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.

 

Former Marine Brandon Raub NOT put in psych ward for posting on FB - Calm down everyone.

page: 5
4
<< 2  3  4   >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Aug, 23 2012 @ 11:02 AM
link   
www.courts.state.va.us...

www.courts.state.va.us...

www.courts.state.va.us...



II. Remove unwarranted impediments to needed treatment for people in crisis who fail to seek treatment on their own while assuring adequate screening and respecting individual rights:
1. Examine proposals to modify criteria for emergency custody, evaluation and treatment (e.g., by eliminating the “imminence” requirement, by allowing civil intervention for acutely psychotic individuals whose impaired functioning is manifested by non-violent criminal conduct, or other modifications).
2. Examine proposals to elongate the total period of evaluation (ECO and TDO) to 4 or 5 days, accompanied by a “preliminary hearing” by an independent clinical evaluator.
3. Examine proposals to permit outpatient treatment orders in cases involving demonstrable deterioration in persons with prior history of hospitalization and deterioration.


www.courts.state.va.us...

www.courts.state.va.us...




posted on Aug, 23 2012 @ 11:07 AM
link   
I think that one link is important enough to repeat.

www.courts.state.va.us...



II. Remove unwarranted impediments to needed treatment for people in crisis who fail to seek treatment on their own while assuring adequate screening and respecting individual rights:
1. Examine proposals to modify criteria for emergency custody, evaluation and treatment (e.g., by eliminating the “imminence” requirement, by allowing civil intervention for acutely psychotic individuals whose impaired functioning is manifested by non-violent criminal conduct, or other modifications).
2. Examine proposals to elongate the total period of evaluation (ECO and TDO) to 4 or 5 days, accompanied by a “preliminary hearing” by an independent clinical evaluator.
3. Examine proposals to permit outpatient treatment orders in cases involving demonstrable deterioration in persons with prior history of hospitalization and deterioration.


1. Examine proposals to modify criteria for emergency custody, evaluation and treatment (e.g., by eliminating the “imminence” requirement, by allowing civil intervention for acutely psychotic individuals whose impaired functioning is manifested by non-violent criminal conduct, or other modifications).

Again I will fine tune it for people.

(e.g., by eliminating the “imminence” requirement, by allowing civil intervention for acutely psychotic individuals whose impaired functioning is manifested by non-violent criminal conduct, or other modifications).

Do you see the key words yet? Ill help yet again.

eliminating the “imminence” requirement
manifested by non-violent

This is the change after the 2007 Virginia Tech shootings. Not NDAA.
edit on 23-8-2012 by JBA2848 because: (no reason given)



posted on Aug, 23 2012 @ 11:08 AM
link   
I found the motion to suspend the involuntary admission document an interesting read. It can be found here. It seems to explain a little about why this whole thing is unconstitutional. Basically that the involuntary admission for mental health care occurred outside of the time frame that a detention order can be filed. At least, that's what I get from reading this document, I may be mistaken.



posted on Aug, 23 2012 @ 11:22 AM
link   

Originally posted by MojaveBurning
I found the motion to suspend the involuntary admission document an interesting read. It can be found here. It seems to explain a little about why this whole thing is unconstitutional. Basically that the involuntary admission for mental health care occurred outside of the time frame that a detention order can be filed. At least, that's what I get from reading this document, I may be mistaken.


I don't know man... if you look at that, in the end they're just trying to get him moved closer to home... As has been repeatedly shown in this thread, the cops have a lot of leeway in these sorts of situations... he hasn't been illegally detained as far as I can make out, he certainly wasn't kidnapped...

He's fully accessible, more or less, just inconveniently located...



posted on Aug, 23 2012 @ 11:28 AM
link   

Originally posted by de_Genova

“It would seem that in the government’s infinite wisdom, especially in this time of obscenely massive deficits, that they are going to send him to a Veteran’s Administration Medical Center. That doesn’t sound too bad now does it? How about this then. The hospital that they are sending him to is NOT the one about eight miles away from his home in Richmond. But is instead on the other side of the Commonwealth of Virginia in Roanoke!” writes Smith.


In view of the above - its possible that he is still military?
As in Marine Reserves?
Otherwise why the commitment to a VA facility?

Anyone here know the answers?


Unless he served 8 years or more on active duty or in a drilling Reserve Unit he is in the Individual Ready Reserves until he reaches that benchmark. IRR is just a fancy way of saying that the individual is subject to involuntary recall based on the needs of the military.

IRR are generally not recalled involuntarily unless they possess a specific skill set that is in great demand, i.e. a linguist, or in the instance of a general mobilization of all reserve forces in the event of major conflict.

Regarding him being sent to VA; this is only personal speculation but….

It is possible that considering his veteran status and the possibility that the state of his mental health would be heavily influenced by the nature of his service that they took him to a facility staffed with individuals who deal with post service mental health issues on a regular basis to get the best possible evaluation.



posted on Aug, 23 2012 @ 02:04 PM
link   

Originally posted by longlostbrother

Originally posted by MojaveBurning
I found the motion to suspend the involuntary admission document an interesting read. It can be found here. It seems to explain a little about why this whole thing is unconstitutional. Basically that the involuntary admission for mental health care occurred outside of the time frame that a detention order can be filed. At least, that's what I get from reading this document, I may be mistaken.


I don't know man... if you look at that, in the end they're just trying to get him moved closer to home... As has been repeatedly shown in this thread, the cops have a lot of leeway in these sorts of situations... he hasn't been illegally detained as far as I can make out, he certainly wasn't kidnapped...

He's fully accessible, more or less, just inconveniently located...



The request to have him moved closer to home was a secondary one, in the event that the order was not suspended. Which now has been... so I guess all this debate is pointless now anyway. Clearly the judge believed his detainment was illegal.



posted on Aug, 23 2012 @ 03:11 PM
link   
reply to post by deadeyedick
 


I never said that 100% of people were guilty of anything. However, a move like this is usually not made without consulting medical professionals first. Cops don't usually take somebody off to the psych ward without cause.

From the report the police department released it sounds like it was a normal concerning behavior investigation. He said somethings and the officers contacted medical professionals associated with the local crisis intervention team. On the recomendation of those medical professionals they detained him for transport to a facility that had a PEU. In those situations the CIT medical professionals usually talk to the person being interviewed as well as officers before making a recomendation.

He said something that scared somebody. They reported him. The cops decided to investigate and he said something that triggered a response. It may have been as simple as saying he felt like he was a danger to physically harm himself.

They government doesn't need to take you to a psych unit. Ask Jose Padilla.



posted on Aug, 23 2012 @ 04:41 PM
link   
Action, Reaction, Solution. Follow the source of the problem. Oh but no one wants to go there because it always leads to the government and society is to blame. He wouldn't be posting rants if it wasn't true. Over the years the government became more corrupt and more powerful then it should. They despise the bill of rights and would love to burn the Constitution, but since they can't do that directly they have to attack it indirectly. You're an instant threat to national security because you put 3 words together in the same sentence. Everything is a threat to national security. Every time you see those words used you can see the foundation of this country crumble away into a pitfall.
edit on 23-8-2012 by sean because: (no reason given)



posted on Aug, 23 2012 @ 05:02 PM
link   

Judge Orders Release of Detained Marine Veteran



Judging from the many negative responses on this thread against this brave Marine I am sure MANY HERE will be disappointed at this GREAT NEWS!!!!!

For those anti-Americans who have taken up the side of a Fascist regime, (?longlostbrother?) and have been arguing with me about this case in defense of the Police State .....READ THIS - ->
WE STILL HAVE FREE SPEECH IN AMERICA..........Thank God for the few level headed judges we have left in this country.

www.infowars.com...
Judge Ordes Release of Detained Marine Veteran

WTVR
Thursday, August 23rd, 2012


HOPEWELL, Va. (WTVR) – A Hopewell circuit court judge has ordered that a Marine veteran detained over anti-government Facebook posts be released from a psychiatric hospital.
CBS 6 News’ Catie Beck said the judge dismissed the case Thursday against Brandon Raub. The judge said the original petition for Raub’s detention contained no facts. In other words, there was no information on why Raub was being held — and the judge deemed this violated his civil liberties.

As a result, the judge ruled law enforcement has no grounds to hold Raub.

Beck said the judge is in the process of writing an order for Raub’s release. He is expected to be released from a the hospital in Salem, Virginia Thursday afternoon.


edit on 23-8-2012 by de_Genova because: edited with additions



posted on Aug, 23 2012 @ 05:12 PM
link   

Originally posted by longlostbrother
I've seen a lot of people on here and a few other forums freaking out about Brandon Raub.

They seem to think he was thrown in a psych ward for posting something controversial on FB. That is NOT the case.

Let me explain what the law allows the police, etc. to do, with an example.

Say that someone who didn't like you, who had military training, and who you thought might be slightly unhinged, started posting on FB that they thought your family deserved to be killed.

Say they did that every day for weeks.

So, you think, this is kinda freaky, I'm gonna call the cops, just in case. I know I would, cause if the guy murdered me, I'd want the cops to know who probably did the crime.

Anyway, you call the cops and they investigate.

After reading the posts they decide, maybe he's just talking crap, maybe he's a threat, we don't know, but hey we're cops, let's go see.

They show up at his house, and he refuses to be rational with them, a crowd gathers.

The cops then decide that, the only way they'll get answers is to take him somewhere, a third location, and ask him questions. He refuses to go. Legally they can handcuff him and take him for questioning.

uk.answers.yahoo.com...

At that point, if they think you are a immediate threat, they can get an emergency involuntary psychiatric hold, but they need a judge to sign off on it in most cases.




Virginia
As of 2008 Virginia was one of only five states requiring imminent danger in order to involuntarily commit someone. But after the Virginia Tech Massacre, there was significant political consensus to strengthen the protections for society and allow more leniency in determining that an individual needed to be committed against their will.

-- the person has a mental illness and there is a substantial likelihood that, as a result of mental illness, the person will, in the near future, (1) cause serious physical harm to himself or others as evidenced by recent behavior causing, attempting, or threatening harm and other relevant information, if any

--the person has a mental illness and there is a substantial likelihood that, as a result of mental illness, the person will, in the near future, (2) suffer serious harm due to his lack of capacity to protect himself from harm or to provide for his basic human needs


en.wikipedia.org...

Now, during this, the guy CAN claim he's not crazy, not a threat etc. Most people dealing with cops claim innocence, but.. you know, that's pretty meaningless.

The important points:

- He was NOT kidnapped
- He was NOT locked up for posting something controversial on FB
- He could ONLY be locked up if the cops (and probably a judge) think he's an imminent threat.

So, please, keep exercising your free speech, calm down, and don't spread false rumours.


You are so wrong!

There must be a specific reason why he was committed. That is one reason why he was released because there was NO CAUSE. This is determined by the questioning of the person. They must show irrational behavior as evidence so the order to commit can be started and the person put under so called protective order....

He was locked up! and another Judge wanted him to be confined for 30 days yet another judge read the order and said it was invalid because "no specific charge or action was listed on it"

Raub was questioned because of his facebook posts....

What you are missing is that he was detained and then was supposed to be committed for 30 days if another judge would have agreed.....



posted on Aug, 23 2012 @ 05:20 PM
link   
reply to post by Golf66
 


GOLF66.....Thank you for the good response to my question. ----> "In view of the above - its possible that he is still military? As in Marine Reserves? Otherwise why the commitment to a VA facility? Anyone here know the answers?"

I hope you realize that regardless of the psychological condition of Brandon Raub and/or the reasoning behind his unlawful detention that the government committed an unconstitutional act here - not unlike what's done in Russia - in the past and to this very day. Have we stooped so low?

Who ever in a million years would have thought America would have become so degraded and despotic?
edit on 23-8-2012 by de_Genova because: edited with additions



posted on Aug, 24 2012 @ 03:18 AM
link   

Originally posted by fnpmitchreturns

Originally posted by longlostbrother
I've seen a lot of people on here and a few other forums freaking out about Brandon Raub.

They seem to think he was thrown in a psych ward for posting something controversial on FB. That is NOT the case.

Let me explain what the law allows the police, etc. to do, with an example.

Say that someone who didn't like you, who had military training, and who you thought might be slightly unhinged, started posting on FB that they thought your family deserved to be killed.

Say they did that every day for weeks.

So, you think, this is kinda freaky, I'm gonna call the cops, just in case. I know I would, cause if the guy murdered me, I'd want the cops to know who probably did the crime.

Anyway, you call the cops and they investigate.

After reading the posts they decide, maybe he's just talking crap, maybe he's a threat, we don't know, but hey we're cops, let's go see.

They show up at his house, and he refuses to be rational with them, a crowd gathers.

The cops then decide that, the only way they'll get answers is to take him somewhere, a third location, and ask him questions. He refuses to go. Legally they can handcuff him and take him for questioning.

uk.answers.yahoo.com...

At that point, if they think you are a immediate threat, they can get an emergency involuntary psychiatric hold, but they need a judge to sign off on it in most cases.




Virginia
As of 2008 Virginia was one of only five states requiring imminent danger in order to involuntarily commit someone. But after the Virginia Tech Massacre, there was significant political consensus to strengthen the protections for society and allow more leniency in determining that an individual needed to be committed against their will.

-- the person has a mental illness and there is a substantial likelihood that, as a result of mental illness, the person will, in the near future, (1) cause serious physical harm to himself or others as evidenced by recent behavior causing, attempting, or threatening harm and other relevant information, if any

--the person has a mental illness and there is a substantial likelihood that, as a result of mental illness, the person will, in the near future, (2) suffer serious harm due to his lack of capacity to protect himself from harm or to provide for his basic human needs


en.wikipedia.org...

Now, during this, the guy CAN claim he's not crazy, not a threat etc. Most people dealing with cops claim innocence, but.. you know, that's pretty meaningless.

The important points:

- He was NOT kidnapped
- He was NOT locked up for posting something controversial on FB
- He could ONLY be locked up if the cops (and probably a judge) think he's an imminent threat.

So, please, keep exercising your free speech, calm down, and don't spread false rumours.


You are so wrong!

There must be a specific reason why he was committed. That is one reason why he was released because there was NO CAUSE. This is determined by the questioning of the person. They must show irrational behavior as evidence so the order to commit can be started and the person put under so called protective order....

He was locked up! and another Judge wanted him to be confined for 30 days yet another judge read the order and said it was invalid because "no specific charge or action was listed on it"

Raub was questioned because of his facebook posts....

What you are missing is that he was detained and then was supposed to be committed for 30 days if another judge would have agreed.....


You're conflating and eliding things.

He WAS questioned because of his FB posts. Not detained because of them.

You DON'T have to have a charge listed against you to be detained, just be seen to be an immediate threat, to yourself or others... Go read the relevant laws yourself... as for the second judge, well this sort of this happens pretty continuously, doesn't it...? One judge thinks one thing, another the opposite... It's pretty clear, logically, that say, if the police thought your behaviour was threatening, and if they thought you'd hard yourself or others, unless they picked you up, they would pick you up, talk to a judge, and see what happened. In Virginia, and in pretty much every state I've looked at, that's legal...

Glad he's released, btw., but still don't think we can know for sure why he was detained, why the was put in a psych hospital, etc.

The judge certainly didn't comment on his mental fitness.

BTW: his little "Take our Republic back" rant is full of nonsense, and inaccuracies... It's pretty obviously regurgitated propaganda he's been told...


edit on 24-8-2012 by longlostbrother because: (no reason given)




top topics



 
4
<< 2  3  4   >>

log in

join