In 1931, in the Scottsboro case, nine Black boys were accused of raping two Southern women in the state of Alabama. The boys were arrested and the National Guard was called out to protect the defendants while they were being held in jail on rape charges. An article written by The New York Times stated that the guardsmen had prevented a mass lynching. The local paper, Scottsboro Progressive Age, and citizens, considered the evidence conclusive with regard to their quilt.

Judge Hawkins, the local judge, assigned seven members of the Scottsboro Bar to represent the Black boys, and only one accepted the position. Judge Hawking was a member of the local community, and it was believed that his objective was to prevent a lynching, and not necessarily to sort out the truth.

The defendant’s attorney, Stephen Roddy, who was not a criminal law attorney, opened the defense case with a petition for a change of venue, based on the inflammatory news stories in the Jackson County Sentinel, and the Scottsboro Progressive Age publication, that Sheriff M. L. Wann had asked for the National Guardsmen.

The State responded by recognizing there was some evidence that the stories in the local papers affected the public opinion. However, the State chose not to grant a change of venue, nor was a mistrial granted based on the circus-like atmosphere in the courtroom during the trial. The eight Scottsboro boys were found guilty, and sentence to be handed down.

At the time of the trial the International Labor Defense of New York City demanded a change of venue, and declared that Judge Hawkins (who presided at the trial) would be held responsible for the boys’ fate. The Communist party, it was believed, used this case to gain the support of the Blacks for their own cause.

The National Association for the Advancement of Colored People (NAACP), who had initially been interested in this case because it was receiving national attention, withdrew their support by the time of the appeal. This allowed the International Labor Defense (ILD) to use the case for its own cause. Walter White (a spokesman for Blacks in the United States for almost a quarter of a century), of the NAACP, and Clarence Darrow (a lawyer and leading member of the American Civil Liberties Union), were credited with the success the case received at the appeal’s stage.

On appeal to the Alabama Supreme Court, the defense argued 1) the inadequacy of the defense counsel, 2) the fact that the boys’ were illiterate and 3) they never consulted with an attorney. Judge Hawkins settled the issues of the defense attorney, but ignored the fact that the boys’ had received inadequate counsel, and that Blacks were systematically excluded from Alabama’s juries.

When discussing the issue of mob influence at the trial, Judge Hawkins cited the Leo Frank case (an American man who became the only known Jew in history to be lynched on American soil), and said that Justice Holmes (American jurist who served on the Supreme Court of the United States from 1902 to 1932), might have had a different decision of he had lived a little closer to the South.

The Alabama Supreme Court found that they would uphold the decision of the trial court, except for one of the defendants, Eugene Wilson, because he was a juvenile at the time of trial.

Despite their outspoken disdain for the legal process, the ILD officials retained Walter Pollak, one of the nation’s most eminent constitutional attorneys. After a preliminary hearing on May 27, 1923, the Supreme Court agreed to hear the case. The arguments delivered were substantially the same as before the Alabama court with one exception: Attorney Pollak stressed the jury question, contending that there had not been any Blacks on the Jackson County juries since the reconstruction.

The reconstruction involved policies implemented between 1863 and 1877 when the nation focused on winning the Civil War, abolishing slavery, defeating the Confederacy, and reconstructing the nation and the Constitution. The Supreme Court had restricted itself to one question, and Justice Sutherland (appointed to the United States Supreme Court) went on to say, that the issue was whether the defendants were in substance, denied the right of counsel, and if so, whether such denial infringes the due process clause of the Fourteenth Amendment. However, there was a crucial question: What constitutional peg would support this possible decision?

The solution was the due process clause of the Fourteenth amendment. In Hurtado v. California, the Supreme Court had denied that the defendant’s right to due process in the state court included the first eight Amendments to the Constitution. In the same decision, however, the court described due process in extremely vague terms.

It was that the law of the land in each State, which derives its authority for the inherent and reserved powers of the State, exerted within the limits of those fundamental principles of liberty and justice, which lie at the base of all our civil political institutions. Due process required no particular form. The people could institute new methods of procedures so long as these were in the furtherance of the public good.

Justice Sutherland declared that the “right to have counsel heard had been so accepted by the States that it had become an integral part of due process”. He concluded that the “right to counsel when necessary is the logical consequence from the constitutional right to be heard by counsel.” The cases were reversed and remanded to the lower court.

What the court was saying under due process, is that one of those aspects of afforded liberty as part of Anglo-American criminal justice, (from the prospective of 1932), is that individuals were entitled to the right of effective counsel on the state level in capital cases. Justice Sutherland also applied some of the Six Amendment rights to the States, because the court picks and chooses particular rights.

It does not suggest that every criminal case on the State level, or every felony, has the right to counsel. The Sixth Amendment to the United States Constitution is the part of the United States Bill of Rights which sets forth rights related to criminal prosecutions in federal courts. The Supreme Court has applied the protections of this amendment to the states through the Due Process Clause of the Fourteenth Amendment.

Another interesting point is that only once at the early part of the decision, does Justice Sutherland refer to the group as Negroes, and that is the only racial reference in the decision. The court was going out of its way to sort of slap the Southern court’s hand, but was not giving them a fully obvious scolding. On the racial question, regarding the jurors being selective exclusively from the White community, the court stated that it did not have to approach that question, because it was going to rest its decision on the due process right to counsel.

Historically speaking, the South had some of the best legal aid support in the nineteenth century. However by the nineteen-twenties and thirties, what you had was the practice of each state determining its own rules, and the South having weak legal aid organizations.

In the urban North and California, you had the beginning of modern Legal Aid offices. The practice that went on, of Judge Hawking appointing attorneys from the Bar, was not all that unusual, and the quality of criminal lawyers at that time was believed not that good. Also, what the court stated is that a defendant should have good counsel in capital cases.

When we look at these decisions directed toward the South, it is one thing for the court to say this, and another for it to implement the decision. Thus, hostility developed between the Southern judiciary, and the Supreme Court. It is not all that clear what affect it had on local Southern cases, since not all of the cases reach the Supreme Court, and the NAACP and IDF could not handle every case.

Finally, there had been an American Civil Liberties Union report that both victims were prostitutes and lived in the Black part of town. The fact that their clients were universal was never published by the Southern newspapers because it was inconsistent with the cultural Southern notions that dedicated that era.

This went along with the feeling in the South that Blacks were less passive and more incline to violent or aggressive. This was further enhanced by a sense of hostility by the Supreme Court and the Northerners, the idea that the communists were in the South to organize the Blacks and laborers, and the general hostility towards the union tradition.

By: Peter Sabbagh

In part two I explored the ethical relationship between the psychiatrist and the court system. Now I will revisit the hired gun side of the psychiatrist, defendant, and attorney relationship.

If a psychiatrist has been hired by the defense, should the psychiatrist say what the defense wants him to? Should the defense psychiatrist accept the role of a hired gun? For instance, a doctor (let us call the Doctor A), might say he has been hired by the defense, and knows the prosecution will find a psychiatrist (whom we’ll call Doctor B) who doesn’t believe the insanity defense is applicable in this case.

Doctor B will say the defense was totally responsible. Doctor A’s job is to be an advocate for the defense because he is a hired gun; therefore his job is to give the best case he can to say the defendant was not responsible at the time of the crime. Does that mean he has to lie or twist the facts? He is there as an advocate for the defendant, and if he has experience as a hired gun for defense cases, he knows why he has been hired and what is expected of him. Or, should he lean towards a higher form of truth, realizing he is there to serve justice? If he finds he believed the defendant was sane, and knew what he was doing at the time of the crime, should he then say that in court?

This is a conflicting decision to make, as it throws the questions of loyalty verses truth and justice against each other. When a psychiatrist goes into the courtroom, he swears to tell the truth, the whole truth, and nothing but the truth. The court system however, does not always allow the truth to come out. He is obligated to answer the questions that are posed to him. If someone does not ask him the right questions, it is out of order for him to volunteer information the court ought to know in order to make a reasonable and just decision. He could be found in contempt of court for presenting information no one has asked to comment on, but that happens to be the most important for the decision.

Given this situation, should the psychiatrist or the expert witness wash their hands of the case, knowing the truth may not be presented? Would it be ethical for the defense psychiatrist, after he has testified on his client’s behalf, to offer a statement to the court, which would help the prosecution’s case because he felt there were some important issues that should be brought out?

In this case, one can only file a “friend of the court” petition with the consent of the parties being defended. It would be doubtful that the defense would consent to having an “off the record” supplementary statement filed by the psychiatrist, saying in effect that while he testified for the defense, he personally believes the defendant is guilty. This would not normally be allowed in court. The courts are mechanisms for dispute resolution and follow their own rules. Thus, injustice is sometimes what comes out of the court, and both the prosecution and the defense would likely agree with this point.

The public may have a jaundiced view of the insanity defense. Sometimes political pressure helps create an atmosphere where the best and right decision cannot be made. On many occasions a defendant will decide not to accept an insanity defense or other psychiatric defense for fear he will have to spend more time in an institution than he would if he pled guilty to a crime.

Many people would agree that given the choice of pleading guilty or walking out of the courtroom on probation, or pleading innocent and running the risk of going to jail, it would be advisable to enter a guilty plea even though you are innocent. Experienced psychiatrists are aware of this when they evaluate patients who are under the belief that if they are innocent, they should plead innocent. Part of the psychiatrist’s job is to explain to the attorneys that the defendant may not be mentally ill – they just don’t understand the court system.

We regularly read, regarding ethical issues, that it is unethical for a lawyer to enter a guilty plea on behalf of his client who is incompetent. Likewise, it is unethical for a lawyer to enter a guilty plea for his client if he knows his client is not guilty. In reality, though, if somebody questions his client’s competence, he will be obligated to have his client spend 30 days in confinement, awaiting a determination of whether he is competent. If he is found incompetent, he will spend 90 days in a state hospital waiting to be released. If however, he enters a guilty plea to begin with, regardless of the fact that he is incompetent to enter a guilty plea, the client on many occasions will walk out the same day.

One could question why the general public complains about the insanity defense undermining public justice, when what often happens is the undermining of justice in the American legal system.

By: Peter Sabbagh

Willie Francis was convicted of murder in 1945 and sentenced to death. The following year, on May 3, 1946, he was strapped to the electric chair. The executioner threw the switch, but Francis was not killed. Instead, he got a jolt only strong enough to scare him half to death. The prison authorities thereupon unstrapped him and returned him to his cell.

His lawyers, in a case that went to the Supreme Court, argued that a second attempt to execute him would violate constitutional prohibitions against cruel and unusual punishment and against double jeopardy. But they lost (Louisiana ex rel. Francis v. Resweber, 1947), and Francis was executed by Louisiana on a second attempt.

The decision had been made by the Supreme Court in spite of the fact that in the lower court there had been no cross-examination, no defense, and no ballistics report, as all of the ballistic evidence had been lost. It is interesting and important to note that the Supreme Court rejected the argument based on the non-existent record of the trial court’s proceedings. How can one present an appeal when there is no record?

In response to the argument of cruel and unusual punishment, the Supreme Court found that it would accept the use of due process standards. (Due process is the principle that the government must respect all of the legal rights that are owed to a person according to the law of the land, instead of respecting merely some or most of those legal rights.) However, when applying the Eighth Amendment, which prohibits the federal government from imposing excessive bail, excessive fines, or cruel and unusual punishments, one can still find that there was no cruel and unjust punishment in the execution, because there was a mistake — what was characterized as an accident, rather than a purposeful act. In doing so the Court suggested that if it had been a purposeful act, then it might be deemed as cruel and unusual punishment.

As for the double jeopardy argument, it too was rejected by the United States Supreme Court. Double jeopardy is a procedural defense. In many countries, such as the United States, Canada, Mexico, and India, there is a constitutional right that prevents a defendant from being tried twice for the same crime on the same set of facts. In this case the issue was whether the second execution procedure was a second punishment. The Supreme Court ruled that it was the same punishment.

According to the law today, the double jeopardy clause states that if an individual is acquitted of murder in a federal jurisdiction, the individual cannot be tried again for that murder either in federal or state court. However, as United States law stood at that time, a state could again try an individual for murder, under state court jurisdiction, because at that point the Fifth Amendment’s double jeopardy clause didn’t apply to the states. (The Fifth Amendment of the United States Constitution, which is part of the Bill of Rights, protects against abuse of government authority in a legal procedure).

This case stands for the proposition that the accidental use of fatal force that does not by itself result in an execution in the initial instance is not cruel and unjust punishment.

It would be fair to say that Justice Felix Frankfurter (Associate Justice of the United States Supreme Court) exercised self-restraint in the Willie Francis case. Frankfurter was basically against capital punishment, but he ruled in favor of the execution in this case. Frankfurter believed that the Fourteenth Amendment, which made important statements about civil rights, immigration, and personal liberties, did not disturb the distribution of power between the states and the central government. Rather, the amendment restricted the unlimited freedom which the states had in making and enforcing their criminal laws. As Frankfurter contended, the amendment was not intended to apply the federal Bill of Rights, which prohibits the federal government from depriving any person of life, liberty, or property without due process of law, to the several states. Similarly, he felt that the Fourteenth Amendment did not withdraw the responsibility of criminal justice from the states and make it instead the business of the federal judiciary.

Justice Black (another Associate Justice of the United States Supreme Court) agreed, recognizing that the lower court’s interpretation of the Fourteenth Amendment’s due process clause had created two different standards of constitutional protection. For instance, there could be an action that would violate the double jeopardy or cruel and unusual punishment prohibitions when performed by the federal government, but which when performed by the state would not be a denial of due process. This made no sense to Justice Black. Why should there be a double standard?

Francis’s attorneys, Skelly Wright and Bertand DeBlanc, shared Black’s concerns in the development of the Francis appeal. The attorneys argued in their brief that a second attempt to carry out the death sentence would violate the Fifth Amendment prohibition. They argued against allowing any person to be twice put in jeopardy of life or limb for the same offense. They argued that through extension of the due process clause of the Fourteenth Amendment, the Fifth Amendment should be held binding in Louisiana. Similarly they argued that cruel and unjust punishment was proscribed by the Eighth Amendment.

Among the public, Justice Frankfurter was a controversial figure. Some admired him, while others disliked him and thought him a hypocrite for ruling in favor of the execution despite his opposition to the death penalty. In any case he was a potent figure in the Willie Francis case, and if one takes the ennobling view of him, one can perceive him balancing heart and mind, and weighing his personal conscience against his duty to the rule of law.   By: Peter Sabbagh

In Part 1 we explored the practical role of psychiatrists in criminal trials. Now we turn to the ethical side of the psychiatrist-defendant relationship.

There is an ethical side to the “hired gun” situation. What happens if the psychiatrist agrees to evaluate and testify for the defendant, but after evaluating the defendant the psychiatrist forms the opinion that at the time of the crime the patient knew what he or she were doing and was in control? In the doctor’s opinion, then, the defendant was guilty, and responsible for his actions. Can the defendant now say that he doesn’t want this information to be used in court?

In reality the defense attorney’s and the psychiatrist’s questioning generally goes something like this. The defendant will make the first move. The defense attorney will call a psychiatrist they know, who may be someone good or not so good. They may even be part of the pool (hired guns) I referred to earlier. This doctor will be asked to examine the client who is facing criminal charges. The less knowledgeable psychiatrist might decide right at that moment either to evaluate the defendant or not. The more knowledgeable one will first ask what the defense wants the defendant examined for, and what is the exact psychiatric legal issue they want to have explored.

The inexperienced attorney may not be prepared for that kind of question, and may ask the doctor what they mean. The doctor may say that the defense attorney is raising the question as to whether or not, at the time of the alleged event, the defendant was criminally responsible, or was acting under “extreme emotional disturbance.” Extreme emotional disturbance (“EED”) generally is interpreted to mean the emotional state of an individual who 1) has no mental disease or defect that affects accountability; 2) is exposed to an extremely unusual and overwhelming stress; and 3) has an extreme emotional reaction to it, as a result of which there is a loss of self control, and reason is overborne by intense feelings, such as passion, anger, distress, grief, excessive agitation, or other similar emotions.  In short, if a person has had time to cool down and then act on their intentions to harm someone, this would not be EED.

The doctor wants to know if the defense is trying to inquire as to whether or not, when the police read the defendant his or her Miranda Rights, the defendant was competent to understand those rights, or competent to make the confession that was given.  A Miranda Right is a warning given by police to criminal suspects in police custody, or in a custodial situation, before asking guilt-seeking questions relating to the commission of a crime. An incriminating statement by a suspect will not constitute admissible evidence unless the suspect was advised of his or her “Miranda rights” and made a knowing, intelligent, and voluntary waiver of those rights.

Miranda warnings developed out of the Ernesto Miranda case (1962), in which a rape suspect was arrested and taken to the police station. After two hours of questioning, he signed a written confession and was subsequently found guilty. Miranda appealed his conviction on the grounds that prior to confessing, he had not been informed of his Fifth Amendment right against self incrimination or his Sixth Amendment right to counsel.

Is the doctor concerned with whether the defendant is competent to stand trial at the moment? Is the doctor concerned with whether the defendant is competent to abide by the terms of bail and should be bailed out, or should remain in jail? Is the doctor concerned that at this time the defendant might be a danger to the community if released?

The Ehrlich case, for example, involved a mentally ill defendant in New York City. The defendant was found not responsible by reason of mental disease and defect after he killed his mother. He then cut off her head, placed it on her bed, and combed her hair so she would look neat when the police arrived. While he was in the Manhattan Psychiatric Center, members of his family complained that he was not being treated properly, and should be allowed to attend some education classes. The doctors allowed him to leave the locked ward, and he went to attend a class. As soon as he entered the class room and the attendants left, he walked out of the room and the hospital. While out, he threatened members of his family and others, and was out on the street for approximately nine days before he was rehospitalized.

The Ehrlich case and other like it are examples of the tremendous responsibility psychiatric medical professionals take on when they become involved in criminal psychiatric evaluations for the court system.

If there is a capital punishment issue (crimes that can result in a death penalty), the reason for the psychiatric examination may be to evaluate whether the defendant is competent to be executed. The common notion of the insanity defense is that there is a straightforward question of whether the defendant was responsible at the time of the crime. However, in fact there are many important issues at hand. The defendant could have been responsible at the time, and then became mentally ill because of the police arrest, and hence did not understand the Miranda warnings. The kernel of the issue is what was the mental state of the defendant at the time of the crime.

Let’s take a moment to explore the psychiatric evaluation process and the amount of time spent on each patient. In America we have a multi-layered system which may unfortunately translate into “you get what you pay for.” If you are being defended by a public defender (Legal Aid Society), they have limited funds. It is generally believed in the medical community that most doctors will not spend less than 45 minutes at the very minimum on an insanity defense evaluation (described as a psychiatric hour). This is because psychiatrists providing insanity defense evaluations need sufficient time to properly gather information; it also helps the doctor to maintain credibility in court.

Because there are wide discrepancies in how psychiatric evaluations are done, many experts believe the best solution is to look for whether or not there was any other evidence, independent of the defendant’s or police testimony. This additional evidence may help reveal what the defendant’s mental state was at the time of the alleged crime. Were there eyewitnesses? Had the person had other psychiatric help prior to the incident? It is important to mention that this type of evaluation is not confidential once a defendant chooses an insanity defense in a criminal case.

Once the event has occurred, the alleged criminal has an interest in presenting a picture that is consistent with his own interests, so mental data is important. For example, most people would ask the defendant how he or she was feeling at the time of the alleged crime. The defendant would probably give a long, drawn-out story about how he was feeling, consistent with whatever position he or she wanted to defend.

Consider this ethical dilemma. Suppose the defense psychiatrist discovers that a patient is malingering (a medical and psychological term that refers to fabricating or exaggerating the symptoms of mental or physical disorders). Should the doctor get off the case, remain as the advocate for the defendant, or go to the prosecution with information on the defendant that could work to the prosecution’s advantage?

Can a defense psychiatrist who has conducted an evaluation go over to the prosecution? The way it normally works is that the prosecution might know whether or not the psychiatrist has visited a defendant in jail. If three psychiatrists visited a defendant in jail, and the names of only two are advanced by the defense to support the claim of “not responsible by reason of mental disease or defect,” it is reasonable for the prosecutor to assume that the third psychiatrist found something that is not going to be of use to the defense; otherwise his or her name would be advanced too. The prosecutor then moves to subpoena the third psychiatrist, whose name has not been advanced by the defense. Thus he can be used as the prosecution’s witness. The psychiatrist now can agree to aid the prosecution, as it is fair game if the judge allows his testimony to be entered into court as evidence.

Now let’s take the above situation a little further. Suppose a psychiatrist is hired by the court to conduct an evaluation. There are issues of advocacy (the pursuit of influencing outcomes), when the court psychiatrist can also be the treating psychiatrist. For example, while the court psychiatrist is doing an evaluation, he or she may also be doing a scientific probe; information thus gained does not hold the kind of doctor-patient relationship of loyalty towards the patient. The psychiatrist visits the patient and explains that though he may sound like a psychiatrist and look like a psychiatrist, in this capacity he is not the patient’s doctor. What discussions go on between them will not be bound by the oath of confidentially. It will be reported to the court. At this stage a sort of distancing is suppose to take place. Often, however, it turns out that the court psychiatrist may be working as an evaluator, but is also treating the patient. This brings up the issue of whether the doctor should be treating the patient both as an evaluator and as a treating doctor, because of the issue of conflicting loyalties.

Another interesting issue concerns separate case records. This is when you have a corrections unit (a facility handling adult probation and parole matters and sometimes juvenile aftercare supervision cases from the Department of Corrections), where there is a treating psychiatrist(s), and an evaluating psychiatrist(s) on the unit. In some situations the same case record may be used. This means that as a patient, the defendant has given varied amounts of information to their treating psychiatrist that he or she would not want given to the courts. Some units try to solve this problem by having one case record presented by the evaluating psychiatrist, which goes to the courts. The evaluating psychiatrist and the court cannot see the second case record, prepared by the treating psychiatrist, which only goes towards the patient’s treatment, to make sure that there is no conflict (fact sharing between records).

Part 3 of this series will return to the hired gun issue: if the psychiatrist has been hired by the defense, should the psychiatrist say what the defense wants him to?

By: Peter Sabbagh

This article is not specifically intended for legal and psychiatric professionals only, although there is legal and psychiatric terminology used throughout the article.

What exactly is the insanity defense? First a person must be found to have actually committed a criminal act. If an individual did not commit a crime, then they would not be guilty of a crime. Next, a person must have a mental disease or defect; a psychological or behavioral pattern thought to cause distress or disability that is not expected as part of normal development or culture.

Finally, a mental disease has to be found at the time of the crime(s), not at the time of the trial. If a mental disease is found then they may have lacked the capacity to know or appreciate either the nature or consequences of their criminal conduct, or that it was wrong.

It has been a tradition in western law, or ethics, that an individual should not be held morally blameworthy over something they had no control over. For, if a piece of chalk were to break, one would not punish it or hold it morally blame worthy because it was simply following the laws of physics.

Further, there is a presumption in American law that an individual will not be punished unless they are responsible. In order for this to be determined in a case involving psychiatric testimony (a medical professional’s account of an event or state of affairs), interplay develops between the psychiatrist, lawyer, jury and criminal justice system. Sometimes these four elements play different roles.

On one hand, a psychiatrist may be working for the defense or the courts on the basis of evaluating a defendant. They may also be working for prosecution. In yet another situation a defendant may be both a patient and an individual who has been brought up on charges. At this point a multi-layered interaction involving some of the more difficult issues of law and psychiatry begin, as well as, the issue of double agency. This includes two types of conflicts, or even multiple conflicts within professional obligations.

The problem first arises when a psychiatrist must be hired to support a position in an insanity defense. The prosecution may avoid hiring a doctor who will not yield the results necessary to appose a defense. For example, presume that a defendant is looking for an insanity defense in a case where they have committed a crime. A defendant then has to hire a psychiatrist who will support the position that he is not responsible for a crime.

On the other hand, the prosecution’s psychiatrist tries to show that, in fact, this is not the case, and that the individual is responsible. What is interesting is that the defendant probably has never had contact with a psychiatrist up to this point. This is because they have left the entire process up to their attorney.

Now there is the issue of the “hired gun” (a person with special knowledge or expertise), used to support a position or argument in a legal case. A good defense attorney may have a pool of psychiatrists to choose from – a group of doctors that may find some way to discover a defendant not responsible for their actions. Similarly, prosecution will also have a pool of “hired guns” that they may turn to; a psychiatrist that will more often than not say that the individual was responsible for the crime.

From the defendant’s perspective the following issues may arise: a defendant confronts their doctor and says that they would like to pursue an insanity defense. They state that a doctor is obligated by the Hippocratic Oath (an oath traditionally taken by physicians pertaining to the ethical practice of medicine), to look out for a patient’s interests and to keep them from harm. Therefore, as the defendant’s agent, and doctor, the defendant wants their doctor to testify to keep them from going to jail for life, getting the electrical chair, or from five years in prison.

If a defendant happened to be in private psychotherapy and had committed a heinous crime and then requested the doctor to aid in their defense, a doctor may avoid talking the case. A doctor may give several reasons for declining involvement.

For example, they may lack the necessary experience; it is not the sort of thing they like to get involved in; there are very big stakes involved; or a doctor may also say that providing legal testimony is outside their area of competence. All of these reasons may be true, but may not be the main reason why a doctor has declined.

If the doctor is more sophisticated (experienced with providing legal testimony), they may answer that once the mental illness issue is raised, personal issues that the defendant told him in confidence will be open to questioning at trial. A doctor may also suggest that opposing-side legal council will request that a psychiatrist take the witness stand to testify about the defendant.

The prosecutions questioning may dig deep into the patient’s disturbing fantasies, about how many times they have mishandled their children, or even what he dreams about. All these issues could greatly embarrass the defendant.

The defendant’s psychotherapist could also advise the defendant to hire a doctor who does not know so much about him so that there will be less risk of weakening his case. He could also suggest that his real job is to help the patient, and that the stress of the trial could jeopardize the caring role he had with the patient.

Similarly he may note that he can defend the defendant or care for a patient – not both. Finally the defendant’s psychotherapist could state that his involvement in the legal process could destroy years of precious therapeutic counseling, all for a few minutes of in-court testimony.

In short, some psychiatrists or therapists will not want to become involved in providing legal testimony. The reasoning behind this decision may be that the doctor is afraid of appearing in front of the courtroom. By doing this they become exposed in an alien environment and to questions from people who have nothing to gain from respecting him.

He may also be ashamed of how little he actually knows of what could be important and how much that fact would be exposed on the witness stand. Thirdly, he may be concerned that he is not going to get paid appropriately, and lastly, that he is going to be inconvenienced regarding his schedule, as he also likes what he is used to.

Part two will explore the ethical side of the psychiatrist and defendant relationship.

Kerala’s natural beauty can only be found when one discovers the harmonious balance, which nature and man have found together through a voyage of its backwaters region. The  passageway of greens, reds, and browns and a myriad other colors, pan out to form 40 large and small canals, functioning as veins to a living organ. They support the daily life of its native inhabitants and their villages, by assuring distribution of food and trading efforts through the canal network, and allowing social communications to be maintained.

It is a wonder to the newcomer, that this small, south-west Indian state, boasting the highest literacy rate in the country can still retain its historical beauty. One need not journey through the Amazon to experience the beauty of the lush green palm forests, carpeted with layers of rice paddies, thick enough that one might imagine walking on top their leaf!

Throughout the small state’s history, traders from distant lands have influenced its culture: Phoenicians, Egyptians, Persians, Chinese, Arabs, and Jews have all taken part in the state’s development. Most visually notable, have been the Chinese whose intricately designed fishing nets support industry and local trade, and add to the over all charm of the backwaters. The traveler cannot help but appreciate these instruments that silhouette themselves against the dark green curtain of the palms.

We embark on our journey northwards, through the backwaters, pushing off from the small market town of Quillon, two hours north of Kerala’s capital Trivandrum. The ferry, old but confident, loud but steady, gradually increases in speed, creasing the waters at a smooth ten miles per hour; stopping endlessly, it seems, at many homes and villages, bring locals to and from their daily commitments. I am now in their word traveling through a neighborhood familiar to them. This is their answer to public transportation; their substitute for the car, bus, and train. The ferry departs twice daily, a slow but steady means of transport; it is the glue that bonds a family’s social commitments and trading efforts together. For myself and a handful of others, traveling on this ferry is to fulfill an intellectual curiosity.

Sitting on the right flank of the boat dangling my feet over the side in an attempt to escape the oppressive rays of the mid-morning sun, I watch dugouts (small, handmade wooden boats, sometimes with a roof made of woven palm leaf) with their towering patchwork white sails, quietly glide by past. Sails and wooden boats freely show their imperfections, true signs of hand-made labor. Some proudly flaunt a sculptured bow representing a local mythological figure, giving their owners credibility on the river. Their boats are their private couriers, helping to sustain the economic system of the waterways, transporting life-sustaining goods, such as dried coconut meat, coconut fiber and cashews. Passing through the small splits of land, no more than several meters wide, water surrounding all sides, one cannot help but admire the resourcefulness of the back water farmer, maintaining an assortment of animals, pigs, chickens, ducks and the vegetable garden.

Our four-to-five hour trip now begins to feel even longer, crawling at a snails pace towards my final stop, the village of Airangthenga. “Airangthenga, Airangthenga?” I shout several times to the captain, the scream of the engine making every utter of communication a strain. Pointing towards the shore, he nods …yes.  For all other travelers this tea stop would mark the half way point of the ferry’s journey up the canals, for myself, the beginning. My next objective was to find a vullum, a small, narrow boat that will take me the opposite side of the river, to the island of Arhikkal. Stepping off the vullum, the owner handing my pack to me, I quickly realize that I must organize a ride back, enabling me to rendezvous with the ferry en route north. Backpack over my left shoulder, I walk slowly into a village, with no apparent shape or structure to its overall layout, but with consistency in the way the homes are designed. The hut walls are constructed of woven palm leaf. Several homes have used the trunk of the coconut tree to fortify the walls. The huts, no taller than six feet inside, are divided into two chambers; an area to cook, eat and play, and another to sleep. Stopping to gain my sense of direction, I attempt to ask a local man, unshaven, darkened from the years of sun, and work on the fishing boats, “How far away is the ocean?” For this would be my home for the evening. He replies with no great hurry, and with no command of the English language, I then decide to try primitive sigh language, hoping this would enable me to communicate the idea of the ocean. “Melbin! Melbin!”  He replies, pointing his finger towards himself.

Melbin and I have found that we are becoming the center of attention in Arhikkal, its members smile and stare, wondering where Melbin and I are going, and what we are doing together. Walking without exchanging a word, accepting direction without hesitation, I am now in his world, and, my instincts allow me to continue. We stop at a small hut, with the sound of the ocean near. I am approached by a pretty woman, wrapped in a faded red sari. Slender, with a broad smile from cheek to cheek, also darkened from the sun, her first words are “Bella… Bella and Melbin.”

I soon realize that they are the couple that lives in this small palm leaf home, and I would be their guest. He directs me to enter. I wonder how much room there could be, his hut is not larger that 12 feet and not wider than six.  I bend my head down so not to collide with the top of their doorway, and enter. Once inside, I am shown to a very small room off the side of the hut. Noticing the window, I expected to see a view of the ocean; I move towards it and peek outside only to find an additional connecting space, this one for the family goat! Placing my backpack on the floor while looking for a place to change my clothing, as expected, I find no furniture except the ground I walk on.

Rejoining Melbin and Bella, I am handed a freshly opened coconut, one of the many gifts nature offers on the island. Gulping down the sweet water with great enthusiasm I am now introduced to the several young children who have been curiously watching us. One, two, three, and now a fourth; all are his daughters, Megil, Merin, Matilda, and Mercy. After a brief block in communication, Melbin discovers I cannot speak Malayalam, his native tongue but he understands my broken Hindi. We now explore the island together.

During our exploration of the island, we are met with great generosity, in the form of food, tea, and coconut water, offered to us by families owning small huts along the way. Arriving in less than an hour at the very tip of the island I discover why it is so special. It is here that the waters of the three great oceans merge in a frothy, swirling frenzied motion. Melbin demonstrates his fishing skills with a net he has borrowed from a fisherman at work near by. Collecting the net over his arm, twisting his waist and taking a stance, that of a discus athlete, he gracefully unwinds his body 360 degrees, allowing the net to propel itself into the ocean.

The hand-made white net, woven into thousands of half-inch squares captures a piece of the ocean. Watching him slowly pull it back to shore, we await anxiously to see his catch. To my eye the catch is small, but to the fisherman of the island a handful of small silver fish, no more than five to six inches in length, and two inches in diameter, provides an important staple food.

Now, for my benefit, Melbin and his friend attempt to cast their nets simultaneously into the ocean, in the hope that I can photograph this moment. Melbin, turns towards me in an attempt to see if I enjoyed their demonstration, suddenly he smiles and pointing to the slowly setting sun, beckons me to follow. It is time to return home.

Following his lead as usual, I have the opportunity to experience an even more enchanting sight. With the setting sun come the long shadows of the palm extending themselves across the white sands. These shadows not only give shade to the villagers, but also their animals; cows and goats.                           

Before arriving back at Melbin and Bella’s home, we stop along the way to meet with all their relatives, and to have freshly picked coconuts, drinking the water while the family watches. His parents’ home is much like his own, slightly larger using more tree trunks than palm leaves. The mother like Bella, is quiet, kind and shy and his father, like his grandfather, is a fisherman too.

It is now time for dinner. Displaying my canned food to Bella, I soon learn that she has had little or no experience with ready-made foods. Not knowing what to do with the cans I have handed her, she smiles politely, turning to Melbin. He looks curious and confused. I try to explain that these cans will need to be opened with tool. After repeated attempts with a knife and stone, we were able to open the cans, first the tuna and then the baked beans. We heat the fish and beans over the fire built with twigs, on the floor of their home. The floor is safe, it being built of stone. In keeping with their traditions, the family offers me their food, a fresh catch of spicy seasoned fried sardines. I hesitate, not wanting to consume the little food they have, in addition to my own. I eat alone, as they watch, anticipating a sign of satisfaction from me. I smile, thank the family, leave and camp on the beach; three minutes away from their home.

Moments before daybreak, I wake to see teams of fisherman drag the 40-foot long boats from their storage positions under the shaded areas of the palm covered beach to the water’s edge. Preparing for the morning catch, the boats now float horizontally to the beach, 50 to 75 yard to the shore. On every boat, fisherman, eight to nine of them, stand evenly spaced from one another each holding a portion of the net, allowing it to dangle over the side of the deck into the water. The boat’s long narrow design provides room for many men to work as a team. Its multi-colored sides make it easy to spot looking on from the shore. There are only a handful of these fishing boats, performing a task carried on from generation to generation, allowing these people to sustain their way of life.

Recent changes to the local fishing industry have been traced to the mobile phone use by fisherman. According to the Economist, since 1997, the mobile phone has revolutionized the fishing industry in Kerala, by providing up to date pricing information and inventory requirements, making it more efficient for local fishermen selling their daily catch. Brough Turner, a telecom and internet specialist has also documented recent studies about how mobile phone use by fishermen in Kerala has reduced price volatility in the fish markets. He refers to Robert Jensen’s paper on this topic published by the Quarterly Journal of Economics, which shows the quantitative benefits for fishermen and for the fish consuming public in Kerala.

It is a sad but happy morning for me, knowing that in a few hours I will rejoin the ferry to continue my journey north. I have become attached to a family, a village, and a way of life that until now could not have been understood emotionally, without the experience of time, and being there.

Rejoining my friends I explain to Melbin that I would like pani (the Hindi word for water) even though in Kerala the native language is Malayalam, for washing. Within minutes the entire family returns from the well, carrying water-filed vessels of various sizes.

It is now nearly midday, and time for me to rejoin the ferry on its journey north, and leave the village and my new friends behind. Arriving in time to meet the ferry, I board, finding myself a seat, while capturing a final glimpse of this extraordinary village. The engine, now started, grows louder and louder as we slice through the rippleless waters ahead. With a glance to the right over my shoulder, I recognize a man in a bright orange colored lungi (a garment worn around the waist). It is Melbin standing in the water knee-deep, his left arm held high over his head, swinging back and forth like the palm trees swaying in the breeze.

By: Peter Sabbagh

The bystander effect is a social psychological phenomenon in which people are less likely to offer help in an emergency situation when other people are present. The probability of help is inversely proportional to the number of bystanders.

With millions of Internet users communicating through social network environments everyday, the bystander theory may not remain a valid theory for online social networking.  Because people are joining social networking communities to make friends, these people are more inclined to come to the aid of a friend or distant contact if personal emergency were discovered. The challenge that we face online is how millions of nonprofessionally trained folks determine the validity of a “call for help”, and how do these users know if someone else has acted on a potentially serious “call for help”. We could have a “Digg” format where users responding to an apparent serious communication click a “helped” button making visible their response to help someone.

Does the Bystander Rule apply to Internet users? Is it time for the formalization (accountability) of “calls for help” on the Internet?

Because the social networking communities are open to all people that have a computer and Internet connection, it serves as a vehicle for expressing an individuals feelings on a regular and real-time basis. By allowing an online community member to interact with other members virtually, they can freely express thoughts and feelings they may not normally share when in a face to face situation off line. It’s like speaking with your psychologist or psychiatrist instead of a family member or friend.

A possible approach suggested by the American Psychologist to negate the bystander effect, is to pick a specific person in the crowd to ask for help rather than appealing to the larger group. For example, point directly to a specific bystander and give the person a specific task such as, “you in the red shirt, dial 911.” This clarifies the situation and places the responsibility directly on a specific person instead of allowing it to diffuse.

To counter a potential Internet bystander affect do we need a “First Responder” appointed within each social networking community? The Internet is a growing exponentially, and becoming a more formalized and less unstructured. In the future there may be increasing need for a specific point of contact in social networking communities to defuse emergency situations; a “First Responder” could be localized for language purposes on a country to country basis.

Does the bystander rule apply to online social networking communities? It may be too soon to tell, but one can assume that because a community member is not physically near the person in need of help, and because they joined a community to build and maintain relationships, the likely hood of a bystander (member) helping in a crises situation may increase as apposed to decrease.

In the future, we may see social networking environments such as FaceBook, MySpace, or Twitter employing a first level “call for help” support option within its virtual environment, or a team of around-the-clock psychologists’ on duty to review incoming “calls for help.” If this model takes affect, we may also be asked to sign a waiver that relinquishes responsibility on the part of the social networking company, so it is not responsible for interventions that do not reach authorities, or become neutralized in a timely manner.

Mental health counseling may be incorporated into the next evolution of the social networking community -

A further step in this direction may be a new social networking business model, one supporting psychotherapy counseling professionals and social networking communities that offer a “pay as you go” counseling service to its online community members. With millions of members sharing their daily woes online, this idea could be effective and profitable, and there would be no shortage of clients.

The following are internet and non internet related “call for help” situations, where some people initiated a “call for help,” and others did not.

Call for help via the internet

NPR Linton Weeks) -January 8, 2009 • Alarm bells went off Sunday night for readers of a Twitter message by a woman known on the Web as Thordora. She writes a “mommy blog” — Spin Me I Pulsate — about the triumphs and tribulations of domesticity. In a tweet, Thordora asked, “If I smother my 3 year old, who will NOT GO TO F****** SLEEP, is it REALLY a crime?”

Over the next two hours, a new kind of Web story unfolded — including a real-world visit by police to check the child’s safety. Someone plugged in to the network of bloggers and Twitter apparently knew the identity of Thordora and called the police in her locale. Thordora explained her side of the story on her blog. She was tired, she wrote, and she had “yelled, threatened and cajoled” her 3-year-old daughter to get into bed. At 11 p.m. the police came to her house. Thordora opened the door to her daughter’s bedroom and showed the sleeping child to the police to prove her child was OK. “So lesson learned ladies,” Thordora wrote. “Don’t do any venting in public. Don’t network. Don’t show anything LESS than perfect bliss…”

Suicide in front of a Webcam:

When Abraham Biggs committed suicide in front of a Webcam in November 08, some internet users texted messages egging him on.

Online intervention:

Ayelet Waldman, also a bipolar mother, received help and encouragement from people on the Internet several years ago when she admitted to suicidal tendencies in her blog. She has written a book about the experience called Bad Mother.

In an interview with NPR in December (2008), Waldman said, “I think we’re just beginning to understand how we can participate in something that is so widespread and in such a community, while at the same time being ourselves in a very intimate place. I mean, you’re home or at the office, you’re also — you are participating in a community that in many cases is much larger than your regular live-action community.”

Stanford’s Professor Fogg says, “My students tell me — and I’m starting to notice — that people use FaceBook as a ‘call for help’ quite frequently.” So what is the responsibility of someone who reads an alarming blog entry or e-mail or tweet like Thordora’s? “I would have done something,” says Fogg. “For one thing, she was talking about a child. We all feel a responsibility toward children. It makes everyone perk up. If she were to get drunk and go out driving, that would be different. Yes, it would be a concern to people — and dangerous on the road — but not in the same way.” But, suggests, in this case, “I would turn the coin over. I would tell her if she is going to post this kind of writing online, she needs to accept the fact that people will misinterpret it.” The responsibility rests on the blogger, the Twitterer, Fogg states. He suggests that people will take action and help others who sound like they are in trouble — on or off the internet. “That’s just normal human behavior.”
The Bystander Rule in the non Web space:

San Francisco Chronicle – TORRANCE, Calif. (AP) 2008

A dozen bystanders rushed in to help a 70-year-old man after he stumbled leaving a Southern California bank, causing thousands of dollars to scatter in the wind. Ludwig Geier says hundreds of bills were “gone in no time,” flying through the air and littering the First National Bank’s parking lot in Torrance on Monday. Almost immediately, about a dozen bystanders rushed in to help. The machine shop owner says about 96 percent of the money was found. Geier says he’s going to pray for those good Samaritans, adding, “If I could get them together, I’d buy them dinner and drinks.”

Wichita, Kan. (AP):

As stabbing victim LaShanda Calloway lay dying on the floor of a convenience store, five shoppers, including one who stopped to take a picture of her with a cell phone, stepped over the woman, police said. The June 23 situation, captured on the store’s surveillance video, got scant news coverage until a columnist for The Wichita Eagle disclosed the existence of the video and its contents Tuesday. Police have refused to release the video, saying it is part of their investigation.

“It was tragic to watch,” police spokesman Gordon Bassham said Tuesday. “The fact that people were more interested in taking a picture with a cell phone and shopping for snacks rather than helping this innocent young woman is, frankly, revolting.”

The woman was stabbed during an altercation that was not part of a robbery, Bassham said. It took about two minutes for someone to call 911, he said. Calloway , 27, died later at a hospital. The district attorney’s office will have to decide whether any of the shoppers could be charged, Bassham said. It was uncertain what law, if any, would be applicable. A state statute for failure to render aid refers only to victims of a car accident.

Eagle columnist Mark McCormick told The Associated Press, he learned about the video when he called Wichita Police Chief Norman Williams. He called to ask about a phone call he had received from a reader. The reader was complaining about a Police Department policy that requires emergency medical personnel to wait until police secure a crime scene before rendering aid. McCormick said Williams then unloaded on him about the shoppers in the stabbing case.”This is just appalling,” Williams told the newspaper. “I could continue shopping and not render aid and then take time out to take a picture? That’s crazy. What happened to our respect for life?”

ABC News LAUREN COX and RADHA CHITALE on June 6, 2008 reported

Yesterday’s release of surveillance video depicting a 78-year-old hit-and-run victim lying in the street but ignored by onlookers and motorists has sparked a public debate over the humanity and the responsibility of the city’s residents. Police release surveillance video of the crime in hopes of catching the driver.

Hartford, Conn., Mayor Eddie A. Perez announced his disgust Thursday after watching the footage, showing several cars swerving to avoid Angle Arce Torres, who was lying paralyzed and bleeding from the head. But while Perez calls such negligence “horrific,” those onlookers may not know how to act in such a medical emergency, or why their instincts tell them to stay put. Waiting in the Wings City officials told the Hartford Courant that four people called 911 to report last Friday’s incident — that may not always be enough in an emergency situation.

Tragically, some experts say the public’s inaction is a classic social occurrence. “It’s kind of a textbook case of bystander phenomenon,” says John Darley, a professor of psychology and public affairs at Princeton University.

Reasons why bystanders in groups fail to act in emergency situations -

There are many reasons why bystanders in groups fail to act in emergency situations, but social psychologists have focused most of their attention on two major elements. Wikipedia experts suggest that according to a basic principle of social influence, bystanders monitor the reactions of other people in an emergency situation to see if others think that it is necessary to intervene. Since everyone is doing exactly the same thing (nothing), they all conclude from the inaction of others that help is not needed. This is an example of pluralistic ignorance or social proof. The other major obstacle to intervention is known as diffusion of responsibility.  This occurs when observers all assume that someone else is going to intervene and so each person feels less responsible and refrains from doing anything.

The case of Kitty Genovese is the most famous example of the bystander effect. It is also the case that originally stimulated social psychological research in this area. Ms. Genovese was stabbed to death in 1964 by a serial rapist and murderer. According to newspaper accounts, the killing took place for at least a half an hour. The murderer attacked Ms. Genovese and stabbed her, but then fled the scene after attracting the attention of a neighbor. The killer then returned ten minutes later and finished the assault. Newspaper reports after Genovese’s death claimed that 38 witnesses watched the stabbings and failed to intervene or even contact the police. This event lead to widespread public attention and editorials that the United States had become a cold and uncaring society.

By: Peter Sabbagh

We have written about how important text (SMS) messaging is, and that the future of text messaging and Twitter is in content development. Here is an example of what is possible for the next level of text messaging, and Twitter content and delivery. While, some of you have already heard about voice to text technology, Spinvox (or Jott in the USA), of England is marketing its technology to church going computer savvy people. We do not doubt that the Taliban have already embraced this method of communication via mobile phone, because the majority of their work is done surreptitiously outside a formal office environment.  Religious leaders in the UK have been delivering their Sunday sermons’, and other messages via e-mail to its members’ computers. As noted by Springwise, “Rev. John Kronenberg led the service celebrating the beginning of Advent; his words were automatically converted by SpinVox, and sent directly to subscribers’ in-boxes in a matter of moments. Some 100 members of St. Christopher’s church received the sermon by email on Sunday, and the next such service will take place on Dec. 21”. “A growing number of voice messaging services can transcribe a customer’s voice-mail messages into text e-mails. Frequently, these services use a combination of speech recognition software and human transcriptionists,” said Chris Strammiello, NaturallySpeaking Product manager. How soon before consumers are able to record meetings, and have speech recognition software accurately transcribe what everyone (multiple conversations) said into text? “Strammiello declined to guess, but allowed it would probably happen in less than ten years.”
By – Peter Sabbagh

The terrorist attack on Bombay is much worse than CNN knows or is able to report, the number of lives lost and process in which they were taken is tragic. We all need to put down our Starbucks, think about the disorder in the world, and petition the US government, and global governments to develop a comprehensive and novel approach to the terrorism situation around the world.

As noted in Guardian’s Arundhati Roy, “If you were watching television you may not have heard that ordinary people too died in Mumbai. They were mowed down in a busy railway station and a public hospital. The terrorists did not distinguish between poor and rich. They killed both with equal cold-bloodedness. The Indian media, however, was transfixed by the rising tide of horror that breached the glittering barricades of India Shining and spread its stench in the marbled lobbies and crystal ballrooms of two incredibly luxurious hotels and a small Jewish centre”.

This is not India’s problem…it is everyone’s problem.

India has had a long history of terrorism prior to the recent November 2008 attacks in Mumbai. According to a research study at the University of Maryland, there have been “12,539 terrorist-related fatalities in India between 1970 and 2004 – an average of almost 360 fatalities per year from terrorism in India”.

Here’s a statistical summary on terrorism in India from the Global Terrorism Database (University of Maryland):
*4,108 terrorist incidents occurring in India between the years 1970 and 2004. During this period, India ranked sixth among all countries in terms of terrorist incidents (behind Peru, Colombia, El Salvador, the United Kingdom and Northern Ireland and Spain).
*12,539 terrorist-related fatalities in India between 1970 and 2004 – an average of almost 360 fatalities per year from terrorism in India. These fatalities peaked in 1991 and 1992, when 1,184 and 1,132 individuals (respectively) were killed in such incidents.
* Terrorists in India have employed a variety of attack types over time: 38.7% of terrorist events were facility attacks, 29.7% percent were bombings (in which the intent was to destroy a specific facility), and 25.5% were assassinations. The recent events in Mumbai would be classified as a series of coordinated facility attacks.”

The following are known terrorist groups in India:
·    Achik National Volunteer Council (ANVC)
·    Adivasi Cobra Force (ACF)
·    al-Barq
·    al-Faran
·    al-Hadid
·    All Tripura Tiger Force (ATTF)
·    al-Madina
·    al-Mansoorain
·    al-Qaeda
·    al-Zulfikar
·    Ananda Marga
·    Azad Hind Sena
·    Babbar Khalsa International (BKI)
·    Birsa Commando Force (BCF)
·    Bodo Liberation Tigers (BLT)
·    Borok National Council of Tripura (BNCT)
·    Communist Party of India-Maoist
·    Communist Party of Nepal-Maoist (CPN-M)
·    Dima Halam Daoga (DHD)
·    Dukhtaran-e-Millat
·    Harkat ul-Ansar
·    Hindu Sena Rashtriya Sangh Party
·    Islami Inqilabi Mahaz
·    Islamic Defense Force
·    Jammu and Kashmir Islamic Front
·    Janashakti
·    Jihad Committee
·    Kamtapur Liberation Organization
·    Kanglei Yawol Kanna Lup (KYKL)
·    Kangleipak Communist Party
·    Karbi Longri North Cachar Hills Resistance Force (KNPR)
·    Kuki Liberation Army (KLA)
·    Kuki Revolutionary Army
·    Lashkar-e-Jabbar (LeJ)
·    Lashkar-e-Jhangvi (LeJ)
·    Lashkar-e-Taiba (LeT)
·    Maoist Communist Center (MCC)
·    Mujahideen al-Mansooran
·    National Democratic Front of Bodoland (NDFB)
·    National Liberation Front of Tripura (NLFT)
·    National Socialist Council of Nagaland-Isak-Muivah (NSCN-IM)
·    National Socialist Council of Nagaland-Khaplang (NSCN-K)
·    People’s Liberation Army (PLA)
·    People’s Revolutionary Party of Kangleipak (PREPAK)
·    People’s United Liberation Front (PULF)
·    People’s War Group (PWG)
·    Revolutionary People’s Front (RPF)
·    Save Kashmir Movement
·    Students Islamic Movement of India (SIMI)
·    Ukrainian Reactionary Force
·    United Achik National Front
·    United Kuki Liberation Front (UKLF)
·    United Liberation Front of Assam (ULFA)
·    United National Liberation Front (UNLF)
·    United People’s Democratic Solidarity (UPDS)
·    Zomi Revolutionary Army (ZRA)”

Note: These data were collected for the Terrorism Knowledge Base® (TKB®), managed by the Memorial Institute for the Prevention of Terrorism (MIPT) until March 2008. START has neither reviewed nor verified these data, but is presenting this information as a service to the homeland security community.

How has the reporting of terrorism and breaking news changed in India and globally? First there was CNN’s 24 hour coverage of the Iraq invasion in 1991, now it is real time twitter and live blogs covering breaking news events globally.

The live blog and real-time mobile, and computer updates by Twitter type devices have become some of the most effective communication tools for breaking news reporting via the web, and mobile phone. Live blogging can incorporate traditional news sources like CNN and the BBC, to complement its instant messaging news feed. It can also create a content rich reporting environment that is more effective than setting up traditional video cameras, lighting, and sound equipment.

Now it is the average bystander (gawker), or a hostage hiding out in a closet inside the Taj Mahal Hotel, Mumbai, that is sending Twitter and text messages to their family and friends in Chicago.  They provide the most unrehearsed, and dramatic accounts of breaking news anywhere in the world. Posted photos and videos can also be embedded on a live blog, and then transferred to Flickr for further worldwide saturation.

Wired:
Mumbai Attack Aftermath Detailed, Tweet by Tweet

Quote – “First-hand accounts of the deadly Mumbai attacks are pouring in on Twitter, Flickr, and other social media.
Twitter has fresh news every few seconds, on Mumbai, Bombay, #Mumbai, and @BreakingNewz.
“Hospital update. Shots still being fired. Also Metro cinema next door,” tweets mumbaiattack. “Blood needed at JJ hospital,” adds aeropolowoman, supplying the numbers for the blood bank.
A Google map of the attacks has already been set up. So has a shockingly-current Wikipedia page, which features a picture of one of the gun-toting attackers.
The local bloggers at Metblogs Mumbai have new updates every couple of minutes. So do the folks at GroundReport. Dozens of videos have been uploaded to YouTube. But the most remarkable citizen journalism may be coming from “Vinu,” who is posting a stream of harrowing post-attack pictures to Flickr.

Blogging breaking news during a terrorism attack-

Quote -“I can’t believe this is my city. I can’t believe I just passed Ramada hotel ten minutes ago and didn’t realise that the little crowd near the gates would end up being a gunfire battle. I can’t believe the Taj hotel is burning. They’ve got hostages in there. More than half are American and British hostages. It’s 1.21am. There’s been a new explosion at the Taj. A friend of mine is in there. His wine glass had a bullet go through it. He said he was being evacuated to the 18th floor except that’s where they apparently took hostages. We can’t get through to his phone. A friend’s sister escaped just as the shooting began. Some of the terrorists have escaped in a police van. Charming”.

Quote -”The scale and planning of the attack have been phenomenal. No one knows who is responsible. Obviously it is a well funded and well trained group. These guys have assault machine guns, grenades, military explosives and God knows what othe“r armament. Besides the locals at the CST Train station, they have been targeting US and UK citizens and have taken local Jews as hostages. Also some Israelis who had come for a Diamond trade conference at the Oberoi Hotel have also been taken hostage. The Leopold Cafe where a lot of foreigners hang out was also attacked, and guests were gunned down gangland style. With the Indian General Elections due early next year – there could be an attempt to alter public opinion to change the result by a mass attack – no one knows ??? Most of the attacks have been in South Mumbai”.

What is next for India?

Why will economic growth, globalization, and the social homogenization of Indian culture with America, Europe, and other progressive (liberal) societies likely increase India’s venerability to terrorism in the future?

The recent attacks in Mumbai were part of a well funded ( possibly by Dubai) and organized (possibly by Pakistan) effort to destabilize India’s economy. Fortunately, the Indian economy is very resilient and the stock market bounced back one day after the attacks, although the lives that were taken did not. The attacks were planned to target Indian and foreign business professionals socializing at Mumbai’s top hotels and dining areas, while they were having dinner. The idea was to discourage ongoing (domestic and international) business investment, and related partnerships from continuing in India. Similarly, prominent business community leaders living in America, and India believe the attacks were not exclusively targeted at foreign visitors, they were very much about destabilizing India in the eyes of the world. Let’s hope that innocent Muslim’s do not experience any negative repercussions from the grieving members of the Indian community.

How and why do these terrorists groups develop?

Functional aggregations, the aggregation of human beings is believed to have taken place because of common language, patterns of interaction, and religious customs, beliefs and practice.  If one functional aggregation with different objectives perceives the other as a roadblock to their functional objectives, a conflict can take place, and it is sometimes expressed in the form of terrorism. If one group’s objective is to transform the other culture or group to become “one”,  that functional aggregation or group will also point out the differences in common language, patterns of interaction, religious customs, beliefs, and practice.

This new level of awareness and identity can create a second aggregation of individuals where differences in common language, patterns of interaction, religious customs, and beliefs and practice are a symbol of identity. This new level of identity will then activate a new identity(s), seeking to emphasize differences between the two groups or roadblocks for their survival. What is important is that one group views the elements of their aggregation as an example of common language or customs, and the other group sees it as a symbol of their identity.

The current Indian crisis has greater social implications than have been reported in the news. For example, all of the schools in Mumbai had to be closed for fear of additional terrorist attacks. What some viewers watched on CNN as current news, were delayed reports by approximately two hours. Many Indians turned to other forms of communication (new media) to receive their breaking news information such as, instant messaging, and Twitter. In addition, they found BBC reports more up to date for a traditional media source.

Most of the interested public around the world will probably never know about many of the horrific events that took place at the terrorist attack locations. For example, at the Oberoi Hotel 8 members of a prominent Indian law firm were shot gangland style while having dinner. The Manager of the Taj Mahal Hotel who also lived with his family (wife and several children) at the hotel, hid his family in a hotel room and told them to stay there quietly, within a short time terrorists set the room on fire, they all died. The Manager is currently working with authorities to uncover additional crime scene information even though his family has been lost. Two friends of my family (husband and wife) left their children at home on the evening of the attack, and went to the Oberoi Hotel for dinner, as they walked into one of the hotel’s restaurants they encountered the terrorist holding the restaurant quests hostage, the terrorists spotted them as the entered, and they were shot and killed. They became the first two people killed at the takeover of the Oberoi Hotel, their children that were waiting for them at home never saw them again. Only 12 of the reported 40 terrorist have been caught, and the remaining ones are scattered around the city of Mumbai. Some of them had been enrolled at universities in Mumbai, and some were employed at the Taj Mahal Hotel. Did they help their comrades orchestrate the Taj Mahal Hotel takeover?

The Taj Mahal Hotel has two sections, the Original building which is considered a historic landmark with Louis 16th furniture and valuable paintings, and the newer section that was part of a modern expansion in recent years. The interior of the original historic part of the hotel has been destroyed, and the authorities are afraid the foundation may possibly collapse from the stress of the fire and related bombings.

Taj Mahal Hotel during the terrorist attack November 2008

In the future, India and other developing countries will have to rethink its security measures with regard to terrorism; they are now perceived around the world as being part of the larger global system of political thought, policy, and culture. All or some of these global cultural elements can be in conflict with the myriad of human aggregations that have the ability to express their new level of conscious identity in the form of terrorism. Eventually there may have to be an independent dispute resolution council represented by many global governments to communicate with, and diffuse these groups (aggregations). Communicating by terrorism will not help these groups realize their new identity and objectives.

By – Peter Sabbagh

A vampire did it!

John was a 50 year old man born in South Africa, of  Australian origin. On Christmas Eve about 1 AM while John was trying to sleep he heard his son  Jason playing his electric piano and other electronic  equipment being played loudly in the bedroom next to his. Because  John and Jason’s rooms were next to each other, the  music was clearly heard. Feeling very tired from working late into the night driving a taxi, and drinking a couple of beers when he returned home, he knocked on his  son’s door to ask him to turn the volume down. Jason  then walked over to John (Dad) with a baseball bat, and shouted at him to leave the room. John left the room and walked down the stairs to the basement, picked up a cigarette lighter from the tool box, and a container of  gasoline (which he kept there for his taxi), and transferred some of the gas into a smaller  container. He then walked backup the stairs carrying a  cigarette lighter and a jar of gasoline.

His wife Sara  headed to the second floor of their Bronx house a few minutes later after she heard the two arguing. She walked into her son’s bedroom and saw John with a lit lighter in one hand, and a container in the other hand.  Jason had the bat raised in the air while John was threatening to use the lighter to the gas if Jason moved any closer to him. When Sara attempted to  stop the argument by standing between the father and  son, John (based on Sara and Jason’s statement) threw gasoline on her upper body saturating her clothing and set her on fire with his lighter, the liquid gas also reached the window curtains, and the flames from Sara’s burning shirt spread to the curtains.

Carol, Jason’s sister ran up the stairs to the second floor and into Jason’s bedroom after hearing her mother  scream. Her Father then threw gasoline onto her body; John began jabbing his lit lighter at them without  igniting Jason and Carol’s gasoline covered clothing,  while the carpet and curtain were burning.

Jason wrapped a blanket around his mother putting out the flames on her body and placed her on his bed. John poured the remaining gasoline onto Jason, and tried to set him on fire again. John then ran out of the bedroom down the stairs wrapped in only a blanket, his arm and legs badly burnt, he ran up the block to a BP Gas Station.

Paco, a manager in the gas station watched John walk into his station wrapped in a blanket, without clothing.  The John asked Paco to lend him money for the pay phone so that he could ask his brother to bring him clothing, and give him a ride out of the neighborhood. Paco noticed that John was bruised; he had marks covering his face and legs. Then Paco offered John his cell phone, and also provided him with a  several articles of clothing that were hung on the back of the office door; a shirt, pants, and work  boots found in the stations auto repair area. Paco also gave him three dollars; John then left the station  without out waiting for his brother to arrive.

In an attempt to distance himself from the crime scene, John left the BP Station; and by that time the neighborhood fire department crew arrived at his house, and managed to distinguish the fire in the upstairs bedroom before it spread throughout the house. When the police arrived several minutes later they immediately questioned John’s daughter Carol and brother Jason (while her mother Sara  was rushed to the burn center at the New York-Presbyterian Hospital). During the questioning of Jason and Carol by Police, they discovered that John had a brother named Andrew living in the neighborhood. They immediately followed-up with a telephone call to him.  Andrew stated to police that he received a telephone  call from John a few minutes earlier requesting he pick him up, but when he arrived at the BP Station John had already left the station, and he did not know where he was going to next.

While being questioned at the house by Police, Carol told Officer McDermott that she found a telephone book on the kitchen table with the name Delta written on the  cover. Carol believed that John may have made plans to leave town by booking a plane reservation. Police officer Sanchez, McDermott’s partner immediately sent notification to JFK Airport Police with an ID of John.

Within a short time John was spotted in the Delta  Terminal at JFK by Airport Police. Officers McDermott  and Sanchez drove to JFK Airport to meet with  authorities at the Delta domestic terminal. Once they arrived, they confirmed John’s ID as he was drinking a cup of coffee and pacing back and forth in front of  Terminal Gate 13. John was then apprehended by airport authorities shortly before boarding flight #172 to Las  Vegas. The only item John had in his pocked was his personal credit card, which he used to purchase an airline ticket and pay for his taxi fare to JFK. John’s burn injuries required him to be taken to a nearby burn center  hospital, New York-Presbyterian Hospital, the same  hospital Sara had been rushed to several hours earlier.  John was diagnosed with 2nd degree burns on his legs and arms. When Police asked why he was boarding the airplane, he stated that he needed a vacation.

Fire Report:

Fire Martial O’Malley’s report discovered that there  were two separate fires started in the house. The first  fire began in the vapors of a flammable liquid at the top of the stairs on the second floor landing of John’s  home, the fire then spread to Sara’s upper body, and from there to the curtains and walls of the second floor  bedroom. Fire two originated in the center of the  bedroom and spread to John’s body.

John received treatment at the burn center hospital for about one week, and then was transferred to the Bronx Criminal Psychiatric Hospital.

John’s case qualified for representation by Legal Aid Attorney David Butler, and Butler immediately suggested to John that he consider using the insanity defense. He explained to John that  the legal system in South Africa had some differences to the American system of law. In South Africa, the legal system is made of laws from countries such as France, England and the Dutch, these countries were once former  occupiers of South Africa. Also, the threshold of proving that you were insane (not responsible) at the  time of a crime is the defendants responsibility  (burden) to prove, as it is in America. Although South Africa has different laws regulating and determining criminal responsibility. And that both countries determine  “criminal responsibility” through a series of  psychiatric examinations. In America, a psychiatrist or  psychologist may explore all or one of the following  issues: the persons thinking, feeling, motives, and  control at the time of the criminal act. Footnote: this  standard is used in many States in America, and is known as the M’Naughten standard. John did not abject to this (strategy).

John’s Attorney, David Butler quickly scheduled John for a psychiatric examination. Once the DA received notice that John may be pleading “not responsible by reason of  mental defect,” the District Attorney requested that the court approve the examination of John by one of their  psychiatric examiners “hired guns” to counter John’s defense strategy. [Note: It is generally believed that the Prosecution will sometimes hire a specific (hired gun) doctor that will support their position in a legal case, and the defense will do the same.] Within a week the DA’s motion for a psychiatric examination was approved by the  court. While Butler was waiting for the court appointed examination, he received notice from the District Attorney that John had been charged with Attempted Murder, Assault, Arson, and Reckless Endangerment.

What exactly is the insanity defense? First it must be found that the defendant actually committed the act. If he did not, then the defendant would not be guilty.  Next, he must have a mental disease or defect at the  time of the crimes, not at the time of trial. If so, then as a result of his mental disease he lacked substantial capacity to know or appreciate either the nature, or consequences of such criminal conduct, or that it was wrong. In NY they have a modified version of The Rule in M’Naughten  case” (English law of 1843). The main important difference is that in New York the defendant must “lack substantial capacity to know or appreciate the nature, and consequences of his act or that it was wrong.

John was first examined by Dr. Cosgrove, a Certified Psychiatrist hired by David Butler, John’s Attorney.    Dr. Cosgrove examined John on two occasions. The first  examination took place shortly after his discharge from the burn center hospital following his transfer to the Bronx Psychiatric facility in NYC. John was found not to be oriented to what the mental health professionals call  “time,” and he was said to be delusional in his thinking process, and considered not fit to stand trial.  About four weeks later at the second evaluation and with the benefit of medication John became psychologically stable and oriented to time and place.  Although he still had some delusional thoughts. John recalled the following events of the crime scene, “my wife was standing in the room between my son and me trying to take the baseball bat away from Jason, she then bumped into my arm holding the gasoline, and the gasoline spilled onto her shirt. The lit lighter then accidentally ignited the gasoline and we both got burned.” Dr Cosgrove then showed the statement John made to the District Attorney shortly following the accident (four weeks earlier). In  the statement he said that he tried to ’cause the death of his wife Sara using the gasoline.”  He replied “the  District Attorney can write whatever they want to even if it is not true.”

John then told Dr Cosgrove that he believed his wife has a boyfriend, and that he has seen them together.  John also believed that Sara  and her boyfriend were involved in a plan to kill him, by injecting him with a needle while he was sleeping. The needle apparently contained some kind of sleep drug. When John asked his wife Sara about the injections and bruises on his arm Sara replied, “a vampire did it.” He also stated that the  injections made him sleep until the following morning.  These injections happened on numerous occasions, and after a while he was unable to go to work because he had trouble walking, seeing, and eating. “They were trying  to poison me and kill me, my children and wife wanted  the house and life insurance policy” he stated.

Following the second interview/examination Dr. Cosgrove determined that John was mentally fit for trial, and had the mental ability to reason and think strategically about his legal case. His diagnosis suggested that he suffered from schizophrenia, the chronic type.

The second psychiatrist that examined John was Dr. King,  a certified psychiatrist hired by the District Attorney.  Dr King examined John on two occasions, the first,  shortly following his transfer from the hospital to the criminal psychiatric facility, and a second time six weeks later. After the first examination Dr King believed that the patient had delusions about his wife, her boyfriend, and the possibility of being drugged.

At the second examination, he found John fully alert,  clean, and neatly dressed. He was oriented to time and place, reciting the time, date and who the president was, his birth date and his current location. He also  understood the charges against him, reciting the most serious being, Attempted Murder. In his own defense John stated that he did not want to plead guilty, he wanted  to stand by his new story that the fire was an accident.  He was fully aware that he could plead the insanity defense, and made the conscious/strategic decision not  to. At the time of the second examination, he was found not to remember clearly his arrest at the airport, and his attempt to board a plane to Los Vegas. He remembered the house fire as “the accident that happened  after his son chased him out of the house with a  baseball bat.” When asked why he was flying to Los Vegas he said, “I was going to get some rest and to get away from my wife and her boyfriend who was trying to kill  me.”

Dr. King ended the examination by finding him currently without any impairment of is ability to  perceive, recall, and relate, and having no difficulty understanding the various defense alternatives and the  pressure of a trial.

Dr King found John fit to proceed, and ruled out the possibly of having schizophrenia and paranoia, and  suggested a possible personality disorder, but was currently able to understand the charges against him.

Shortly after John’s case had been scheduled for trial,  John was concerned about his insanity defense strategy, both medical examiners found him currently fit for trial even though the two medical examiners initially found him delusional shortly after setting fire to his wife and home. For John to be excused of all criminal charges against him, the jury would have to find that the fire in his home, and the burns his wife received were a result of John’s lack of substantial capacity to know or appreciate the nature and consequences of his act.

The prosecutor tries his/her case to win, if they think that a defendant has been wrongly indicted on weak or  speculative evidence, rather than loosing the case and creating bad press for his office, affecting the DA’s  yearly win statistics, he may dismiss or offer a plea bargain (deal).

Just after the incident at John’s home in the Bronx, John was said to be delusional in his thinking process and considered not fit to stand trial by two psychiatrists’.  It was only after approximately six weeks of  hospitalization that included drug treatment (medication) that he was “made” ready to stand trial for his criminal acts. Did this mean that he was actually not responsible for his behavior on Christmas Eve? Could the  DA convince and prove to the jury that John was able to decide right from wrong at the time of the  criminal acts, or that his actions were premeditated?

The DA chose to offer John a plea bargain, in the eyes of the DA, and the political pressure that its office is  under to show successful prosecution results (statistics), the plea looks better than an acquittal to the public, or a finding of not guilty by reason of mental defect.  The deal was for John to plead guilty to Attempted  Murder, and in return he would receive a sentence of 6  to 15 years in prison. John and his attorney considered his defense, and the following issues they would have to  prove to the Jury, 1) his original statement to the Assistant District Attorney that he tried to cause the death of is wife Sara, 2) the witnesses (his daughter and son) at his house at the time of the crime, 3) fleeing the crime scene, 4) attempt to leave the state by plane,  5) John’s ability to prove that Sara and her boyfriend were injecting him on a regular basis with a toxic life threatening drug (which could actually work in his favor at a jury trial proving his insanity, or against him showing reason to revenge Sara), and 6)  John’s psychiatric reports that found him delusional at the time of the crime, but fit approximately six weeks later, which is how he would have to present himself to a trial jury.

John’s attorney David Butler advised John to accept the DA’s plea bargain offer, and John Agreed. John received a sentence of 6 to 15 years in prison.