I wonder if Mr. N was hoping for a guilty verdict with the idea of making a film from it or hopes to with the civil trial.
8 Likes
The thing is, the vast majority of cases, NGRI or not, donât intersect between civil and criminal cases. They are separate actions.
Now, if a defendant takes a plea deal to say, aggravated assault, and subsequently is sued, the plaintiff may try to argue that he already pled to the act, therefore we donât need to litigate it again, but thatâs not the vast majority of cases.
8 Likes
I personally think someone should be working with MB (eventually) on a book about what has happened to him and how he managed to find the strength to fight this.
22 Likes
I hope so too.
1 Like
Well, we speculated on if this is being paid on contingency, I guess itâs being paid for in movie rightsâŠ.
4 Likes
oh wow good for them for suing Boy Scouts though. Thatâs a crazy story in itself.
Because words have meaning. MB was NOT found guilty of attempted murder, period. NOT straight guilty, NOT guilty but not criminally liable. He was found NGRI.
Exactly as I predicted, you are now trying to claim the judge meant the prosecution proved MB shot LK.
None of us knows what he MEANT. What he clearly WROTE was that âMB was found guilty of attempted murder but not criminally liable.â That is clearly, categorically false. HE WAS NOT FOUND GUILTY, period.
Whether you believe the prosecution proved he committed the act is irrelevant. Whether the judge believes that is irrelevant. Whether I believe that is irrelevant. NGRI is NOT not guilty but criminally liable. The background (which seems to have been copied from the plaintiffâs filing) mis-states the juryâs finding in the criminal case, along with several other details. Thatâs whatâs relevant.
27 Likes
I think the one about the boy scouts is the first one but could be wrong.
2 Likes
So this type of situation is virtually without precedent in New Jersey (or elsewhere)?
I guess I donât understand what youâre asking?
The issue is whether the criminal jury having concluded as a finding of fact that the actus reus occurred is relevant to the civil case. @Lazaret asserts itâs not relevant. I think it might be, and my assessment of the likelihood that itâs relevant increased after reading the judges ruling.
I agree that words have meaning. I agree MB was not found Guilty of attempted murder of LK. Neither was he found Not Guilty of the attempted murder of LK. He was found NGRI.
I think youâre an intelligent and perceptive person, and therefore I cannot believe you donât understand my position. You may understand it and disagree with it, but I donât believe you fail to understand it. So can we stop with the word games?
Here is a quote from State of New Jersey vs Krol 1975
â Commitment following acquittal by reason of insanity is not intended to be punitive, for, although such a verdict implies a finding that defendant has committed the actus reus, it also constitutes a finding that he did so without a criminal state of mind. There is, in effect, no crime to punish.â
Here is a link about actus reas and mens reus which shows CHâs point about âguilty of the act.â
I found the wording I use a lot about the prosecutor proved beyond a reasonable doubt, the highest standard, the act that would otherwise have been a crime except the defense proved with a preponderance of evidence that he was insane at the time.â
In other words, it is a situation where once they have the shooter then the question is why. If the answer is self defense, insanity, or other allowed reasons, those are affirmative defenses to being guilty of a crime although the actor was guilty of the act.
2 Likes
Thank you Equibrit;
The jury foreman says " Not Guilty By Reason of Insanity" at approx. 2 minutes.
15 Likes
Talk about a convergence of bad business plans.
6 Likes
If Nagel wantâs to make a documentary about it, then he should be very careful to make sure the writing is more accurate than his briefs.
14 Likes
From the New Jersey Statutes for Insanity Defense:
âA person is not criminally responsible for conduct if at the time of such conduct he was laboring under such a defect of reason, from disease of the mind as not to know the nature and quality of the act he was doing, or if he did know it, that he did not know what he was doing was wrong. Insanity is an affirmative defense which must be proved by a preponderance of the evidence.â
Directly from the NJ Courts Model Jury Charges (basically where judges get the words they read to tell the jury what to consider and how to evaluated the case):
"If you find that the State has failed to prove beyond a reasonable doubt any essential element of the offense, or the defendantâs participation in the offense, you must find the defendant not guilty and you need not consider the evidence as to the defendantâs insanity.
If you find that the State has proved beyond a reasonable doubt each essential element of the offense, and the defendantâs participation in the offense, you must then consider the evidence as to the defendantâs insanity."
A not guilty verdict is âthe person did not do the act.â A NGRI verdict is âthe person did the act, but is not legally responsible because of their mental state.â The jury only moves on to considering insanity if the jury thinks the individual committed the act.
The first question on the verdict sheet for the attempted murder of LK charge was probably something like âdo you believe that MB attempted to murder LK.â If the jury checks no, that is a not guilty verdict and they stop. If the jury checks yes, they are likely instructed to continue to a second question that said something like âif yes, do you believe that MB was laboring under such a defect of reason from disease of the mind as not to know the nature and quality of the act, or if MB did know it, that he did not know that what he was doing was wrong.â A check no there is a guilty verdict. A check yes is NGRI.
So whether the jury found MB to have committed the act can be assumed from the NGRI verdict according to the model jury instructions and statute definition of the defense (so no need to take out any disagreement on me!) But, what is more interesting is how that affects the civil case. There is probably a check box on a verdict sheet proving whether the jury found him to have committed the acts, but those are sealed and handed to a court security officer once the judge reads them. Jury proceedings are closely guarded and generally not subject to subpoena. Again, if the civil court decides not to carry over any of the findings it wonât matter anyway and LK has to prove everything. If the civil court decides some of the issues were already decided in the criminal case and those decisions are binding (like whether MB shot LK), the court has to find a way to determine whether a final decision was made and apply it in the case. Not sure how that is going to happen either.
A NGRI verdict is so rare to begin with (and shows the strength of MBâs criminal case) that it doesnât surprise me this exact circumstance is even rarer. My guess is we wonât get a lot of answers on this specific issue until discovery concludes and it moves onto to motions for summary judgement - probably early next year given the glacial pace of LK and co.
9 Likes
As much as I love a good debate, especially when I Know I am right, until everything is black and white, with absolutely NOOOOOOOOOO shades of gray, some folks are not going to get it or give up twisting things that they really do not have knowledge about that several licensed attorneys have tried to explain time and time and time and time and time and time and time and time and time and time and time AGAIN.
I have this vision of some of you gathering up bandaging material, wrapping your head wounds from wacking your head against the closes wall. The bricks are chipping and the chinking is falling out, but I give you all so much credit and have so much respect for your gallant efforts to educate.
If we are every close together in some odd place, drinks on me.
16 Likes
