Aug is Utah Cold Case month and the Utah Cold Case Coalition is featuring Rosie Tapia's case
Click on Rosie Tapia's Thread and help Websleuths find Rosie's killer

GUILTY WA - Deborah Byars, 45, raped & murdered, Ravenna, 23 Aug 2004

Discussion in 'Recently Sentenced and Beyond' started by wfgodot, Jan 28, 2012.

  1. wfgodot

    wfgodot Former Member

    Messages:
    30,163
    Likes Received:
    28
    Trophy Points:
    0
    This is the third in an excellent four-part Seattle Times series on sexual predators and the law.

    Swayed by a psychologist, jury frees 'monster' who attacks again

    How he got to that bedroom:
    What further wages of a faulty decision?
    the rest of the lengthy article, plus links to the four parts of the ST predator series, at link above
     
  2. Loading...


  3. Belinda

    Belinda Doer of Things

    Messages:
    5,669
    Likes Received:
    12
    Trophy Points:
    0
    Our justice system for sexual predators needs to be completely revamped. Predators are released over and over again to reoffend. It has to stop. I believe any experts should be brought in by the court, not paid to support a particular side. This seems so simple, yet it's not done.
     
  4. BrownRice

    BrownRice Well-Known Member

    Messages:
    3,296
    Likes Received:
    89
    Trophy Points:
    48
    I've never heard of the term "civil committed" before. What is that?
     
  5. believe09

    believe09 Active Member

    Messages:
    28,114
    Likes Received:
    31
    Trophy Points:
    38

    IIRC, once a prisoner has served his/her term, they are free to go. For serial predators like this one, some states have a back up plan where they can continue to incarcarate them under the umbrella of mental defect until a time when they are no longer a danger. Civil committments are indefinite and they can be polarizing because of the way our justice system is structured.

    So what is the defense of this psychiatrist, I wonder? "Oops, my bad." :banghead:
     
  6. Nova

    Nova Active Member

    Messages:
    19,111
    Likes Received:
    2
    Trophy Points:
    38
    I think the problem is how to insure the objectivity of the Court. The judge and the D.A. are both paid by the government. This isn't to say judges are consciously corrupt, but our system recognizes that people have a tendency to favor he or she who signs the paycheck.

    Although juries often ignore expert testimony, figuring each side simply presents the testimony it likes, at least under our current system a defendant has the opportunity to present an expert who agrees with the defense view.

    In this particular case, that didn't work very well, obviously. Perhaps the real solution is for courts to admit that the field of psychiatry has limited and imperfect powers of prognostication. Unfortunately, the law treats psychiatrists and psychologists as if they have greater powers than they actually have. Mental health professionals themselves admit as much; many write that they are very uncomfortable with the decisions the law forces them to make.
     

Share This Page



  1. This site uses cookies to help personalise content, tailor your experience and to keep you logged in if you register.
    By continuing to use this site, you are consenting to our use of cookies.
    Dismiss Notice