YOUR HONOR, WE ARE AWARE THAT THIS COURT WOULD HAVE GRANTED THE UNSUPERVISED ON-GROUNDS PASS IN A CASE LIKE THIS IF ALL PARTIES HAD BEEN IN AGREEMENT. THAT SUGGESTS THAT ANY PERSON WHO DIDN’T WANT MR. SAWICKI TO PROGRESS TOWARD RELEASE, FOR ANY REASON, HAD AN IMPLIED EFFECTIVE VETO.
BUT LONG SETTLED LAW SAYS THAT THE STATE CAN ONLY HOLD SOMEONE INVOLUNTARILY IN A PSYCHIATRIC INSTITUTION IF, AND AS LONG AS, THAT PERSON IS DANGEROUS TO HIM OR HERSELF OR OTHERS DUE TO MENTAL ILLNESS. MR. SAWICKI IS ACKNOWLEDGED BY EVERY EXPERT AND EVERY CLINICIAN WHO HAS TESTIFIED IN THIS MATTER, TO NO LONGER BE MENTALLY ILL AND DANGEROUS. HIS SCHIZOPHRENIA IS IN FULL REMISSION, HE’S SHOWN NO SYMPTOMS OF PSYCHOSIS FOR MANY YEARS. IN OTHER WORDS, HIS TREATMENT HAS BEEN SUCCESSFUL, IT’S OVER, AND IT’S TIME TO RELEASE HIM. THAT IS THE ONLY REASONABLE CONCLUSION FROM THE EVIDENCE, AND IT’S THE ONLY CONSTITUTIONAL APPLICATION OF THE LAW, UNDER THE PRECEDENT OF FOUCHA V. LOUISIANA, 504 U.S. 71 (U.S. SUPREME COURT, 1992).
NOW THE STATE MAY SAY WE DIDN’T PROVE THAT MR. SAWICKI IS NOT MENTALLY ILL AND DANGEROUS BY CLEAR AND CONVINCING EVIDENCE. THEY WOULD BE TECHNICALLY CORRECT TO SAY THAT, BUT OF COURSE NO ONE CAN EVER PROVE THEY ARE NOT MENTALLY ILL. THAT’S A NEGATIVE AVERMENT THAT ISN’T SUSCEPTIBLE TO CLEAR AND CONVINCING PROOF. I CAN’T PROVE I’M NOT MENTALLY ILL. YOU CAN’T PROVE YOU’RE NOT, MS. BOWDEN CAN’T PROVE SHE’S NOT.
OF COURSE, YOU AND I AND MS. BOWDEN ARE IN A DIFFERENT SITUATION THAN MR. SAWICKI BECAUSE WE NEVER KILLED ANYBODY AND HE DID.
NEVERTHELESS, MR. SAWICKI WAS FOUND NOT GUILTY BY REASON OF INSANITY, SO HE CANNOT BE PUNISHED. HE CAN ONLY BE TREATED IN A SAFE ENVIRONMENT, THAT’S THE STATE’S ONLY LEGITIMATE INTEREST AND ITS ONLY LEGITIMATE ROLE NOW. AND WHAT IF THERE’S NOTHING TO TREAT, WITH HIS SCHIZOPHRENIA IN REMISSION? “IN REMISSION”, BY THE WAY, IS COMPATIBLE WITH NO LONGER MENTALLY ILL, PURSUANT TO A RECENT FIRST DISTRICT APPELLATE COURT DECISION IN PEOPLE V. GUNDERSON, IN WHICH THAT COURT CITED LEVINE V. TORVIK, 986 F.2D 1506 (6TH CIR. 1993), OVERRULED IN PART ON OTHER GROUNDS BY THOMPSON V. KEOHANE, 516 U.S. 99 (1995).
IF THERE’S NOTHING TO TREAT, WHY WOULD ANYONE STILL WANT TO KEEP MR. SAWICKI AT ELGIN MENTAL HEALTH CENTER FOR $800/DAY ON THE TAXPAYER? THAT IS A REALLY GOOD QUESTION. JAMES PATRICK CORCORAN TESTIFIED THAT MR. SAWICKI IS ONE OF THE TWELVE MOST DIFFICULT PATIENTS IN THE FACILITY, AND ONE REASON WHY GOOD M.D. PSYCHIATRISTS CANNOT EVEN BE RECRUITED FOR THE MEDICAL DIRECTOR JOB. SO HOW IS HE SO DIFFICULT, DESPITE BEING AN APPARENT TREATMENT SUCCESS? WELL… I SUGGEST THAT HE’S “DIFFICULT” PRECISELY BECAUSE HE HAS RECOVERED SO FULLY… WITHOUT PSYCHIATRIC DRUGS. THAT MAKES HIM A SORT OF DISSIDENT, AND A THREAT TO THE ORTHODOX CULT WHEREIN EVERYBODY MUST TAKE DRUGS WHETHER THEY LIKE IT OR NOT, AND EVERYBODY MUST BELIEVE IN MENTAL ILLNESS THE EXACT SAME WAY.
DR CORCORAN, AND MAYBE A HANDFUL OF OTHERS AT ELGIN, WOULD PUNISH MR. SAWICKI FOR BEING SUCCESSFUL. AND THEY ARE ACTUALLY TRYING TO RECRUIT THIS COURT TO HELP PUNISH MR. SAWICKI. BUT IN DOING THIS, THEY MAKE MISTAKES AND THEY COMMIT FRAUD UPON THE COURT.
I CALL YOUR ATTENTION TO A RECENT COURT REPORT AND COVER LETTER, DATED AUGUST, 2017. THIS IS AN OFFICIAL DOCUMENT, SUBMITTED AS EVIDENCE AND THEREFORE AS IF SWORN UNDER PENALTIES OF PERJURY. THE FINAL SENTENCE IN THIS REPORT STATES THAT A HEARING IS SCHEDULED FOR SEPTEMBER 29TH, 2017. THE TROUBLE IS, ALTHOUGH WE DID HAVE A HEARING ON THAT DATE, IT WASN’T SCHEDULED UNTIL SEPTEMBER 15TH. SO HOW EXACTLY COULD A COURT REPORT DATED AUGUST INCLUDE THAT INFORMATION, WHICH DIDN’T EXIST AT THE TIME THE WRITERS SWORE THEY WROTE IT? I POINTED THIS OUT TO VICKY INGRAM MYSELF, ABOUT A WEEK AGO. I BELIEVE THE OCTOBER REPORT THAT MS. BOWDEN ENTERED TODAY WAS SURPRISINGLY PROMPT, COMING ON THE SECOND DAY OF THE MONTH. YOUR HONOR MIGHT REALISE WHETHER THIS IS COMMON OR RARE, OR PERHAPS UNPRECEDENTED. IF THEY ARE SO CARELESS AS TO PUT A COMPLETELY UNNECESSARY UNTRUTH IN WRITING AND THEN HAVE TO SCRAMBLE WITH A NEW REPORT TO COVER THAT PROBLEM, THEN SHOULDN’T WE ASK WHAT ELSE MIGHT THEY BE UNTRUTHFUL ABOUT?
WE SUGGEST AT LEAST ONE OTHER THING…. THEY ARE UNTRUTHFUL ABOUT THE REASON THEY PUT MR. SAWICKI’S PETITION FOR PRIVILEGES ON HOLD. IT DOESN’T SEEM TO MAKE SENSE. THERE WAS NO EXISTING RULE ABOUT TURNING OVER ALL PASSWORDS, EVEN PASSWORDS TO FINANCIAL ACCOUNTS, WHEN MR. SAWICKI WAS USING THE COMPUTERS IN THE LIBRARY FOR RESEARCH. THE RULE HE IS ACCUSED OF BREAKING WAS REWORDED OPPORTUNISTICALLY AFTER THE ACCUSATION, AND THE DATE WAS CHANGED, JUST LIKE THE SO-CALLED “AUGUST, 2017” COURT REPORT. IT CAN REASONABLY BE ASKED, WHY WOULD THEY GO TO THE TROUBLE TO DO THIS?
PART OF THE ANSWER IS, ABSOLUTELY EVERYTHING THAT COULD BE EVEN TANGENTIALLY RELATED TO COMPUTERS OR DIGITAL INFORMATION IS AN EXTREMELY HOT SUBJECT RIGHT NOW AT ELGIN MENTAL HELTH CENTER. THEY ARE CONFISCATING EVERYONE’S COMPUTERS, EVERYONE’S DIGITAL MEDIA AND EVERY CONCEIVABLE STORAGE DEVICE, BECAUSE THEY ARE AFRAID CERTAIN EVIDENCE WILL GET OUT – EVIDENCE CURRENTLY BEING INVESTIGATED BY THE ILLINOIS STATE POLICE, OF SYSTEMATIC SEXUAL ABUSE OF PATIENTS BY STAFF. IT MAY BE RECALLED THAT I QUESTIONED FRIDA DUNPHEY ABOUT WHETHER SHE WAS AWARE THAT IF ANY SEXUAL CONTACT OCCURS BETWEEN A FEMALE STAFF MEMBER AND A MALE PATIENT, IT IS THE FEMALE STAFF MEMBER WHO GETS PROSECUTED FOR A FELONY CHARGE. MS. DUNPHEY ANSWERED MY QUESTION INSTANTLY, BEFORE THE STATE COULD EVEN OBJECT. OF COURSE SHE WAS AWARE! SHE HAS PROBABLY SEEN THE EVIDENCE HERSELF OF CERTAIN INCIDENTS … EVIDENCE THAT THE MEDIA AND THE PUBLIC WILL CERTAINLY INTERPRET TO SHOW THAT THIS INSTITUTION, THE OLDEST AND MOST WORLD RENOWNED STATE PSYCHIATRIC HOSPITAL IN ILLINOIS, IS IN REALITY A SLAVE PLANTATION OPERATED FOR THE CORRUPT PERSONAL BENEFITS OF STAFF.
BUT THAT’S A COMPLETELY DIFFERENT CASE, WHICH ONLY TOUCHES ON THIS ONE BY ACCIDENT. IN FACT, MY CLIENT HAS STRONGLY URGED ME NOT TO MENTION IT AT ALL. SO LET ME JUST QUICKLY OUTLINE WHAT THIS CASE IS ABOUT AND WHAT THE SEVERAL RECENT HEARINGS HAVE ESTABLISHED, TO MAKE THE CORRECT PERSPECTIVE EXPLICIT ON THE RECORD.
MR. SAWICKI WAS FOUND NOT GUILTY OF MURDER BY REASON OF INSANITY BY THIS COURT IN 2003, AND ADMITTED TO THE FORENSIC TREATMENT PROGRAM AT ELGIN WITH A THIEM DATE OF 2058. BASICALLY, THE COURT RULED THAT HE WAS NOT CULPABLE FOR SHOOTING HIS FORMER SUPERVISOR DEAD, BECAUSE HIS MENTAL ILLNESS MADE HIM DO IT. THUS, THE ONLY JUST THING TO DO WITH HIM WAS TREAT HIS MENTAL ILLNESS. THE COURT RIGHTFULLY LEFT IT TO THE MENTAL HEALTH EXPERTS AT ELGIN TO DECIDE EXACTLY HOW HIS MENTAL ILLNESS MIGHT BEST BE TREATED, AND I HAVE HEARD THIS COURT SAY ON NUMEROUS OCCASIONS THAT IT IS EXTREMELY RELUCTANT TO SECOND-GUESS THE EXPERTISE OF THE DOCTORS.
AFTER FOURTEEN YEARS, THE MENTAL HEALTH EXPERTS AND THE DOCTORS DECIDED THAT THE BEST TREATMENT PROGRAM SHOULD INCLUDE UNSUPERVISED ON-GROUNDS PASS PRIVILEGES, AND THEY PETITIONED THE COURT FOR THAT. THE COURT ORDERED A SEPARATE EVALUATION FROM THE TENTH FLOOR, AND THOSE MENTAL HEALTH EXPERTS ALSO DECIDED THAT THE BEST TREATMENT PROGRAM SHOULD INCLUDE UNSUPERVISED ON-GROUNDS PASS PRIVILEGES. IF WE HAD GOTTEN TO A HEARING QUICKLY ENOUGH, IT WOULD HAVE BEEN AN AGREED ORDER.
THEN CAME THE UNFORTUNATE ALLEGATION WHICH WE HAVE LITIGATED THROUGH FOUR DAYS OF HEARINGS AND VARIOUS WITNESSES. MR. SAWICKI WAS SAID TO HAVE MISUSED HIS INTERNET ACCESS VIA THE DISTANCE LEARNING PROGRAM TO TRADE SECURITIES ON-LINE. THE APPLICATION FOR THE PASS PRIVILEGE WAS SUPPOSEDLY PUT ON HOLD DURING AN INVESTIGATION INTO THIS. THE INVESTIGATION CONSISTED OF EXPERTS IN SPRINGFIELD WHO CHECKED AND CATALOGUED ALL THE WEB PAGES MR. SAWICKI HAD VISITED ON LINE. A LOCAL TECH GUY AT ELGIN THEN REVIEWED THAT CATALOGUE FROM SPRINGFIELD, AND SUMMARIZED IT. SEVERAL INDIVIDUALS TESTIFIED ABOUT THIS EVIDENCE. IN THE END, EVERY WITNESS INVOLVED IN THE ALLEGATION AND THE SUBSEQUENT INVESTIGATION TESTIFIED THAT THEY HAD NO INFORMATION TO SUBSTANTIATE THE ALLEGATION. NOBODY WAS EVEN WILLING TO ADMIT THAT THE ALLEGATION HAD EVER COME FROM THEM TO BEGIN WITH. WE ALSO PRESENTED AN EXPERT WHO TESTIFIED THAT IT WOULD HAVE BEEN POINTLESS AND TOTALLY IMPRACTICABLE FOR MR. SAWICKI TO TRADE ON LINE DURING HIS DISTANCE LEARNING PROGRAM COMPUTER TIME. THE BOTTOM LINE IS, MR. SAWICKI DID NOT ABUSE HIS DISTANCE LEARNING COMPUTER TIME TO TRADE ON LINE, AFTER ALL.
SO, WITH THE ORIGINAL ALLEGATION PROVEN FALSE, THE REASON THE PASS REQUEST HAD BEEN PUT ON HOLD HAD TO BE CHANGED, OR ACTUALLY, FALSIFIED AFTER THE FACT. IT BECAME A SLIGHTLY VAGUE ALLEGATION THAT SOME RULE OR RULES WERE VIOLATED. THEN DR. CORCORAN ALSO GRATUITOUSLY SUGGESTED THAT MR. SAWICKI MIGHT BE ONE OF THE TWELVE MOST DIFFICULT PATIENTS AT ELGIN, WITHOUT SAYING WHY. MAYBE ITS BECAUSE HE IS A CLEAR EXAMPLE OF SOMEONE WHO DOESN’T NEED DRUGS, OR MAYBE ITS EVEN BECAUSE HE HAS ME AS HIS LEGAL COUNSEL. NEITHER OF THOSE ARE REASONS TO PUT HIS PASS ON HOLD. THEY WANTED TO PUT HIS PASS ON HOLD, SUPPOSEDLY, BECAUSE OF AN ACCUSATION WHICH CLEARLY WAS UNTRUE. MR. SAWICKI USED HIS COMPUTER ACCESS FOR EXACTLY WHAT HE WAS SUPPOSED TO USE IT FOR: STUDYING MATERIAL RELEVANT TO THE ON-LINE COURSES HE WAS ENROLLED IN.
SO WE ASK THE COURT TO GRANT THE PETITION FOR PASSES. IN FACT, WE ASK THE COURT TO DISCHARGE MR. SAWICKI FROM DHS CUSTODY, BECAUSE THE EVIDENCE SHOWS HE IS NO LONGER MENTALLY ILL, AND SO HE CAN’T BE DANGEROUS TO HIMSELF OR OTHERS DUE TO HIS NO LONGER EXISTING MENTAL ILLNESS, AND SO THE STATE HAS NO FURTHER RIGHT TO DENY HIM HIS LIBERTY AND TRUMP UP ALLEGATIONS AGAINST HIM. ILLINOIS’ STATUTE REQUIRING THAT AN NGRI COMMITTEE MUST PROVE, MANY YEARS AFTER HE WAS FOUND NGRI, BY AN ELEVATED STANDARD, THAT HE IS NO LONGER MENTALLY ILL IS IN VIOLATION OF THE FOURTEENTH AMENDMENT DUE PROCESS CLAUSE. THERE IS NO POSSIBLE PROCESS TO PROVE THE NON EXISTENCE OR AN ABSENCE OF MENTAL ILLNESS.
IT’S TIME THAT WE BEGIN TO HONESTLY CONFRONT THE BRUTAL FACT: THIS SYSTEM OF SO-CALLED FORENSIC MENTAL HEALTH THAT WE ARE WORKING FOR IS UNJUST, INCOMPETENT AND A WASTE OF OUR TIME AND MONEY.
No comments:
Post a Comment