This happened in 2018.

https://www.click2houston.com/news/investigates/2026/01/14/attorney-charged-santa-fe-high-school-gunman-remains-incompetent-to-stand-trial/?fbclid=IwdGRjcAPUoU9jbGNrA9ShJ2V4dG4DYWVtAjExAHNydGMGYXBwX2lkDDM1MDY4NTUzMTcyOAABHtaQx1YLwnpGVmzOuMHT_6a1sEPamaK6c_WVb65JBmr7RI3UGCJfmigDJlVL_aem_5910w19HJg3Snh7kU5kZDw

Yes, he's working the system. At least he needs to be moved to another facility.

Wildmen03 said:

---

This guy is 25 now and is still avoiding his trial? He's clearly scamming everyone to avoid prosecution. At some point you gotta get this show on the road, and that point has well passed.

---

Is he scamming or is it some quack doctors?

TAMUallen said:

---

Wildmen03 said:

---

This guy is 25 now and is still avoiding his trial? He's clearly scamming everyone to avoid prosecution. At some point you gotta get this show on the road, and that point has well passed.

---

Is he scamming or is it some quack doctors?

---

Why not both? The article says around 150 days is the average to get someone competent for trial. He's been not competent for over 2,000 days. That's ****ed.

Real life "Primal Fear" story.

There are several people that have been at that state hospital longer than 5 years. It is rare but some people are just crazy and there is no fixing them and getting them competent to stand trial. When/if he ever goes to trial he obviously has a strong insanity defense, I wouldn't be surprised if he ends up committed more or less forever.

Mark Geragos went into this with Adam Carolla last week discussing Nick Reiner. Basically said that the guy likely doesn't remember doing it and is not in a mental state to stand trial. With therapy and the right setting you can get someone to be competent to stand trial, but when they get to the courtroom they crack and it goes back to an insanity plea and it is an endless loop.

https://adamcarolla.com/podcast-episode/mark-geragos-talks-nick-reiner-bill-cosby-derek-chauvin-and-more/

Quote:

---

What normally happens, and it's funny I'm here in Vista because I had one of these cases here also, what ends up happening inevitably is if they get to a point where it's determined that they're basically not competent. They go to a place like Atascadero, which is a mental health facility, lockdown facility. They've got, believe it or not, fairly good doctors and staff there that will get the person situated, medicated, and they're in a therapeutic environment.

At some point, it can take months or years, they'll say, they report back to the court and they say, look, we've stabilized the person. Then the person gets shipped back to county jail. As you saw when he was wearing the bedspread, the blue bedspread, that's usually consistent with being in Twin Towers downtown, which is the mental health unit.

What happens, though, is they go back down there, they're in a jail facility, and they immediately crumble again. Then you get back in the court system and you have to declare a doubt as to competency. They get shipped back to Atascadero.

It's this endless cycle or endless circle jerk of mental health that is just you bounce between[…]"

---

Ignoring execution (which is obviously a different outcome), is there a difference between being locked up in a mental hospital for life and being locked up in prison for life? The outcome is effectively the same (perp never rejoins society), so other than the actual procedure of a trial, is it really an issue worth worrying about? Everyone knows he did it, and he'll never be a free man again, so why worry about it?

Bringing capital punishment back in, even if he was convicted today, he would still sit on death row for 20+ years. And realistically, the fact that he has taken this long to still be declared incompetent, seems like it would just make the appeals process take even longer before he could get the juice.

valvemonkey91 said:

---

What is the reasoning behind not executing the insane? Why does the mental state of a killer matter?

---

Same reason age matters. Culpability. You can't convict a 5 year old who finds a loaded gun and kills their sibling because they're not mentally competent enough to understand the crime and be culpable. Same thing for an adult who may have the mental faculties of a 5 year old. And by extension, is the same thing goes for the insane. Depending on what is wrong with them, they may lack the mental capacity to understand they committed/were committing a crime.

And let's say you extend your argument to normal people involved in an accident where there is no negligence or malfeasance, just poor circumstances. For example, you're in a parking lot and back up into an old lady who stepped out from behind a tall van because she didn't see you backing up, and she falls over, his her head, and dies. You couldn't see her, she couldn't see you, and the fact that she feel and hit her head is just a random accident. Should we execute you since you're responsible for killing her? Why does your mental state or intention matter?

Time to evaluate the competency of the doctors who are completing the competency check of the mass murderer.

If he's that looney then he has no place or utility in society. Take him around back and just be done with it.

AtticusMatlock said:

---

State hospital doctors are very good at picking up malingering. It's far more likely the guy is just clinically insane and so far gone he may never be able to stand trial. The Vernon State Hospital is where a lot of these violent guys go to regain competency and the vast majority get cleared for trial. It's not like the doctors are in on some sort of conspiracy here.

---

The field of mental health has taken a far left turn and criminality, no matter how abhorrent, is seen as due to external factors (e.g., trauma, abuse, poverty, oppression and the like) and not the individuals own malevolent desires.

And every criminal knows they can play the mental health system from the youngest of incarcerated juvenile offenders who assaults a peer and immediately throws out they are suicidal and/or hearing voices.

Thought this thread was about Alexander Rae Baldwin III.

ABATTBQ11 said:

---

valvemonkey91 said:

---

What is the reasoning behind not executing the insane? Why does the mental state of a killer matter?

---

Same reason age matters. Culpability. You can't convict a 5 year old who finds a loaded gun and kills their sibling because they're not mentally competent enough to understand the crime and be culpable. Same thing for an adult who may have the mental faculties of a 5 year old. And by extension, is the same thing goes for the insane. Depending on what is wrong with them, they may lack the mental capacity to understand they committed/were committing a crime.

And let's say you extend your argument to normal people involved in an accident where there is no negligence or malfeasance, just poor circumstances. For example, you're in a parking lot and back up into an old lady who stepped out from behind a tall van because she didn't see you backing up, and she falls over, his her head, and dies. You couldn't see her, she couldn't see you, and the fact that she feel and hit her head is just a random accident. Should we execute you since you're responsible for killing her? Why does your mental state or intention matter?

---

Apples and oranges. Of course there are differing levels of homicide. I should have rephrased my post. An accidental death punishment does not (nor should it) rise to the death penalty. Likewise, a 5yr old can't be held accountable either. However, a fully capable person who "just snaps" should be held accountable for the appropriate punishment. "Crazy people" who "snap" should be eligible for execution. JMHO.

This is a case where justice will be denied, he will be eventually released, and justice will be served outside of the courts.