It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

Ky. man claims caffeine insanity in wife's death

page: 1
1
<<   2 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Sep, 20 2010 @ 09:48 AM
link   

Ky. man claims caffeine insanity in wife's death


news.yahoo.com

Woody Will Smith, 33, is scheduled for trial starting Monday on a murder charge in the May 2009 death of Amanda Hornsby-Smith, 28.

Defense attorney Shannon Sexton filed notice with the Newport court of plans to argue his client ingested so much caffeine in the days leading up to the killing that it rendered him temporarily insane —
(visit the link for the full news article)




posted on Sep, 20 2010 @ 09:48 AM
link   
This reminds me of the underground comic "Too Much Coffee Man"
When I first read this I thought they were really clutching at straws here... but the story cites another case

A legal strategy invoking caffeine intoxication is unusual but has succeeded at least once before, in a case involving a man cleared in 2009 of charges of running down and injuring two people with a car in Washington state.

So it can happen and has been used in court to clear someone... Who Knew????

news.yahoo.com
(visit the link for the full news article)



posted on Sep, 20 2010 @ 09:55 AM
link   
reply to post by DaddyBare
 


Not a new phenomenon. It is a sad reality in criminal law.

Here is the most infamous: TWINKIE DEFENSE

Our society is a blameless society. It makes me ill, and right now my stomach is churning just thinking about it, but it is the world we live in. If you spill hot coffee, sue the restaurant, the cup maker, the lid maker, the automobile maker, the clothing maker, your own doctors, the hospital, and your own lawyer if yoru settlement isn't satisfactory.

If you kill someone, blame the gun maker, the state lawmakers, the food and drink makers, the victim, the victims family, your parents, your therapist, and if you are still found guilty, appeal on the grounds of a bad attorney.

Luckily my life has not been impacted by any tragic crimes, because if it ever was, or ever will be, the guilty party will be lucky to make it to court.

* * ** * * * * * * * * * * * *
Edit to add sad Supreme Court quote:

During oral Supreme Court arguments in United States v. Gonzalez-Lopez (No. 05-352) in April 2006, Justice Antonin Scalia referred to the Twinkie defense in discussion of a defendant's right to counsel of choice: "[If I am a defendant,] I don't want a competent lawyer. I want a lawyer who's going to get me off. I want a lawyer who will invent the Twinkie Defense [...] I would not consider the Twinkie Defense an invention of a competent lawyer [...] but I want a lawyer who's going to win for me."[6]

Emphasis mine




edit on 20-9-2010 by getreadyalready because: added Supreme Court quote



posted on Sep, 20 2010 @ 10:11 AM
link   
reply to post by DaddyBare
 


Let me also add that we should have to choose between civil and criminal proceedings. No one should be liable to both courts separately.

The whole OJ fiasco was ridiculous. I think he was probably guilty, but the jury found him innocent. End of story. To turn around and find him liable for millions of dollars of damages for a crime that the court already decided he did not commit is ludicrous! If I was his civil attorney, I would have cross examined every witness the exact same way, "Was OJ found "not-guilty" of this horrible crime. Yes? Then how can we actually be in this courtroom debating how much money he is liable to pay for a crime that the courts already decided he did not commit? Hmmm? Witness excused! Next! Ridiculous Proceeding! You should all be ashamed of yourselves for dragging us in here, and we plan to counter-sue everyone of you for wasting our time and costing the state this money!!"



posted on Sep, 20 2010 @ 10:11 AM
link   
reply to post by getready already
 


I hear ya and it makes me mad too.
except in the case of self defence there is no excuse for someone to murder their wife....
besides if there more cases like this pretty soon coffee if going to have a warning label.
"Caution drinking this product is been proven to cause homicidal rages!"
give me a break, coffe didnt make him do it, he did because he wanted too... give him the chair!!! oh yeah, we dont do that any more either...



posted on Sep, 20 2010 @ 10:14 AM
link   
Just saw the coffee related death header, and thought that I might have something to add to the discussion.
Many moons ago I was trawling for bizzare things, and investigating the effects of various chemical compounds on living things. I came across this rather odd, but very interesting experiment and thought of it almost as soon as I had set eyes on the headline of this thread.

cannabis.net...

Please do not be put off by the addy, its pictoral evidence of the effects of various chemicals on spiders ability to create webs. Note the caffine example... Might not be the worst defense ever.



posted on Sep, 20 2010 @ 10:22 AM
link   
Caffeine is the same type of drug as speed and coc aine. They're all stimulants. Just because something is legal doesn't mean it can't be very harmful for some.

Sleep deprivation is the devil !!



I can go a little crazy if I drink more than a couple cups of tea throughout the day. It gets me so wound up that if I have a cup after about 3pm, I'll be up until at least 1am. If I drink a cup at say, 7 or 8 pm I will likely be up until 4 am. It effects everyone differently.

The reason tweakers act bizarre and go nuts isn't really because of the drug's direct effect, it's because of the sleep deprivation from staying up so long. It depends how solid one's mind is, but generally people go insane and hallucinate after about 72 hours without sleep.


edit on 20-9-2010 by unityemissions because: spelling



posted on Sep, 20 2010 @ 10:25 AM
link   
reply to post by DaddyBare
 


I'm not sure how they will prove it but, in the DSM-IV-TR there is a Caffeine psychosis (among other Caffeine related disorders).
emedicine.medscape.com...
Caffeine is a drug and yes, it does make some folks go batcrap insane.


edit on 20-9-2010 by antonia because: forgot something



posted on Sep, 20 2010 @ 10:25 AM
link   
reply to post by DaddyBare
 


That is correct. People talk of "roid" rage from testosterone. I have experimented with it and I have felt the effects, and it does give someone the "superman" complex. However it is no different than alcohol or adrenaline or extreme anger. If I go to the gym regularly and start feeling really healthy and confident, steroids or no steroids, my attitude will still change. We are each responsible for our own actions regardless of the influence of outside forces. AND, if we are to blame the sugar/caffeine/testosterone then we have to still lay the blame with the person that ingested all of that chemical to make them act out of control. They still bear the ultimate responsibility!

Again, if you are the family member of somebody that is a victim of a crime. And the guilty party is trying to get off by some creative defense, I actually hope that the defense works, because I want that person out of the safety of a jail and out on the street with me!! I might testify in their defense to establish my own alibi and make sure they are set free where I can reach them!



posted on Sep, 20 2010 @ 10:35 AM
link   
The following is my opinion as a member participating in this discussion.



Originally posted by getreadyalready
I think he was probably guilty, but the jury found him innocent. End of story. To turn around and find him liable for millions of dollars of damages for a crime that the court already decided he did not commit is ludicrous!


I really irritated someone in another thread discussing this, so hopefully I'm not setting myself up for round 2.


Jurors in criminal cases don't find anyone innocent. They don't have a determination which says the defendant didn't commit the crime. What they do is render a "not guilty" verdict in cases where the prosecution failed to meet the standard of proof required. No one leaves a criminal trial with an official "innocent" designation imposed by the jury. The options are, guilty or not guilty, as in not proven beyond a reasonable doubt. "Not guilty" does not equal "innocent". Two very different things.

Civil trials have a different burden of proof - preponderance of the evidence. For a criminal case, it's approaching 100% certitude. For a civil case, it's 51%. All you have to do is tip the scale in your direction.


As an ATS Staff Member, I will not moderate in threads such as this where I have participated as a member.



posted on Sep, 20 2010 @ 10:35 AM
link   
What I have found intesting is that in case such as those mentioned here is that even the most strange defenses can be used, and veracity of the "evidence" can be as ridiculous as a wooden moon. If one can prove the many, many adverse effects of something as common as caffeine, it can be won. We are the human comedy. Speaking from pesonaly experience, I know the consequences of having very little sleep, and then using some over the counter stimulants to just be able to manage the day. Ephedrine, as one example, is, as was explained to me by a Dr. is a "cousin to meth". All this guy's attorney will have to do is show how badly caffeine can mess with someone, and how his client may be one in a million whose body produces just a little too much something or other that enhances the effects of caffeine, and POW!, he'll have a valid case.



posted on Sep, 20 2010 @ 10:41 AM
link   
I doubt my morning cup of coffee is going to render me homicidal especially when it comes to my wife.

He knew what he was doing. He'll say anything to get away with it..



posted on Sep, 20 2010 @ 10:45 AM
link   
reply to post by DaMod
 


How can you compare the two?

He didn't just have a cup of joe, he was taking over 400mg of caffeine a day, which is equivalent to about a 12 pack of coke a day. I would explode from that!

He wasn't eating properly, and putting himself into a hard-core fight or flight response. That's what caffeine does, it pumps out adrenaline from the adrenal at insane rates when consumed in high doses. This activates primitive drives in people, like the drive to dominate. This, coupled with severe sleep depression, may very well cause an ordinarily sane person to do something brutal like murdering someone else.

Neither of us know his conscious intent on the matter.




edit on 20-9-2010 by unityemissions because: (no reason given)



posted on Sep, 20 2010 @ 10:47 AM
link   
Ky. man claims caffeine insanity in wife's death.



ATS user snowen20 claims absolute concentrated BULLCRAP to Ky mans defense claim.

More like a crack attack I think. Caffeine my ass.



posted on Sep, 20 2010 @ 10:48 AM
link   
reply to post by yeahright
 


I almost pre-emptively addressed that issue, but my posts tend to ramble on too long.

Yes, civil and criminal trials have different levels of burden for the prosecution/plaintiff. That is exactly why we should only be responsible to one court. I know a court cannot find someone "innocent." But, if the court cannot prove that you are guilty, then you should be exempt from civil proceedings. "Double Jeopardy" should be extended to all courts.

Make them decide ahead of time if they want criminal or civil proceedings. 51% "preponderance" of guilt should not be sufficient to rob someone of their life's earnings all the way up to and including trophies that they won? Surely you are not endorsing the right of some litigious party to find that I am "probably" guilty, and so they have the right to come into my home and take my personal keepsakes that might be valuable at an auction?

Either extend the double jeopardy protection or raise the standard of proof for civil trials. Civil trials should not be like the "loser bracket" of a sports tournament where you play for 3rd place. We are talking a person's entire material existence. Maybe we don't have the death penalty in civil court, but what they did to OJ was as close as you can get without physically touching someone.


CX

posted on Sep, 20 2010 @ 10:49 AM
link   
I remember once having a couple of pints of red bull (they had it on draght at our local), followed by a couple of pints of Coke, then had two double expressos in town...i swear i can't remember half the shops i went in that day.

When i got back home i was a gibbering wreck, shaking and felt really ill.

Whilst i think it's a bit much to top your wife whilst on a caffeine high, it wouldn't suprise me if it made people do some rather strange things.

CX.



posted on Sep, 20 2010 @ 10:50 AM
link   
reply to post by yeahright
 


Surely if one is innocent until they are proven , in a court of law, to be guilty, then they must retain the innocent status in the event that they are proven to be not guilty? Otherwise, why not shoot a suspect on sight every damned time?



posted on Sep, 20 2010 @ 10:52 AM
link   
reply to post by CX
 


Now imagine not only doing that for one day, but for several days in a row, and not getting any quality sleep in the whole time. Maybe an hour or two each 24 hour period, but you never really rest. Can you imagine how some people would go insane from this? It's the same as speed when you consume enough.



posted on Sep, 20 2010 @ 10:55 AM
link   
reply to post by unityemissions
 



He didn't just have a cup of joe, he was taking over 400mg of caffeine a day, which is equvelant to about 9 or 10 sodas a day. I would explode from that!


I mentioned before that I experimented with Testosterone. At that same point in time bodybuilders like me were taking an "ECA" stack. It was 400mg Caffeine, 50mg Ephedrine, 200mg Aspirin. We took it every day in addition to Testosterone and my normal caffeinated drinks. Plus a lot of endorphin and adrenalin making workouts. Plus a lifestyle around a lot of similar guys and girls and parties. Add to that a typical 20 year old's vigor and fearlessness, and you have the worst possible homicidal combination, yet somehow 99.9% of us were able to keep normal jobs, have normal relationships, and refrain from any major crimes? How can that be with all of those evil chemicals surging through systems?

The responsibility lies with the individual. In my opinion, legally prescribed anti-depressants are the most harmful thing on the market. They take away the normal "concern" or anxiety that a person has. When you don't worry about consequences, you become very very dangerous. I would take a roided out caffeine freak over my typically medicated ex-wife anyday!



posted on Sep, 20 2010 @ 10:57 AM
link   
The following is my opinion as a member participating in this discussion.


reply to post by getreadyalready
 


And here's why I disagree. The two courts serve two entirely different purposes. If you commit a crime, your debt is to "society" and does nothing to compensate any victim. The opposing entities are the defendant and The People.

A civil trial is a defendant against a plaintiff who seeks to be compensated for a loss. If the defendant loses a civil trial, he pays the plaintiff and has no debt to "society".

So, no you can't "pick one". It's irrelevant to the state whether or not a wronged party seeks damages. they're looking to prosecute a case for The People. The wronged party isn't directly compensated as the result of a criminal trial.

What if a rich guy is found criminally negligent and pays a fine, or does jail time? By what you seem to suggest, no harmed person could sue for recompense, since the criminal trial already settled the issue.Think Madoff's clients would be okay with that? Do you think it's fair?

No, I don't care for that at all. Two courts, two very different plaintiffs, two very different situations extra DIV



new topics

top topics



 
1
<<   2 >>

log in

join