Psychotic killer sues hospital which released him

[arcticpenguin]

http://www.theaustralian.news.com.au/common/story_page/0,5744,7008527%255E2702,00.html

MAN acquitted of mur der because he was psychotic has won a $300,000 payout after suing a hospital for negligently releasing him into the community.

In an unprecedented judgment, NSW Supreme Court judge Michael Adams yesterday awarded Kevin Presland the money for distress and economic loss suffered on remand.

Justice Adams said the hospital and the doctor who discharged Mr Presland "materially contributed" to the victim's death.

He not only sued, he won.

This is a bizarre situation. I'm not sure what to make of it.

[CJW]

Qu'est-ce que c'est?

[Upchurch]

Originally posted by arcticpenguin
He not only sued, he won.

This is a bizarre situation. I'm not sure what to make of it. You know, whenever I hear about weird lawsuits like this one, I always assume there is a lot more going on than what is reported in these little news blurbs in the hopes that in knowing all the details, it would make a lot more sense.

[Dancing David]

This is probably an area where Australian law is very diffrent than USA law, our laws vary from state to state as well.

In Illinois you have to have very clear and present danger before you can have someone committed. There is then a regular review of the continuing threat for someone to stay in the hospital. The big gap here is that you can be admitted on avoluntary basis and then sign a five day walkout request.

I doubt that any one could win a suit like that in Illinois because there would be proof that someone was assesed as not being a threat before they would be released.(If there was an involuntary commitment).

In the USA we also have the standard of care, being off your medication means that you might be found NGRI (not guilty reason insanity) but that is very unlikely. To claim psychosis as a defense would mean that you would have to proof that you didn't know going off your medicine would cause you to become insane.

[Mr Manifesto]

Originally posted by Upchurch
You know, whenever I hear about weird lawsuits like this one, I always assume there is a lot more going on than what is reported in these little news blurbs in the hopes that in knowing all the details, it would make a lot more sense.

In a law which has since been corrected by NSW government, it was possible for the mentally ill who were convicted of a crime to sue the hospital for lack of 'duty of care'.

"Duty of care" is one of those pain-in-the-neck laws that makes sense when it's used properly, but inevitably gets exploited by the greedy. We had a case recently of a woman who lost her arm in a drink-driving accident who tried to sue the pub that served her for lack of duty of care. Fortunately, that one got hoiked out of court, leaving the woman with the cost of the trial.

I believe the law has been amended to prevent this from happening in future. It is also under appeal... although techinically he has won, he has to win the appeal before the $$ come through.

(Unfortunately it's the rare case like this that gives mouthy ratbag Robyn "It's not enough! The sentence should have been longer!" Cotterell-Jones of VOCAL yet another chance to rant about how unfair the system is. :rolleyes: )

Presland unlikely to get $300,000: Debus (http://www.abc.net.au/news/australia/nsw/metnsw-20aug2003-13.htm)

(and let me just make it crystal-clear: I HATE VOCAL! PARASITES!)

The 'Chopper' laws in the link refer to a criminal, Mark "Chopper" Read, who wrote a bunch of books on his exploits and technically 'profited from his crimes'. Aye-yay-yay.

[The Don]

At least a judgement like that will prevent "the system" from washing its hands of the people placed in its care because of a lack of resources.

Here in the UK, the barbarism of keeping people in asylums was recognised and replaced with "care in the community". This system was supposed to support people with mental illness as they tried to re-establish a more productive life. What (almost) invariably happened is that sufficient back-up and resource was not in place and the patients slipped into homelessness and despair.

All this was done with the best intentions, but merely became a cost saving exercise. If the true costs are factored in however, little saving was made.

[Mr Manifesto]

Much the same situation in Aus. You wouldn't believe the number of people I see who should be in care.