Ean Posted February 5, 2008 Share Posted February 5, 2008 Eh? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Cret Posted February 5, 2008 Share Posted February 5, 2008 I'll have a gram of what that guy has just had! On second thoughts.... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
WTF Posted February 5, 2008 Share Posted February 5, 2008 i think that previous rant was referring to his family name being a bought title a few years back. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
cheeky boy Posted February 5, 2008 Share Posted February 5, 2008 To try to clarify the rant, there are a number of licenced firearms at his parents house which are kept locked up and aren't really relevant to this thread The son involved in the road rage attack was previously a bit of a high flyer but suffered brain damage as a result of a very serious car accident Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
gazza Posted February 5, 2008 Author Share Posted February 5, 2008 at least he should be made by the courts to get help, What kind of help? Don't you think that after having damaged his brain that as much help will have been as available as possible. Sudden bursts of anger are often frequent in people who have suffered brain damage and there is no help in the world that will help that and yours is a pretty insensitive comment to make. I'm sure he was (more than likely still is) mortified about it, I doubt he just brushed it off nonchalantly as you seem to believe, he must be struggling to understand why this happened and where that anger came from. As Cret has already stated it is out of character for him previously. now while the way i put the help thing was maybe a bit insensitive, but i ment it in the best posable way for him, what help, well im not a doctor, so i woulden know what sort of help, maybe hes had all the help he can get maybe he hasent, i dont know, i never implied he just brushed it off, and im sure hes struggling to understand why this happened, i cant see it being easy for him, Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Thinkinghard... Posted February 10, 2008 Share Posted February 10, 2008 I am not in the least surprised at this. Whether or not he was right we can only blame our own legal system for this one. Several years ago when I had only fairly recently got together with my husband, his brother for no reason at all knocked on a door of a hotel in Douglas and when the door was answered he attacked the person who opened the door. No reason for this at all. Anyway the police arrested him and it goes to court, gets adjourned for social reports and comes back to court. For some reason he asked for only me to go to court with him. I duly did my bit and attended including sitting in with duty solicitor who read out the social report to us. That is the point where I realised why he only wanted me there and no-one else in his family. He had totally blamed his behaviour on a fictitious terrible childhood, family letting him down to the point where he was suicidal etc etc. To say I was shocked was an understatement. Not because it had happened and I didn't know about it but because it was all untrue. Guess what he got away with it! They believed everything he had said. Isn't it time that the people who write these social reports actually start looking things up instead of just believing the defendent? Of course I am not saying this is the case for everybody but people need to take responsibility for their own actions and stop blaming other people/situations for them. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Skeddan Posted February 11, 2008 Share Posted February 11, 2008 people need to take responsibility for their own actions and stop blaming other people/situations for them. Occasionally people are not responsible for their own actions. Mild traumatic brain injury after a serious road accident is not that uncommon. This kind of injury can effect frontal lobes and executive function which is involved in impulse control and inhibiting behaviours such as lashing out like this. There are proper and valid assessment procedures and tests and a court would probably require a full assessment by a neuropsychiatrist with appropriate specialisation. The defence is automatism - and it is the same as if someone was sleepwalking for example. Someone I know was in a crash refused an alcohol test and then seriously assaulted 3 policemen, but it was shown by clinical testing he was not responsible for his actions due to a head injury in the accident. In fact he couldn't even remember anything between the moment of the accident and waking up in a police cell. There are therapies to assist with rehabilitation, and he may be doing very well and not pose a high risk of being a threat, but tipped over the edge on this occassion - just as people without MTBI do on occassions. It is unusual for someone to pose a great long-term threat after MTBI, and if so he would be unlikely he could drive etc. If anything he might have gone from placid and mild-mannered to being no more of a loose canon than probably 5% of the population who are responsible for their actions but have poor impulse control. Over time this will hopefully improve further. I'm sure the court don't believe he is a threat after receiving a proper report. I'm sure some people have gripes about court decisions, but I don't think something like this should be exploited as a hook for complaining about the legal system on the basis of being another example of a bad decision. etc. What is good is that people are more aware of brain injury, and hopefully not only the courts deal with this sensibly as they seem to have done, but the police and ambulance services are also trained appropriately. (Unfortunately that is not always the case, and someone with a brain injury acting eratically and aggressively can die in a police cell instead of being taken to hospital). Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
manxchatterbollox Posted February 11, 2008 Share Posted February 11, 2008 Occasionally people are not responsible for their own actions. Actually Skeddan maybe with your expertise you could make yourself useful. Did you miss the: i think that previous rant was referring to his family name being a bought title a few years back. Maybe you could enlighten us? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Thinkinghard... Posted February 11, 2008 Share Posted February 11, 2008 For those of you who don't know his parents bought their title of Lord and Lady and the whole family have "lorded" it over the rest of us mere mortals ever since! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Skeddan Posted February 12, 2008 Share Posted February 12, 2008 Occasionally people are not responsible for their own actions. Actually Skeddan maybe with your expertise you could make yourself useful. Did you miss the: i think that previous rant was referring to his family name being a bought title a few years back. Maybe you could enlighten us? Not really sure what you're getting at here. But I don't think I can help; cognitive neuroscience and psychiatry are very different - while I've studied the former, I don't claim to have any expertise as such - except perhaps in the very narrow field of my research, and if anything buying fake titles would be a psychiatric matter which I know even less about. I have no idea if buying fake titles is a category of psychiatric disorder in DSM - maybe it's a new subtype of 'narcissistic personality disorder'?? I have no problem with having a snigger at someone taking on silly fake titles , but that shouldn't get in the way of taking seriously the problems and issues of brain injury . Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Skeddan Posted February 12, 2008 Share Posted February 12, 2008 For those of you who don't know his parents bought their title of Lord and Lady and the whole family have "lorded" it over the rest of us mere mortals ever since! I didn't know. Is that Lord and Lady as pronounced 'Lewd and Lewdy'? (I'd watch out for what might be coming if Lewd thingy-whatsisface wants you to kneel down in front of him! ) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mona Posted February 13, 2008 Share Posted February 13, 2008 Have you thought that if a Deemster thought the medical evidence was compelling ... then possibly it was. The days of believing a Deemster as a knowledgeable wise man are just about gone. This case wasn't heard by a 'deemster' anyway. So, back on thread. If the guy is going to say "Hey my head is screwed up due to a road accident and that is why I did it" then surely if that reasoning is going to be held up and believed it should be carried through and the guy's licence removed from him. I don't want to be driving along with the possibility of a person driving behind me who has declared himself to be unstable. Violoently unstable at that. I don't go strnking people over such relatively trivial matters in life and neither do 99.99% of other people. This person should use a bus, walk, push-bike, taxi, get a lift. But plaese, as a self confessed person liable to violence and road-rage....don't ever drive again until you have been certified sorted. It is as if a driving licence is a God given right, like air and water. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
oldmanxfella Posted February 13, 2008 Share Posted February 13, 2008 This person should use a bus There are more nutters on public transport than anything. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mrs Merton Posted February 19, 2008 Share Posted February 19, 2008 So do we know if this guy still has a driving license? Friends of ours were having dinner in a Douglas restaurant last week & this guy was in there & by all accounts had another outburst. His family looked a little embarrassed. Perhaps he does need some help. Poor guy Or will the courts just wait for a more serious incident? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
keyboarder Posted February 19, 2008 Share Posted February 19, 2008 For some reason he asked for only me to go to court with him. I duly did my bit and attended including sitting in with duty solicitor who read out the social report to us. That is the point where I realised why he only wanted me there and no-one else in his family. He had totally blamed his behaviour on a fictitious terrible childhood, family letting him down to the point where he was suicidal etc etc. To say I was shocked was an understatement. Not because it had happened and I didn't know about it but because it was all untrue. Guess what he got away with it! They believed everything he had said. Isn't it time that the people who write these social reports actually start looking things up instead of just believing the defendent? Of course I am not saying this is the case for everybody but people need to take responsibility for their own actions and stop blaming other people/situations for them. All very well pointing the finger at the author of the social report but you just might question your own role in the lack of justice in this matter. There are more nutters on public transport than anything. And that's just the drivers...... ; (( Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.