I am curious regarding having someone institutionalized for mental illness.
As I understand it, to have someone committed, they have to agree to it or it be a court order.
How long can one stay committed? Is it up to the individual as to when they are released?
It seems that sociopaths or psychopaths would not respond well to therapy, so what is the course of action for these individuals? Is incarceration usually the end result since they would not have to remain institutionalized if their release was up to them?
The dog did attack someone the day before, and then went after a police officer at that same time, so there is that!
She definitely had/has video cameras at the house, which supposedly āhad technical difficultiesāĀ at the time of the shooting and did not record.
She also walked around with her phone videoing EVERYONE and EVERYTHING!
There can be a āBaker Holdā which is up to 72 hours.
There is no course of action re: sociopaths or psychopaths who havenāt broken laws or demonstrated that they are intent upon harming others that require institutionalization in some manner or another (jail, prison or other).
Minors can and have become wards of the state when they have demonstrated a callous disinterest or disregard for human life. Happened to one of the neighborās granddaughterās. She tried to kill her younger siblings and other family members more than once. I donāt know if she can be released after she has turned 18. Poor kid had a terrible start in life - but that doesnāt override that she was dangerous. I truly hope she can eventually be in a group home, get a job, etc.
I cannot speak specifically to NJ law, because my only brief experience with this was in Maryland. But I did work for a public defender who dealt solely with mental health cases, mostly representing folks who were involuntarily committed, but sometimes representing people who were not mentally able to stand trial or had their mental health status as a factor in their sentencing.
For involuntary commitment, the basic scenario is that the individual must meet several criteria, most important of which is that they are immediate threat to their own safety or the safety of others. In most cases, a concerned/close party is required to report to police or medical professionals to pick the person up and deliver to a mental health hospital or security ward for a 72 hour hold.
During that time the individual is evaluated by doctors, perhaps put on medication (in most cases, the person had a prescription that they had stopped taking), in extreme cases, restrained, etc.
After that hold, there is a hearing where family members, doctors, and a lawyer for the individual meet with an administrative law judge to determine whether the involuntary hold is justified and if the person needs to actually be committed. They review the case file, when possible discuss the diagnosis, etc. I think the time frame for involuntary commitment varies by state, and canāt remember what the term was in Maryland, but itās not an indefinite stay. However if the patient is committed against their will, they must stay the whole length of the commitment, at which time thereās another hearing. Some of our clients had been hospitalized involuntarily for years (in some cases, because they were simply not competent to agree to treatment or enter a voluntary program).
Some patients who came in on a 72 hour hold would agree to enter voluntary commitment/treatment, so they could have more control over it and if they made good progress they could potentially leave much earlier (the flip side is voluntary patients wouldnāt get hearings every so-many-weeks to determine if they had to stay).
There are a lot of people out there with major mental health issues who do not qualify for involuntary commitment. They have to pretty much be suicidal, homicidal, violent, or so incompetent that they canāt function safely.
She actually said that her dog attacked MH during the shooting incident. I canāt remember if it was on her FB, or somebody elseās, or on Twitter, or on the COTH FB page. But I read it recently.
They were living in the barn, not the house, so the convos that she says occurred behind her back would have been in the barn. And she certainly wouldnāt have gotten close enough to record them with her cell phone saying those things.
When did she have time to ride, or even pay attention to the horses, if she was running around with her cell phone in her hand all of the time?
Does paranoia accompany narcissism or psycopathy? Iām asking any professionals on here because I really donāt know. Iāve learned a lot about narcissism from following this saga.
In my own experience, a narcissist sees those who donāt unabashedly praise them or agree completely as enemies. Itās them against the world, everyone else is scheming to ruin them. The narcissist isnāt responsible for anything bad that befalls them, itās all because of everyone else. No one can be trusted.
The dog did attack MB, not MH.
She listened and probably recorded private conversations that went on in MBās section of the house before they moved into the barn as well as recording in the barn.
She is sneaky and was able to hide and listen in on conversations.
She did not ride most of the time despite what she says.
Wowā¦what doesnāt she get. Her show career tanking, which it will, is not a threat but a reasonable outcome of her own actions. Whatever the facts, she has created uncertainty that will not play in her favor irrespective of āunlimited resources.āĀ
First, what trainer in a reasonable state of mind is going to touch her. Supposing, she does showā¦imagine the behind scene chatter that she wonāt be able to control ever time she enters the ring. Thereās the āgirlāĀ that ā¦<fill in the blank.>. It wonāt be sympathetic or even kind, given her online behavior. No guarantees that it will be about āovercoming adversityāĀā¦the ācomebackāĀ so to speak. People will focus on the questionable.
Wherever she goes, whatever she does, that long dark shadow will follow her. No one will want to be drawn into her dark universe and her brand of end gaming.
Just think the joy that this will bring DH. Whenever and wherever LK rides, that special camera will find her at her worst, and she and the DH fans will experience photoshopping designed to show the very worst, day after day. But then again, it is attention.
Iām sorry that I was unclear. What I meant was his lawyer, in MBās defense, said something like, ā MB is an upstanding member of the community and no danger to the community.āĀ
I would think if it were an accident, or similar, he would have said something like, āYour Honor, as you can see from the evidence gathered so far, this was unintentional and accidental.āĀ
So I was thinking if his lawyer didnāt go there, then it probably wasnāt accidental, otherwise they would be fighting to get him released before his trial.
She states in a comment on this Facebook post that she was shot twice in the chest, and grazed by a bullet in the left torso, but no one seems to know this for sure, but no one seems to be able to say this for sure, including the surgeons. Really? [ATTACH=JSON]{āaltā:āClick image for larger version Name: 95FE5896-9B6D-45B0-983C-4939E4B0140F.jpeg Views: 1 Size: 11.0 KB ID: 10483718ā,ādata-alignā:ānoneā,ādata-attachmentidā:ā10483718ā,ādata-sizeā:āfullā}[/ATTACH]
I donāt think that people are pretending that this is a new theory? Some stated this from the beginning, some now feel this way as their opinions on the matter have been shaped by information collected along the wayā¦ But itās not new. It was a speculation from the start, but not by everyone. Many of us do not believe that is the case. But people can express their theories on this board, even if they differ, thatās what makes discussion interestingā¦ Or a train wreck. Fine balance :winkgrin:
Most trainers want to have owners with horses that need to be in training not own horses. Training fees are regular if you have good paying owners. A sale is one time money plus it is income that is not as good from a tax standpoint,. ā¦ her story would have made more sense if she stuck to the āI was going to move to a different trainer and take 3 or 5 or whatever it was horses out of his training programā line
Agreed. Some posts are almost as bizarre as the stuff LK is spewingā¦ and when some are obviously closer to all this than they pretend to be, the feigned āinnocenceā is eye-roll inducing.
Ok I am officially calling this in as my bet on what happened, after all the new info.
I think that he did go to talk to her, with a gun. But I donāt think it was with intention to kill. I think that after CPS, and the lack of anything with LE or them even seeming like they were going to try to do anything about it, he was thinking that the only way he might be able to get her to leave was to truly seem dangerous. Whatās the best way to really scare someone into thinking you mean business? Have a gun. Or at least, if you are majorly distressed, upset, not thinking clearly, that might appear to be your only option.
I think that he took a gun to the house with him to try to scare her into leaving. At that point, who knows. Apparently there was a dog that was attacking people (where did THIS info come from, that is the first I had heard) so maybe that played into it. But I think that MBās plan to try to scare her into leaving didnāt work, she probably didnāt actually believe he would shoot her and was being belligerent. And either the gun went off on accident, or he was driven temporarily insane, blacked out with rage, and shot at her (which would explain the shots being a bit all over the place, and his āI had a good lifeā slightly insane babbling afterwards). But Iām calling that he didnāt go with the intention to actually use the gun.
Could be TOTALLY wrong, but that is the bet Iām placing now. :yes: Not a new theory. Just my guess.
There is quite a bit of info that will not be told until the trial, but yes her dog did attack someone the day before, and went after a cop at that same time, and yes the dog did attack MB when he was down there.
