Law School Discussion

Nine Years of Discussion
;

Author Topic: Psychopath attorneys  (Read 26977 times)

actuate

  • Newbie
  • *
  • Posts: 3
    • View Profile
This Monday
« Reply #70 on: August 18, 2007, 06:47:46 AM »

cohere

  • Newbie
  • *
  • Posts: 3
    • View Profile
Re: Psychopath attorneys
« Reply #71 on: August 18, 2007, 06:48:37 PM »
Thanks for letting us know, actuate. :)

apocryphal

  • Newbie
  • *
  • Posts: 4
    • View Profile
Re: Psychopath attorneys
« Reply #72 on: August 19, 2007, 08:09:18 PM »

[...] He is bored with his own life and is permeated by a seething and explosive envy of the lucky, the mighty, the clever, the have it alls, the know it alls, the handsome, the happy - in short: his opposites. [...]


You hit the @ # ! * i n g nail on the m o t h e r @ # ! * i n g head!

Red Cell

  • Jr. Member
  • **
  • Posts: 6
    • View Profile
Re: Psychopath attorneys
« Reply #73 on: August 19, 2007, 09:35:54 PM »
For all those who have read these blogs, do not attend Syracuse University College of Law.  This program has refused to deal with this behavior.  For Syracuse, it is the crying gang...

It is typically a group that has one of those personalities in it that will not stop with another person.  Law school attracts this personality type and incompetent administrators, faculty, and staff allow it continue in the school.    The profession is loathe to stop this behavior.  It becomes worse.  High salaries coupled with new social groups provide a larger network with which to destroy someone.  In fact, many will find that those psychpathic personalities are most often helped to the detriment of others.  As a group, they live to get around a person and destroy that person.  It's a brag.

"F" stands for Felony in every jurisdiction and crossing state lines makes it a federal offense but for law schools it is the "L" word Liability.  Law schools do not care what anyone does as long as they are not sued.  Go find corporate counsel, the PR group, and the dedicated donors/alums who will stop at nothing to silence all.  This may also be known as an internal investigation.         


Red Cell 

   
 

execrable

  • Newbie
  • *
  • Posts: 2
    • View Profile
Re: Psychopath attorneys
« Reply #74 on: August 21, 2007, 10:07:29 PM »
Being a psychopath isn't illegal -- in fact, some psychopaths are very successful members of society, an Ottawa lawyer argued at a dangerous offender hearing. A former Ace Crew gang member -- who as a teen was convicted of manslaughter in the death of Sylvain Leduc -- was facing a dangerous offender application following further convictions for forcible confinement, extortion and assault causing bodily harm among other raps. He has been branded a psychopath and untreatable by the Crown.

"It's a noble endeavour to treat psychopaths, but it's not expected to be successful," said Crown prosecutor Jason Neubauer, citing testimony by forensic psychiatrist Stephen Hucker that likened the personality type to an untreatable cancer. But defence lawyer Lorne Goldstein argued that while the psychopath label isn't treatable, antisocial behavior is. "There is some evidence to suggest that some judges, lawyers and CEOs do rank high on the psychopathy score," said Goldstein. "Psychopaths can't be treated -- that is the prevailing thinking -- but I have not seen a single case that says they can't be rehabilitated."

largess

  • Jr. Member
  • **
  • Posts: 8
    • View Profile
Re: Psychopath attorneys
« Reply #75 on: August 24, 2007, 07:26:59 AM »

Being a psychopath isn't illegal -- in fact, some psychopaths are very successful members of society, an Ottawa lawyer argued at a dangerous offender hearing. A former Ace Crew gang member -- who as a teen was convicted of manslaughter in the death of Sylvain Leduc -- was facing a dangerous offender application following further convictions for forcible confinement, extortion and assault causing bodily harm among other raps. He has been branded a psychopath and untreatable by the Crown.

"It's a noble endeavour to treat psychopaths, but it's not expected to be successful," said Crown prosecutor Jason Neubauer, citing testimony by forensic psychiatrist Stephen Hucker that likened the personality type to an untreatable cancer. But defence lawyer Lorne Goldstein argued that while the psychopath label isn't treatable, antisocial behavior is. "There is some evidence to suggest that some judges, lawyers and CEOs do rank high on the psychopathy score," said Goldstein. "Psychopaths can't be treated -- that is the prevailing thinking -- but I have not seen a single case that says they can't be rehabilitated."


It appears to be a pretty persuasive argument.
What a happy coincidence. God hates the same people I do.

libo

  • Newbie
  • *
  • Posts: 4
    • View Profile
Misdiagnosing Narcissism - The Bipolar I Disorder
« Reply #76 on: February 24, 2008, 01:24:51 PM »

Many attorneys suffer from NPD (Narcissistic Personality Disorder).

Narcissism, in human psychology is the pattern of thinking and behaving which involves infatuation and obsession with one's self to the exclusion of others. It may be seen manifest in the chronic pursuit of personal gratification and public attention, in social dominance and personal ambition, braggadocio, insensitivity to others (lack of empathy) and/or excessive dependence on others to meet his/her responsibilities in daily living and thinking.


The manic phase of Bipolar I Disorder is often misdiagnosed as Narcissistic Personality Disorder (NPD). Bipolar patients in the manic phase exhibit many of the signs and symptoms of pathological narcissism -- hyperactivity, self-centeredness, lack of empathy, and control freakery. During this recurring chapter of the disease, the patient is euphoric, has grandiose fantasies, spins unrealistic schemes, and has frequent rage attacks (is irritable) if her or his wishes and plans are (inevitably) frustrated. The manic phases of the bipolar disorder, however, are limited in time -- NPD is not. Furthermore, the mania is followed by -- usually protracted -- depressive episodes. The narcissist is also frequently dysphoric. But whereas the bipolar sinks into deep self-deprecation, self-devaluation, unbounded pessimism, all-pervasive guilt and anhedonia -- the narcissist, even when depressed, never forgoes his narcissism: his grandiosity, sense of entitlement, haughtiness, and lack of empathy. Narcissistic dysphorias are much shorter and reactive -- they constitute a response to the Grandiosity Gap. In plain words, the narcissist is dejected when confronted with the abyss between his inflated self-image and grandiose fantasies -- and the drab reality of his life: his failures, lack of accomplishments, disintegrating interpersonal relationships, and low status. Yet, one dose of Narcissistic Supply is enough to elevate the narcissists from the depth of misery to the heights of manic euphoria.

Not so with the bipolar. The source of her or his mood swings is assumed to be brain biochemistry -- not the availability of Narcissistic Supply. Whereas the narcissist is in full control of his faculties, even when maximally agitated, the bipolar often feels that s/he has lost control of his/her brain ("flight of ideas"), his/her speech, his/her attention span (distractibility), and his/her motor functions. The bipolar is prone to reckless behaviors and substance abuse only during the manic phase. The narcissist does drugs, drinks, gambles, shops on credit, indulges in unsafe sex or in other compulsive behaviors both when elated and when deflated. As a rule, the bipolar's manic phase interferes with his/her social and occupational functioning. Many narcissists, in contrast, reach the highest rungs of their community, church, firm, or voluntary organization. Most of the time, they function flawlessly -- though the inevitable blowups and the grating extortion of Narcissistic Supply usually put an end to the narcissist's career and social liaisons. The manic phase of bipolar sometimes requires hospitalization and -- more frequently than admitted -- involves psychotic features. Narcissists are never hospitalized as the risk for self-harm is minute.

Moreover, psychotic microepisodes in narcissism are decompensatory in nature and appear only under unendurable stress (e.g., in intensive therapy). The bipolar's mania provokes discomfort in both strangers and in the patient's nearest and dearest. His/her constant cheer and compulsive insistence on interpersonal, sexual, and occupational, or professional interactions engenders unease and repulsion. Her/his lability of mood -- rapid shifts between uncontrollable rage and unnatural good spirits -- is downright intimidating. The narcissist's gregariousness, by comparison, is calculated, "cold", controlled, and goal-orientated (the extraction of Narcissistic Supply). His cycles of mood and affect are far less pronounced and less rapid. The bipolar's swollen self-esteem, overstated self-confidence, obvious grandiosity, and delusional fantasies are akin to the narcissist's and are the source of the diagnostic confusion. Both types of patients purport to give advice, carry out an assignment, accomplish a mission, or embark on an enterprise for which they are uniquely unqualified and lack the talents, skills, knowledge, or experience required. But the bipolar's bombast is far more delusional than the narcissist's. Ideas of reference and magical thinking are common and, in this sense, the bipolar is closer to the schizotypal than to the narcissistic.

There are other differentiating symptoms:

Sleep disorders -- notably acute insomnia -- are common in the manic phase of bipolar and uncommon in narcissism. So is "manic speech" -- pressured, uninterruptible, loud, rapid, dramatic (includes singing and humorous asides), sometimes incomprehensible, incoherent, chaotic, and lasts for hours. It reflects the bipolar's inner turmoil and his/her inability to control his/her racing and kaleidoscopic thoughts. As opposed to narcissists, bipolar in the manic phase are often distracted by the slightest stimuli, are unable to focus on relevant data, or to maintain the thread of conversation. They are "all over the place" -- simultaneously initiating numerous business ventures, joining a myriad organization, writing umpteen letters, contacting hundreds of friends and perfect strangers, acting in a domineering, demanding, and intrusive manner, totally disregarding the needs and emotions of the unfortunate recipients of their unwanted attentions. They rarely follow up on their projects. The transformation is so marked that the bipolar is often described by his/her closest as "not himself/herself". Indeed, some bipolars relocate, change name and appearance, and lose contact with their "former life". Antisocial or even criminal behavior is not uncommon and aggression is marked, directed at both others (assault) and oneself (suicide). Some biploars describe an acuteness of the senses, akin to experiences recounted by drug users: smells, sounds, and sights are accentuated and attain an unearthly quality. As opposed to narcissists, bipolars regret their misdeeds following the manic phase and try to atone for their actions. They realize and accept that "something is wrong with them" and seek help. During the depressive phase they are ego-dystonic and their defenses are autoplastic (they blame themselves for their defeats, failures, and mishaps). Finally, pathological narcissism is already discernible in early adolescence. The full-fledged bipolar disorder -- including a manic phase -- rarely occurs before the age of 20. The narcissist is consistent in his pathology -- not so the bipolar. The onset of the manic episode is fast and furious and results in a conspicuous metamorphosis of the patient.

Valenta

  • Jr. Member
  • **
  • Posts: 5
    • View Profile
Re: Psychopath attorneys
« Reply #77 on: June 10, 2008, 05:43:28 PM »

-- Visionary

Contrary to popular opinion, serial killers are rarely insane or motivated by hallucinations and/or voices in their heads. Many claim to be, usually as a way of trying to get acquitted by reason of insanity. There are, however, a few genuine cases of serial killers who were compelled by such delusions.

Herbert Mullin slaughtered 13 people after voices told him that murder was necessary to prevent California from suffering an earthquake. (Mullin went to great pains to point out that California did indeed avoid an earthquake during his murder spree.)

Ed Gein claimed that by eating the corpses of women who looked like his deceased mother, he could preserve his mother's soul inside his body. He killed two women who bore passing resemblances to his mother, eating one and being apprehended while in the process of preparing the second woman's body for consumption. He also used the flesh of exhumed corpses to fashion a "woman suit" for himself so that he could "become" his mother, and carried on conversations with himself in a falsetto voice. After his arrest he was placed in a mental facility for the remainder of his life.


-- Missionary

So-called missionary killers believe that their acts are justified on the basis that they are getting rid of a certain type of person (often prostitutes or members of a certain ethnic group), and thus doing society a favor. Gary Ridgway and Aileen Wuornos are often described as missionary killers. In Wuornos' case, the victims were not prostitutes, but their patrons. Missionary killers differ from other types of serial killer in that their motive is generally non-sexual. Arguably, Jack the Ripper also fits this role.


-- Hedonistic

This type kills for the sheer pleasure of it, although what aspect they enjoy varies. Yang Xinhai's post capture statement is typical of such killers' attitudes: "When I killed people I had a desire [to kill more]. This inspired me to kill more. I don't care whether they deserve to live or not. It is none of my concern"[1]. Some killers may enjoy the actual "chase" of hunting down a victim more than anything, while others may be primarily motivated by the act of torturing and abusing the victim while they are alive. Yet others, like Jeffrey Dahmer, may kill the victim quickly, almost as if it were a chore, and then indulge in necrophilia or cannibalism with the body. Usually there is a strong sexual aspect to the crimes, even if it may not be immediately obvious, but some killers obtain a surge of excitement that is not necessarily sexual, such as Berkowitz, who got a thrill out of shooting young couples in cars at random and then running away without ever physically touching the victims.


-- Gain motivated

Most criminals who commit multiple murders for material ends (such as mob hit men) are not classed as serial killers, because they are motivated by economic gain rather than psychopathological compulsion.[citation needed] There is a fine line separating such killers, however. For example, Marcel Petiot, who operated in Nazi-occupied France, could be classified as a serial killer. He posed as a member of the French Resistance and lured wealthy Jewish people to his home, claiming he could smuggle them out of the country. Instead he murdered them and stole their belongings, killing 63 people before he was finally caught. Although Petiot's primary motivation was materialistic, few would deny that a man willing to slaughter so many people simply to acquire a few dozen suitcases of clothes and jewelry was a compulsive killer and psychopath. However, it is impossible to understand the true motivation in such cases.


-- Power/control

This is the most common serial killer. Their main objective for killing is to gain and exert power over their victim. Such killers are sometimes abused as children, which means they feel incredibly powerless and inadequate, and often they indulge in rituals that are linked, often very specifically, to forms of abuse they suffered themselves. One killer, for example, forced young girls to perform oral sex on him, after which he would spank the girl before finally strangling her. After capture, the killer claimed that when he was a child his older sister would force him to perform oral sex on her, then she would spank him in order to terrify him into not telling their parents.[citation needed] The ritual he performed with his victims would negate the humiliation he felt from his abuse as a child, although such relief would only be temporary, and like other such killers, he would soon feel compelled to repeat his actions until eventual capture. (The vast majority of child abuse victims do not become serial killers, of course, meaning that such abuse is not regarded as the sole trigger of such crimes in these cases.) Many power/control-motivated killers sexually abuse their victims, but they differ from hedonistic killers in that rape is not motivated by lust but as simply another form of dominating the victim.

Some serial killers may seem to have characteristics of more than one type. For example, British killer Peter Sutcliffe appeared to be both a visionary and a mission-oriented killer in that he claimed voices told him to clean up the streets of prostitutes.

Alternatively, another school of thought classifies motive as being one of three types: need, greed, or power.


Exactly, MacDonald! Psychological studies have shown that individuals who take pleasure in inflicting harm on animals are more likely to do so to humans. One of the known warning signs of certain psychopathologies, including anti-social personality disorder, also known as psychopathic personality disorder, is a history of torturing pets and small animals, a behavior known as zoosadism. The standard diagnostic and treatment manual for psychiatric and emotional disorders lists cruelty to animals a diagnostic criterion for conduct disorders, though it should be noted that the inclusion of animal cruelty within this standard only began with DSM-IV. A survey of psychiatric patients who had repeatedly tortured dogs and cats found all of them had high levels of aggression toward people as well, including one patient who had murdered a young boy. MacDonald Triad, indicators of violent antisocial behavior in children and adolescents. According to the studies used to form this model, cruelty to animals is a common (but not with every case) behavior in children and adolescents who grow up to become serial killers and other violent criminals.

There is some research, however, in both the UK and the U.S. that challenges the assertion that animal cruelty begets human-directed violence. Heather Piper's work, published in a 2003 article in the Journal of Social Work, posits that the presumed linkage between animal cruelty and future, human directed violence might be a "sheep in wolve's clothing." Arguing that the Human Society and other animal rights organizations have popularized the seemingly "common-sense" claim that cruelty to animals is a sort of practice for later cruelty toward humans, Lea and Stock, in a Spring 2007 Proteus: A Journal of Ideas article dispute the reliability and validity of the science that initially established this claim. MacDonald's work, for instance, was based upon very few cases and included no control group; other studies, similarly, looked only at the backgrounds of serial killers to make their claims. The reference earlier in this article to the "fact" that all of the psychiatric patients who, in one study, had reported abusing dogs or cats also reported feeling a high level of aggression toward humans was found at the Tulsa SPCA page. In fact, that study and others like it are dated and do not evidence the modern scientific standards of rigor such as including a control group.

http://people.ucsc.edu/~rglee/HW7_presentation.ppt#4

Lea's book, "Delinquency and Animal Cruelty: Myths and Realities about Social Pathology," for instance, uses a community sample (not just a sample of criminals or serial killers but a more general sample of a population of twenty-something year old Americans) to explore how common animal cruelty is among a non-institutionalized, non-criminal population and finds that 22% of males report having engaged in such acts. Additionally, Arluke et al., in a 1999 article in the Journal of Interpersonal Violence, find that, while some people are first cruel to animals and later cruel to humans, others are first cruel to humans and later to animals and still others simply alternate haphazardly between both types of cruelty. Finally, there is also evidence that some serial killers find a strong affinity to animals and never express cruelty toward animals but have no such qualms about enacting cruelty toward humans (this paradigm was also demonstrated by Hitler and others in the Nazi leadership).

http://people.howstuffworks.com/serial-killer.htm/printable

turn on the engine

  • Newbie
  • *
  • Posts: 2
    • View Profile
Re: Psychopath attorneys
« Reply #78 on: June 10, 2008, 07:55:39 PM »

Exactly, MacDonald! Psychological studies have shown that individuals who take pleasure in inflicting harm on animals are more likely to do so to humans. One of the known warning signs of certain psychopathologies, including anti-social personality disorder, also known as psychopathic personality disorder, is a history of torturing pets and small animals, a behavior known as zoosadism. The standard diagnostic and treatment manual for psychiatric and emotional disorders lists cruelty to animals a diagnostic criterion for conduct disorders, though it should be noted that the inclusion of animal cruelty within this standard only began with DSM-IV. A survey of psychiatric patients who had repeatedly tortured dogs and cats found all of them had high levels of aggression toward people as well, including one patient who had murdered a young boy. MacDonald Triad, indicators of violent antisocial behavior in children and adolescents. According to the studies used to form this model, cruelty to animals is a common (but not with every case) behavior in children and adolescents who grow up to become serial killers and other violent criminals.

There is some research, however, in both the UK and the U.S. that challenges the assertion that animal cruelty begets human-directed violence. Heather Piper's work, published in a 2003 article in the Journal of Social Work, posits that the presumed linkage between animal cruelty and future, human directed violence might be a "sheep in wolve's clothing." Arguing that the Human Society and other animal rights organizations have popularized the seemingly "common-sense" claim that cruelty to animals is a sort of practice for later cruelty toward humans, Lea and Stock, in a Spring 2007 Proteus: A Journal of Ideas article dispute the reliability and validity of the science that initially established this claim. MacDonald's work, for instance, was based upon very few cases and included no control group; other studies, similarly, looked only at the backgrounds of serial killers to make their claims. The reference earlier in this article to the "fact" that all of the psychiatric patients who, in one study, had reported abusing dogs or cats also reported feeling a high level of aggression toward humans was found at the Tulsa SPCA page. In fact, that study and others like it are dated and do not evidence the modern scientific standards of rigor such as including a control group.

http://people.ucsc.edu/~rglee/HW7_presentation.ppt#4

Lea's book, "Delinquency and Animal Cruelty: Myths and Realities about Social Pathology," for instance, uses a community sample (not just a sample of criminals or serial killers but a more general sample of a population of twenty-something year old Americans) to explore how common animal cruelty is among a non-institutionalized, non-criminal population and finds that 22% of males report having engaged in such acts. Additionally, Arluke et al., in a 1999 article in the Journal of Interpersonal Violence, find that, while some people are first cruel to animals and later cruel to humans, others are first cruel to humans and later to animals and still others simply alternate haphazardly between both types of cruelty. Finally, there is also evidence that some serial killers find a strong affinity to animals and never express cruelty toward animals but have no such qualms about enacting cruelty toward humans (this paradigm was also demonstrated by Hitler and others in the Nazi leadership).

http://people.howstuffworks.com/serial-killer.htm/printable




The "Mask of Sanity" is a book written by Hervey Cleckley, M.D., first published in 1941, describing Cleckley's clinical interviews with adult male incarcerated psychopaths. It is considered a seminal work and the most influential clinical description of psychopathy in the 20th century. The basic elements of psychopathy outlined by Cleckley are still relevant today. The title refers to the normal "mask" that conceals the mental disorder of the psychopathic person in Cleckley's conceptualization. Cleckley describes the psychopathic person as outwardly a perfect mimic of a normally functioning person, able to mask or disguise the fundamental lack of internal personality structure, an internal chaos that results in repeatedly purposeful destructive behavior, often more self-destructive than destructive to others. Despite the seemingly sincere, intelligent, even charming, external presentation, internally the psychopathic person does not have the ability to experience genuine emotions. Cleckley questions whether this mask of sanity is voluntarily assumed to intentionally hide the lack of internal structure, or if the mask hides a serious, but yet unidentified, psychiatric defect.

An expanded edition of the book was published in 1982, after the DSM, the manual used in the United States for categorizing psychiatric disorders, had changed the name and standards for the classification of psychopathy to antisocial personality disorder, incorporating most of Cleckley's 16 characteristics of a psychopath listed below. The original edition of the book is no longer available.

Pacavelli

  • Full Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 55
  • Ain't nothin to it, gangsta rap made me do it.
    • View Profile
Re: Psychopath attorneys
« Reply #79 on: June 11, 2008, 07:22:03 PM »
Man I really regret reading this thread.  I hope I don't become crazy....crazy people don't realize that they are crazy.  Now i'm just f-ing confused.   ???

**Throws award letters in the trash**
Stereotypes of a black male misunderstood, but it's still all good.
-Christopher Wallace