Dr. Deakin assessed me for a Treatment Over Objection with antipsychotic medications. He decided I was incompetent to decide whether I needed them, because I was "psychotic" and didn't know it. Look at the dates: which one of us is, in fact, way out of contact with reality, and thus, DELUSIONAL? … I don't think he needs drugs to improve his reasoning capacity; I think he needs to be stripped of his license to practice medicine, because it has given him a false sense of fitness to judge the rationality of others.
(this never happened, but is implicit in the dates Deakin lists)
The actual date of my DWI offense, adjudicated as a DWAI following my acceptance of a plea bargain.
"Outside of the 6 week window of time when Mr. Saunders compiled these charges, he has never been charged with a crime." - Defense Attorney Ezra Sherman, AFFIRMATION FOR MOTION IN SUPPORT OF BAIL - October 6, 1997
That's still true.
Susan attempted to fail rape charges, and failed, possibly in part because "the subject is being 150% cooperative" (Deputy Van Ostrand).
Charges were filed for the lowest grade of harassment, calling for a maximum of two weeks in jail on a finding of guilt, and possession of two unregistered handguns - Class A Misdemeanors which could potentially be punished with a year in jail each.
"Potentially" - this is "interesting," because as Susan well knew, that potential didn't actually exist: I retained possession of these two heirloom Colt autopistols (in .380 and .22LR) because the higher courts of New York State had found the law forbidding peaceable possession of handguns in the home "moot," as it was too rarely prosecuted…
The actual date of the offense.
I submit my analysis of my Adverse Drug Reaction to the OMH and all concerned parties following my research into the effects of Prozac and Trazodone… particularly the effects of mCPP, the anxiogenic hallucinogen that is Trazodone's primary byproduct.
Judge Barrett accepts my plea of Not Responsible Due to Mental Disease or Defect - a finding that I lacked the "mens rea," the intent to cause harm, which is the factor that would make the act criminal. This is an acquittal under New York State law, which is based on the M'Naghten Rules.
Charges of Driving While Intoxicated and Speeding were pled down to a single charge of "Driving While Ability Impaired," which is a Violation rather than a Misdemeanor under the laws of New York State.
The plea was accepted by Judge Judith Rossiter in Ithaca City Court, and a fine of $500 was imposed, along with referral to a Drug and Alcohol Treatment Program.
As is their privilege under the law, the psychiatric examiners requested an inpatient examination subsequent to an acquittal under CPL 330.20.
Keep in mind: this is not an ordinary psychiatric hospitalization following a finding of dangerousness due to mental illness. Judge Barrett ordered that the examination be conducted on an outpatient basis, indicating that he himself saw no evidence of current dangerousness.
The prosecution requested an adjournment in contemplation of dismissal, which Judge Rector of the Ulysses Town Court granted sometime in or about June 1, 1998.