[The defendant] complained on Tuesday, the second day of trial, that he was not receiving his anti-psychotic medication from prison personnel. Sandles [told the court] that he had not received his medication, which he normally took twice a day, since that past Thursday. He said that he was starting to experience "emotional overload." The United States Marshal informed the court that he had contacted the county jail, and the court stated, "We'll trust that results in you receiving medication."
-- Monday's Sixth Circuit opinion in U.S. v. Sandles, 02-2466/2492
I knew something was still bothering me about this after i posted it Monday night. Again, defendant get a new trial on other grounds, not mental illness. But something nagged me in my sleep.
It's this: go back to Stein's interview last week with M. Treloar about the U.S. nursing shortage.
Why don't folks in jail get their meds? The excuse that's given is often, "Not enough nurses."
What are the questions raised just in those 60-odd words above?
Surprisingly many:
1) What are the meds? The 6th circ. doesn't say. Since they decided the appeal on other grounds, maybe it's okay that the appellate judges don't seem to know or care.
2) What does at least 94 hours without the meds do to somebody?
3) Exactly where is defendant in custody? The excerpt from the opinion says "prison personnel" and "county jail." He's on trial in District court for bank robbery, so why isn't he in Federal custody? Why is the Marshal's Service talking to another agency?
4) Why doesn't the court issue an order? The judge here comes across almost snarky -- or is it just me, having seen my fair share of sarcasm from the bench -- telling defendant, "We'll trust [the USMS phoning it in to the jail] results in you receiving medication"? Why merely "trust," judge, when you have the authority to make jailers take care of business?
The defendant represented himself with court-appointed counsel as standby. On his appeal, which won him a new trial, he was again pro se. For the believers of the "prisons-as-country-clubs" myth, that alone may stand as proof that there's no mentall illness. Anyone who's ever spent serious time behind bars (as inmate, staff, lawyer, or legal worker) knows how many smart people there are struggling to communicate lucidly, to litigate their cases, to challenge their conditions.
A paragraph like the one above, raising so many questions, at least gives one answer: Even if you convince a court to grant you some relief, the baseline judicial attitude is, "Good luck, schmuck."
Tags: Angels, Archangel Gabriel, bank robbery, mental health, mental illness, auditory hallucinations, law, policy, skepticism, nursing shortage, correctional health care.
June 24, 1374, Aachen: An outbreak of dancing mania grips the town.
Recent Comments