Please Don’t Put Us on the Cannibal’s Menu
James Yang clubbed his mother to death in Troy MI in 2000, then sawed off her face and ate her eyes. He was judged not guilty by reason of insanity and put in a state mental hospital. Six years later, state psychiatrists said his mental illness is in remission and he should be released.
His attorney, Scott Neumann, said he’s not a danger and shouldn’t be penalized forever. Eric Hufnagel, of the National Schizophrenia Foundation, said it's not fair to assume that it’ll happen again, that some people are violent just once and never again.
Let’s drop the poppycock trying to hide spectacular stupidity. “Mental illness” is usually rather mundane. In this case it means stark, raving lunacy at its most extreme.
“Illness is in remission” means an illness has subsided for awhile – not permanently, nor does it imply a “cure.” In this case it may well mean that after six years under lock and key, Mr. Yang is just “between meals.”
This is not about “penalizing” anyone, Mr. Neumann. This is about protecting society - us - from a nightmarish cannibal.
Oh, please, Mr. Hufnagel. An act of violence can be as minor as a once-in-a-lifetime slap in the face. But in this case it means bludgeoning, mutilating, and cannibalizing. And you said, "some people are violent just once and never again." Can you predict which people? NO. Yet you're willing to gamble with our safety.
Beyond the con-man euphemisms masquerading as logic, a thunderous fact remains: A Man Ate His Mother’s Eyes!
Mr. Neumann, if he is not a danger, then who is? And Mr. Hufnagel, you don't think it's "fair"? Fair to whom? It’s not fair to endanger us!
Maybe they think the cannibal merely has an eating disorder. Or maybe they think he simply misunderstood his mother when she asked him if he wanted dinner.
Let’s remind them of the facts: Yang pulverized his mother’s skull, sawed off her face, and dined on her eyeballs. That's not your everyday monster - that's as extreme as a horror film.
Egregiously violent offenders are simply broken and cannot be fixed – they’ll be dangerous from the cradle to the grave. See Predatory Mind.
Notice that neither Neumann, Hufnagel, nor any of the
fuzzy-headed shrinks volunteered to be guinea pigs by inviting
their safe little monster to move into their homes and live cheek-to-jowl with them and their families. Oh, no, they release monsters into the general public to gamble with our lives.
And they never can explain exactly why these dangerous creatures need to roam freely among us. For us, it’s all risk with NO benefit. They should remain in a cage as long as their victims remain dead.
The shrinks say, “If they take their daily medication, they’ll probably be no threat to others.” Sorry, Doc, ”if” and “probably” don’t cut it. Many barely functional mental patients often don’t take their meds on their own after they're released. That’s very possibly a catastrophe for any innocent soul who happens to be nearby. How dare the officials gamble with public safety? It's far better to err on the side of caution and keep proven monsters locked up for life. Whatever happened to common sense?
Past behavior (in the real world) is the best predictor of future behavior. Behaving properly in an institution is never predictive of future behavior in the real world – especially when it comes to a monster. But legislators, judges, shrinks, lawyers, and do-gooders once again unleash a de facto homicidal maniac on an unwilling group of guinea pigs: us.
This case is scarily typical of many thousands more that, so to speak, free lions and tigers from the zoo to roam your neighborhood so the kindly zookeepers can feel all warm and fuzzy. Shame on them all.
Crime-Safety-Security > Newsletter Archive > newsletter-12-Feb-08