntley was faced with a sentence of life imprisonment if a jury could be convinced of his guilt. He was subsequently transferred to Woodhill prison in Milton Keynes, Buckinghamshire, where he attempted suicide on 9 June 2003 by consuming 29 antidepressants which he had accumulated in his cell. Although staff initially feared Huntley may die as a result of this overdose, he was returned to his prison cell within 48 hours. Huntley was later transferred to London's Belmarsh prison.
To determine Huntley's state of mental health, he was detained under Section 48 of the Mental Health Act for almost two months at Rampton Secure Hospital. Here, his mental state was extensively assessed by a consultant forensic psychiatrist named Dr. Christopher Clark to determine whether he suffered from any form of mental illness and whether he was mentally competent to stand trial. Dr. Clark concluded in October that Huntley did not suffer from any major mental or psychotic illness. Resultingly, on 8 October, Huntley was deemed mentally competent to stand trial.[
Although Mr Huntley made clear attempts to appear insane, I have no doubt that the man currently, and at the time of the murders, was both physically and mentally sound and therefore, if he is found guilty, carried out the murders totally aware of his actions.
Dr. Christopher Clark. Consultant forensic psychiatrist reciting the conclusions of his assessment of Ian Huntley's mental state (2002)
Having been declared mentally fit to stand trial, Huntley was faced with a sentence of life imprisonment if a jury could be convinced of his guilt. He was subsequently transferred to Woodhill prison in Milton Keynes, Buckinghamshire, where he attempted suicide on 9 June 2003 by consuming 29 antidepressants which he had accumulated in his cell. Although staff initially feared Huntley may die as a result of this overdose, he was returned to his prison cell within 48 hours. Huntley was later transferred to London's Belmarsh prison.
Do you know him or conducted an interview with him that makes you think the evaluation conducted by professionals is incorrect?
As for needing help, it would have been a good idea for him to look for help before committing the murders. Since he was deemed competent, he has to serve his sentence according to the law.
I'm not sure "criticising" is the right word for it - yes, most people will be rightfully horrified by the brutal killing of two 10-year-olds and (once again, rightfully) consider him a danger to the public.
Both of them were evaluated as mentally competent - for many of us it feels that only someone insane or not entirely human could commit such heinous acts with long term consequences against children, but that doesn't absolve the criminals of responsibility.
_________________
"Facts do not cease to exist because they are ignored." Aldous Huxley
Jamesy
Veteran
Joined: 24 Oct 2008
Age: 36
Gender: Male
Posts: 8,589
Location: Near London United Kingdom
BenderRodriguez wrote:
Regarding Huntley:
Do you know him or conducted an interview with him that makes you think the evaluation conducted by professionals is incorrect?
As for needing help, it would have been a good idea for him to look for help before committing the murders. Since he was deemed competent, he has to serve his sentence according to the law.
I'm not sure "criticising" is the right word for it - yes, most people will be rightfully horrified by the brutal killing of two 10-year-olds and (once again, rightfully) consider him a danger to the public.
Both of them were evaluated as mentally competent - for many of us it feels that only someone insane or not entirely human could commit such heinous acts with long term consequences against children, but that doesn't absolve the criminals of responsibility.
Quote:
Mental health assessment
To determine Huntley's state of mental health, he was detained under Section 48 of the Mental Health Act for almost two months at Rampton Secure Hospital. Here, his mental state was extensively assessed by a consultant forensic psychiatrist named Dr. Christopher Clark to determine whether he suffered from any form of mental illness and whether he was mentally competent to stand trial. Dr. Clark concluded in October that Huntley did not suffer from any major mental or psychotic illness. Resultingly, on 8 October, Huntley was deemed mentally competent to stand trial.[
Although Mr Huntley made clear attempts to appear insane, I have no doubt that the man currently, and at the time of the murders, was both physically and mentally sound and therefore, if he is found guilty, carried out the murders totally aware of his actions.
Dr. Christopher Clark. Consultant forensic psychiatrist reciting the conclusions of his assessment of Ian Huntley's mental state (2002)
Having been declared mentally fit to stand trial, Huntley was faced with a sentence of life imprisonment if a jury could be convinced of his guilt. He was subsequently transferred to Woodhill prison in Milton Keynes, Buckinghamshire, where he attempted suicide on 9 June 2003 by consuming 29 antidepressants which he had accumulated in his cell. Although staff initially feared Huntley may die as a result of this overdose, he was returned to his prison cell within 48 hours. Huntley was later transferred to London's Belmarsh prison.
To determine Huntley's state of mental health, he was detained under Section 48 of the Mental Health Act for almost two months at Rampton Secure Hospital. Here, his mental state was extensively assessed by a consultant forensic psychiatrist named Dr. Christopher Clark to determine whether he suffered from any form of mental illness and whether he was mentally competent to stand trial. Dr. Clark concluded in October that Huntley did not suffer from any major mental or psychotic illness. Resultingly, on 8 October, Huntley was deemed mentally competent to stand trial.[
Although Mr Huntley made clear attempts to appear insane, I have no doubt that the man currently, and at the time of the murders, was both physically and mentally sound and therefore, if he is found guilty, carried out the murders totally aware of his actions.
Dr. Christopher Clark. Consultant forensic psychiatrist reciting the conclusions of his assessment of Ian Huntley's mental state (2002)
Having been declared mentally fit to stand trial, Huntley was faced with a sentence of life imprisonment if a jury could be convinced of his guilt. He was subsequently transferred to Woodhill prison in Milton Keynes, Buckinghamshire, where he attempted suicide on 9 June 2003 by consuming 29 antidepressants which he had accumulated in his cell. Although staff initially feared Huntley may die as a result of this overdose, he was returned to his prison cell within 48 hours. Huntley was later transferred to London's Belmarsh prison.
Do you know him or conducted an interview with him that makes you think the evaluation conducted by professionals is incorrect?
As for needing help, it would have been a good idea for him to look for help before committing the murders. Since he was deemed competent, he has to serve his sentence according to the law.
I'm not sure "criticising" is the right word for it - yes, most people will be rightfully horrified by the brutal killing of two 10-year-olds and (once again, rightfully) consider him a danger to the public.
Both of them were evaluated as mentally competent - for many of us it feels that only someone insane or not entirely human could commit such heinous acts with long term consequences against children, but that doesn't absolve the criminals of responsibility.
Okay I didn’t know he was evaluated as mentally competent.
Jamesy wrote:
Okay I didn’t know he was evaluated as mentally competent.
For future reference, you cannot stand trial if you're not mentally competent and, particularly in this kind of cases, they evaluate. So you can rest assured that others that have been trialled and convicted were evaluated too. Both the State and the defence attornies would ask for it.
_________________
"Facts do not cease to exist because they are ignored." Aldous Huxley
