Latest / Dumb Defenses / 4. A Dick in the Matrix

Transcript

4. A Dick in the Matrix · Dumb Defenses

• Frankie Hupy: Hello and welcome back to Dumb Defenses, where we travel through time and across the world to bring you the weirdest cases. I'm Frankie. And I think Judah's going first this week. J.D. Largent: I'm Judah. I am, I had promised you a case called Sweet Fanny Adams, which I indicated was picked based entirely off the name. ⁓ have read it first. It's about the brutal murder ⁓ ⁓ child ⁓ England. ⁓ we are gonna skip that. ⁓ I'm gonna talk to you about the legal journey ⁓ Frankie Hupy: ⁓ no. ⁓ dear. Fair. J.D. Largent: of an Australian man called Jared Hyams. So this started in about twenty ten. ⁓ Jared Himes ⁓ moving around and every you have to you have to like out a bunch of official paperwork to change your residence. ⁓ he was really sick he was moving a lot, so he was drawing ⁓ just like lines across a lot of the documents. And that worked fine. And one time, thinking that nobody was going to look at it, he just as his signature drew dick and balls. Frankie Hupy: Okay, that's a way to do it. J.D. Largent: And was by some government agencies as not being a valid as not being a valid signature. This is gonna be a short one today, but I just love the Frankie Hupy: What? J.D. Largent: Just sickiness. So from Vice.com, an article by Mitchell Sunderland called An Australian Man Has Won the Right to Draw a Penis as his signature. From ⁓ the Sydney Morning Herald, Melbourne Man faces stiff opposition. To penis signature by Bo Donnelly. And from Lawyers Weekly, Phallic's signature inspires Legal Career by Laura Bullock. So he draws dick balls and he gets pushback and just out of pure stubbornness, ⁓ this man goes on multiple year ⁓ legal fight against different Australian states and different governmental authorities to win the right to draw a penis and testicles as his signature The government said a couple of things about that, that it was offensive and that it was ⁓ too to replicate. ⁓ But fighting to say, like, who are you to tell me ⁓ what be my signature? ⁓ His is repeatedly thrown out of court. ⁓ He's with contempt of court, ⁓ but after a five year legal battle, ⁓ he the right to ⁓ have penis in testicles as his signature ⁓ in ⁓ He it on his ID, on his student ID, on his bank account information was was the Dickin Balls. Yeah. And but h his argument was who are you government to tell me what my signature should be? Like people just draw squiggles as their signature. You know, like Frankie Hupy: Which are like way more easy to copy. J.D. Largent: Yeah. says, all started 'cause quote, was moving a bit had to sign these electoral ⁓ in in brackets registration forms ⁓ and one day he just to draw a penis. this the attention of a pornographic actor named Lee who said, Quote, I think it's a great idea to have your dick as your signature. I'm jealous I didn't think of it since I use mine to cash checks on a regular basis. Then later on, apparently this fight inspired mister Hymes ⁓ go into the legal field Frankie Hupy: ⁓ God, was he signing legal pleadings with a penis? J.D. Largent: I don't know if he I don't know if he is because attention stops wrapping up around him, he wins ⁓ right to draw a and balls as a signature the same year that he's ⁓ finishing up his law degree ⁓ Victoria University. I think that that's a a heck of a hill to die on, but he picked ⁓ Frankie Hupy: That's I was gonna say. Like like the fact that that is the thing that you spend five years litigating is a little over the time. J.D. Largent: multiple levels of litigation, getting thrown out of court, getting threatened with complaints of sexual harassment, ⁓ and ultimately like, okay, you're gonna become a lawyer. Are you gonna keep a dick in balls as your s yeah, are you gonna sign legal pleadings ⁓ with dick and who's gonna hire you? ⁓ Frankie Hupy: Right? Like And who's gonna hire you? J.D. Largent: Like respectfully submit this application taking balls at the bottom. I would a look at that and that application would go right in the shredder. Frankie Hupy: Well, not even hire ⁓ at like at the firm, but also like as a client, maybe that porn star would, ⁓ but other people would probably like, That's super unprofessional and I don't want to be associated with you as my attorney. J.D. Largent: I mean it would it would be hilarious if you went into like a specialized field, like representing pornographic actors and pornography companies ⁓ they might think is ⁓ hilarious that their ⁓ qualified lawyer ⁓ a tick and b ⁓ this as a signature. that wraps up today's ⁓ fun ⁓ Frankie Hupy: Yeah. uses this as the signature. J.D. Largent: What is a legal signature and can you just draw ⁓ dick and balls? Apparently the answer is yes, and in the United States it's any mark that manifests your intent to be bound for what constitutes like a signature on a contract. Frankie Hupy: Apparently the answer is yes. And if this is the way you want to be contractually bound, then have at it. J.D. Largent: Yep. W one could definitely argue that a dick and ball still counts in the United States. That is from Australia. I found that to be a much funnier to read about and talk about 'cause as soon as I went through this book that I like, ⁓ I'm gonna read 'cause I just picked this 'cause it had ⁓ ⁓ the name and I was like, ha ha it's it's dirty and I like mm ⁓ mm mm mm mm nope ⁓ no no no no no ⁓ Frankie Hupy: Ha ha ha. That's more serious case. J.D. Largent: Yeah, let's let's do Dick Guy. So we went f we went from Fanny to Dick. Frankie Hupy: Yeah. Yep. Well, I sticking with my Matrix Defense ⁓ and I actually never seen the movie in full, so I watched it last night so I would be prepared to do this today. ⁓ J.D. Largent: I got some texts from your husband Frankie Hupy: he ⁓ my god, I can't believe Frankie's never watched this movie. J.D. Largent: let's go back Frankie watching Matrix for first time, quote, for research, and I assume this is your doing, so you get to have me live tweet their experience at you. ⁓ Here's a quotation from you. Is set in present day? ⁓ Another quote from you. I will be answering any questions. ⁓ Then he says only two reactions. Frankie Hupy: No, no, no. I so I I asked I asked him, is this set pr in present day to the recording? So like in nineteen ninety nine, and he said, I will not be answering any questions. J.D. Largent: Okay, that clarifies it. And then he says only two reactions so far. Chuckling at the cartoon imprint in the street when Neil fails the jump program and quote, his glasses don't have earpieces ⁓ that was your experience at me ⁓ of your watching The in full. ⁓ I saw that ⁓ ago. ⁓ Twenty years ago. Frankie Hupy: Mm-hmm. Ha ha ha. Mm-hmm. Yeah, I was definitely movie deprived as a child, so there's that. Anyways, into this whole thing as a legal defense, The as we all know, which came out in nineteen ninety-nine and then it's progeny. that movie brought into pop culture a theory that ⁓ we are all in a personalized computer simulation or video game and nothing around us is actually real. But that theory actually goes back as far as Plato's allegory of the cave. Uhhuh. J.D. Largent: ⁓ my gosh, bringing this back up. You you tease me for going back in time and we're going back to Plato. I remember this in Philosophy one ⁓ one with like Frankie Hupy: So the allegory of the cave was a thought experiment where ⁓ prisoners chained to a wall and facing the wall such that the entirety of their reality is the shadows that they can see from a puppet show behind them. And essentially the thought experiment comes to the idea that our perception is limited and we cannot possibly perceive everything that's going on everywhere. So there's no way to know That we are not characters in a game being controlled by someone we are completely unaware of. There were similar philosophies ⁓ in the world, like the butterfly dream from Zhuangzi from ancient China, the Indian philosophy of Maya, the Aztec philosophical texts ⁓ that theorized that the world was a painting or book by Tiotl. ⁓ so this is this idea of like, is life real has been going on for ages. it broke into the academic mainstream with Nick Barstrom's 2003 paper called Are You Living in a Computer Simulation? Yep. I remember reading it and being like, this is breaking my brain and I want to stop reading it. that was published in the Philosophical Quarterly, and that brought the philosophy into the mainstream. Mr. Barstrom asserted that we are either almost certainly living in a simulation. ⁓ J.D. Largent: I heard about this. I heard about this paper. Frankie Hupy: Or those simulations will never exist. He believed that we would eventually come to a point of being post human, quote, where humankind has acquired most of the technological capabilities that one can currently show to be consistent with physical laws and with material energy and constraints. essentially theory is that we c could convert entire planets computer programs ⁓ and the human mind become a substrate independent and the universe may as well run on these computer chips. as people remember from The everybody lived in these like gelatinous aquatic pod things, and their brain function ⁓ and their experiences in the Matrix were basically uploaded directly to their brain with a giant needle. it kind of tracks. ⁓ Neil deGrasse Tyson also explained this philosophy ⁓ and I him so I'm just gonna quote him directly. ⁓ He said, you're a character in a world that you think you will have free will and you say, I want to invent a computer. So you do so. Hey I want to ⁓ create a world my computer and then that world creates a world in the computer. And then you have simulations all the way down. So now you lay out all these universes and throw a dart. Which of these universes are you most likely to hit? The original one that started it, or the countless simulations, the daughter simulations that unfolded thereafter. ⁓ going to hit one of the simulations. ⁓ ⁓ you create the computer world, then within that computer world, somebody could create the computer world and on down, down, down, down, down. And the likelihood of whether you're going to pick the real one is infinitely small. And that's when my brain broke and I like, I'm gonna stop reading. So J.D. Largent: I'm good. The this this kinda reminds me of that joke philosophical concept about there was a philosopher that was explaining that the world and everything all rested on the back of a giant turtle ⁓ floating through space, which is the basis of Terry Pratchett's great Atoin and I love that book series. We'll talk more about that later. ⁓ And Frankie Hupy: Mm-hmm. J.D. Largent: then it's like, Well what what is that turtle writing on? And the philosopher says it's an even larger turtle and it's like, Well what's that turtle writing on? And the philosopher says, It's just turtles all the way down ⁓ Frankie Hupy: Yep, yep. Yep. Dr. John who's the of University of Cincinnati's Institute of Law and Psychology, said that despite this theory being around for a while, the movie introduced it to those who may not have known about it and offered them an explanation for why their lives were fractured without having to admit being sick or different. ⁓ He said, it's a much more soothing explanation than admitting that you have a problem. So was favorable to people who were probably schizophrenic, but didn't want to admit it. the original Matrix Defense was put on by Tonda Lynn Ashley from Butler, Ohio, By all accounts, she was generally a normal person, and she had a generally amicable relationship with her landlord, Sherry Lee Corbett. she was always on time with her rent ⁓ had no issues with her apartment. There were no quarrels about that contract. ⁓ then out of the blue, ⁓ day in July 2022, she shot Corbett in the head three times, completely unprovoked, in front of a number of people. She went into custody quietly, immediately taking responsibility for what she had done. Upon interrogation, Angely stated that she believed that she was in the Matrix. She said that she had some strange dreams with Corbett trying to keep her tethered to the Matrix, so she shot Corbett in an attempt to escape the Matrix. She alluded to the idea that she didn't think she had killed Corbett in reality, and she felt that Corbett, her husband, and others were controlling her dreams, and she found out that these dreams weren't actually dreams. ⁓ She said that's where you go to sleep at night and they drug you and they take you somewhere else and they bring you back and put you in your bed and you wake up and you think it's a bad dream. Kind of like the beginning of The Matrix when Neo first gets picked up ⁓ gets the critter shoved into his belly button ⁓ then he wakes up and he thinks he's back home and then, you know, twenty minutes later they suck the critter out of his belly button. He's like, ⁓ wait, that was real. So that's the headspace that she was in when she committed this offense. it's also noted that she had a hit list of other individuals, including her husband, a psychiatrist, and one other person. ⁓ J.D. Largent: Was she experiencing psychosis? Frankie Hupy: So they're calling it delusions, which is a part of psychosis. and she also had a psychiatric history. she had previous psychotic breaks, and so based on that and these delusions, she was found not guilty by reason of insanity and sentenced to Twin Valley Behavioral Health Care, the Timothy B. Moritz Forensic Unit, which is like the max security setting of the Twin Valley Behavioral Health Care, based on that she was charged with ag murder and that's what she was committed under. So in 2005, her treatment team requested that she be moved to a civil treatment center, which is a lower acuity setting, the court found that to do so would be a public safety threat and denied her motion and she appealed. referencing Oregon it, you're ⁓ on a guilty except for insanity in Oregon, committed to the PSRB, the psychiatric security review board. and committed to the hospital and can be stepped down in care. And sometimes within the hospital, there's higher acuity units and lower acuity units. And this was another locked facility that she was asking to go to. So it wasn't like she was asking to leave the hospital. She was asking to go to a lower acuity unit. So she had to ⁓ step as a part of stepping down. Yep. when when appeal J.D. Largent: Like as a part of stepping down and trying to step out of the facility. Frankie Hupy: A case from the trial level court, you need to assign error. You need to find things that ⁓ are that the trial court did that are errors law. We talked a little bit about this last week. and so she alleged two assignments of error. ⁓ One was the denial her request to move to the lower acuity setting ⁓ against the recommendation of treatment team, And her other assignment of error was finding that the treating and evaluating doctors were not credible. So on her first assignment of error, there was evidence presented that she was fully compliant with her meds and her treatment, and her mental illness was in remission, and that it would stay in remission if she remained compliant with meds and her aftercare treatment. There was further testimony that she is under heavy supervision at Moritz, and that if she goes off her meds, there would be a bad outcome for both her and for public safety. So those were the two like competing theories at the trial level. Further testimony came out that the civil unit is also locked, but there will be fewer security staff and up to double the amount of patients. That's what happens when you go into a lower acuity unit. you need a lower to staff to patient ratio at the higher acuity units. ⁓ And so when you step down to a lower unit, there's essentially gonna be less consistent eyes on her. J.D. Largent: It might be like you're going from five to one down to ten to one. Frankie Hupy: Something like that, yeah. there was also testimony that she has decompensated in jail without medication, though she disputes this, ⁓ that if she were to leave a setting ensuring that she was taking her meds, she could decompensate and continue to work down her hit list, which Corbett had been on, and her husband and these other people were on. So she took issue to the idea that she would escape the facility and stop taking her meds. ⁓ The appellate court found that she was stable in Moritz, which was the higher acuity unit, for two years, and that a reduction in her level of care, quote, would unacceptably reduce all of the components that are currently working to keep appellant compliant and in remission from her mental illness. So, on that aspect, the court did not err. And this is something that we run into a lot with civil commitments when somebody is already committed and they're doing a recommitment, where the person's doing wildly well, like completely in remission or otherwise just doing really well and really stable, but the court finds that they are stable because of being hospitalized. J.D. Largent: And that's gonna kind of get you into this no win situation where you're just stuck there ⁓ forever. Frankie Hupy: Yeah, exactly. Forever, yeah. No, I've I've had clients committed for years because of this. but sometimes comes on appeal favorably. In this case it did not. ⁓ as to her assignment of error, she alleged an abuse of discretion. ⁓ These are exceedingly hard win. ⁓ it's partially ⁓ like we talked de novo review a little bit last week. ⁓ It's kind ⁓ kind of like that, you're asking to sort of pierce the veil of the decision of the court to determine whether or not it was sufficiently within the court's discretion to rule as they did. Judges are given a little bit of leeway in how they rule on things because there's a lot that happens at the trial court that isn't necessarily reduced to the record, like someone's Body language, facial movements, tone of how they're speaking, things like that, because it's a cold record ⁓ appeal. And so there's a lot of deference given to the court's discretion as long as it's not legally wrong. those are hard win. And ⁓ she also win here. but her argument was that the court disregarded the expert opinions and made a statement regarding their credibility. ⁓ citing the that there was testimony to the contrary. I'm not surprised that this one lost on appeal because you're gonna get conflicting testimony. ⁓ It doesn't like the court outright made a credibility finding. And the Court of Appeals actually noted that the statement regarding the testimony to the contrary was a little bit confusing. ⁓ But It was not a clear enough credibility finding that the Court of Appeals didn't find that that statement amounted to discounting the expert testimony, rather ⁓ court found based on balancing the evidence that the safeguards in place at Meritz necessary to ensure ⁓ Ainsley's symptoms remained in remission and that the trial court's disagreement that she was ready for a lower level of care was not an error. So it took until twenty ten for her to finally get visits in the community. three doctors testified that her delusional disorder in remission. and that increased freedom would not increase the risk of public safety as long as she stays out of Hamilton, Ohio and the entire state of Pennsylvania where her intended victims live. J.D. Largent: And Okay, no Pennsylvania for you. Frankie Hupy: Right. So it took seven years of her being in complete remission for the court to feel comfortable letting her ⁓ go unsupervised visits of the secured facility. J.D. Largent: I mean that's not unusual. Frankie Hupy: It's not it is a long time, but again she was found not guilty for ruin of insanity under the Ag Murder Statute. ⁓ So J.D. Largent: Yeah. So they have an un a basically unlimited time frame. So like in Oregon you can't spend more time in the hospital than the maximum sentence. Frankie Hupy: Right, an aggravated murder, at least in Oregon, is an unclassified felony. So There's not really a ⁓ a maximum, ⁓ you can be sentenced life without parole. So it's yeah. ⁓ the J.D. Largent: There's not there's not really a maximum. Yeah. It's not like if somebody commits theft in the third degree is thirty days. You got thirty days, you got one month, and then you no matter what you're out. Frankie Hupy: And it's thirty day yeah. So Right. So Ainsley is the most well-known user of the Matrix defense. and she was able to ⁓ use it the delusions were so sincerely held that ⁓ she did believe that her actions were unlawful. She felt they were justified because these people were trying to keep her in the matrix, and she did not believe she actually killed them in real life. She thought she'd just killed their avatar. J.D. Largent: But like this isn't this is kind of another misnomer, the Twinkie defense wasn't really about Twinkies. You're saying this is really just a manifestation of a severe mental illness, like this belief. We're not she's not successfully arguing that this isn't real. Frankie Hupy: Correct. Right. So essentially because ⁓ defense is based in a delusion, ⁓ means that she was not able to conform her actions to the law and she was unaware that her actions were unlawful. ⁓ is the basis of ⁓ ⁓ mean, it goes back to the McNaughton rule that we were talking about a few weeks ago. it's basis of any sort of not guilty by reason of insanity, guilty except for insanity. it's called. While she is the most famous user of the Matrix defense, she was not the first. ⁓ 2000, ⁓ Swiss Exchange student named Vadim Maizujes killed, and dismembered his landlord, blaming both meth use and a fear of getting sucked into the Matrix. ⁓ also had a history of illness. He had been a prior inpatient mental patient. And he was found not guilty by reason of insanity, because of the combination of the psychosis and the meth use. There were also ⁓ others coming after. One was named Lee Boyd Malvo in two thousand and two. J.D. Largent: ⁓ he was one of the snipers. BC snipers. Frankie Hupy: Yes, yes. He he had a sort of chosen street father figure named John Alan Mohammed. And together ⁓ they shot people, killing ten of them in Washington DC over a three week period. ⁓ He stated the Matrix movie held the key to understanding him. While in custody, he was writing things like Free Yourself from the Matrix, You are a Slave to the Matrix's control, things like that, you know, the kinds of things that Morpheus was telling Neo ⁓ the movie. he pled not guilty by reason of insanity. ⁓ But his actually focused more on video games ⁓ than on Matrix movie. And this was a really big sort of legal movement in the late 90s, early aughts, that kids growing up on these superviolent video games ⁓ also not really know the difference between, real and make-believe, because ⁓ they're spending eight, ten hours a day playing these video games where they're killing people left, right, and center, The theory was essentially that somehow dampened their ability to understand that shooting people in real life is bad. And so that's more what that defense was based on was the fact that he was playing video games that were super, super violent. And based on that he didn't understand that shooting people in real life is wrong. J.D. Largent: mean he was also a a a child and he had been heavily, heavily indoctrinated by this his own father figure. Frankie Hupy: Yes. Yes, by by yeah, by Mr. Mohammed. ⁓ and just shows how ⁓ malleable kids' brains are. We a little bit about that earlier. ⁓ And if they get in the wrong ⁓ parent figure, ⁓ That can exceedingly detrimental to their development, to their of the world works. ⁓ There was another individual. in two thousand three named Josh Cook, who murdered his adoptive parents. ⁓ happened was he was in his room after dinner listening to Bodies by Downing Poole. And he looked at his matrix poster and ⁓ then to shotgun. And he had been sort of ⁓ modeling his after Neo for a bit. ⁓ And so he the black combat boots He had the black long leather trench coat and he put those on and he grabbed his shotgun because it looked like the gun that was in the movie, and he loaded his pockets up with shotgun shells. And then he said he felt like he was in the Matrix and that the murders didn't seem real. prior to trial, he was evaluated and found to be under the ⁓ fide belief that he was living in the Matrix. This is what we call a delusion, he was obsessed with the movie and thought it was real, ⁓ that defense started to fall apart when the nine one one calls were played and he didn't sound delusional. he those one one calls acknowledged that he would probably get the death penalty for what he did, which shows a greater connection with reality than any sort of mental health defense ⁓ would generally suggest. He eventually abandoned the matrix defense and took responsibility for the murders. had no previous psychiatric history, but he did later learn that both of his biological parents had been diagnosed with paranoid schizophrenia, which allowed him to see a psychiatrist prior to sentencing. And that psychiatrist diagnosed him with simple schizophrenia, which means that the person's aware of and can describe the outside world, but cannot describe what it meant to him. and that other people are scarcely real to him. And this came actually as a di as a relief to ⁓ Cook, who now had explanation for why he always felt different ⁓ rather than The Matrix. the paranoid schizophrenia and schizophrenia are really ⁓ old diagnosis labels. Now it's just it's schizophrenia most will just fall under that umbrella. ⁓ If you can't hit all of the widgets for schizophrenia, you'll see people diagnosed with ⁓ schizophrenia spectrum and psychotic disorder, which I think is probably what this simple schizophrenia is probably more akin to today. ⁓ It just means there's a lot of stuff there that would could suggest schizophrenia, ⁓ but you don't the six months that you need of symptoms, ⁓ or you're not quite hitting all of those widgets. ⁓ But there's clearly some sort of psychotic disorder there. it used to be called psychotic disorder, not otherwise specified. Now, under the DSM5, again, everything is a spectrum. ⁓ So, spectrum, another psychotic disorder. one other ⁓ in 2003, Lovett, was before he and his accomplices could launch a Colabine-style assault. ⁓ He would call Neo, and he wrote in his diary. J.D. Largent: Everything's a spectrum. Frankie Hupy: I have a whole new reason to do this now after watching The Matrix reloaded. So, one might imagine that with all of these Matrix defenses popping up, Warner Brothers who made the movie might be a little bit concerned. And yes, in fact, in 2003, they did issue a statement, including: quote, any attempt to link these crimes with a motion picture is disturbing and irresponsible. Which is Such a cover your ass type statement because yeah, people need if people are mentally well, they need to take take responsibility for what they're doing. But at the same time, ⁓ you are creating a movie ⁓ creates this false reality, ⁓ people have underlying psychotic disorders, it's gonna be something that they latch on to. J.D. Largent: Yeah, I mean we we saw that also with prior to The Matrix with the movie Natural Born Killers and people emulating that. And that movie is supposed to be a parody of violence and culture ⁓ and so was ⁓ pretty ironic it was ⁓ used ⁓ commit violence ⁓ Frankie Hupy: Yes. Right. Well and I mean it's the same thing as as the the defenses coming up in the nineties in the early aughts about video game violence, right? J.D. Largent: Yeah, video game violence. We saw it very recently the famous case with the two girls and their belief in Slender Man and their the murder of another young girl. that was a of multiple things, including one of the children being profoundly deeply mentally ill. when I have migraines and I take my migraine medication ⁓ it makes ⁓ things that see not real. It's not like I'm outside of reality ⁓ and it's because migraines and medication screw with your visual cortex. it is very unsettling. So I've experienced that during that period. ⁓ Frankie Hupy: Mm-hmm. Well and and when you when they first put you on antidepressants, ⁓ there's a warning there's gonna be like a dip before you actually start seeing progress on it. ⁓ And ⁓ there a of time, it was maybe like a week into being on antidepressants, ⁓ that nothing felt real. And it was ⁓ fucking scary. And I can it's it's I can imagine ⁓ J.D. Largent: Yeah. It's the Frankie Hupy: when that is your entire reality, that everybody's telling you this, that, and the other is real, and it doesn't seem real. And the things that do feel real, people are saying that they don't see how incredibly terrifying that can be, and how incredibly unsafe you can feel, and why that might lead to you lashing out against something that's making you feel unsafe. J.D. Largent: Yeah, I mine's was less scary than your experience when I have this migraine thing. It just ⁓ everything kind seems like it's from almost like a seputone picture. I don't see that aren't there. It's just the things that are there seem ⁓ like ⁓ it's that that's there. ⁓ I describe it being kind of in like a real life episode of Is It Cake? ⁓ You just wouldn't surprised if it was cake. Frankie Hupy: Mm-hmm. J.D. Largent: I don't see things that aren't I'm just kind of surprised. it's less unsettling. It is freaky, ⁓ but I will say and only happens when I have a migraine and then I take the migraine medication. It is a not uncommon side effect of this migraine medication. ⁓ But it's better than experiencing the and nausea ⁓ of the migraine ⁓ and it away. ⁓ Frankie Hupy: Absolutely. Absolutely. J.D. Largent: but It is certainly unsettling ⁓ when that happens. Frankie Hupy: Right, and just imagine that being your entire existence. a lot of the stigma mental illness ⁓ is ⁓ people seeing ⁓ decompensated people are on the talking to themselves, screaming at traffic, things like that ⁓ that, make it really hard to sympathize somebody because you have no idea what they're feeling. But if you take a moment to actually think about what they're feeling, their reactions make a lot of sense. J.D. Largent: what I explain to when they're surprised, the lay person 'cause I have over the course of my career worked with quite a few people who have schizoaffective disorder. ⁓ You work with more, ⁓ but ⁓ Frankie Hupy: Yep. Well and just so so an explanation, schizoaffective disorder is kind of like a combination of schizophrenia and bipolar disorder, where you have the delusion, psychosis, hallucinations of schizophrenia plus a mood component, either ⁓ or depressive. Or both. J.D. Largent: Yes, and the features of schizophrenia can ebb and flow. ⁓ So there's periods of where it's a lot worse ⁓ and then there's periods time where it's lot better. but ⁓ ⁓ when you're talking about kind of which people are very afraid of, ⁓ the primary feature of that disorganized thinking. ⁓ not ⁓ like ⁓ Frankie Hupy: Mm-hmm. J.D. Largent: they're gonna go kill you and ⁓ severe illness are far, far, far, far more likely to be victims of violent crimes than perpetrators. ⁓ Frankie Hupy: what Right. so disorganized thinking means that the person is not able to think in a linear fashion. Like you and I are talking right now, we're having a back and forth, we're able to form coherent thoughts. ⁓ When somebody having disorganized thinking, and it comes out as disorganized speech, it's what is referred to as word salad. Like it does not make sense. ⁓ There may be some lucid moments where able to complete a full sentence, ⁓ but ⁓ that sentence may be based in delusion or just generally what they're saying doesn't make sense in the real world. J.D. Largent: Or getting very lost what you're to say them ⁓ and the verbal acuity is really not there. So you're drawing pictures and and writing things out and and doing diagrams ⁓ their brain is scrambling ⁓ you're saying to them. ⁓ Frankie Hupy: Mm-hmm. Yep. Whatever you can do to help base that person in consensus reality. may not work because frankly if they're ⁓ very, very ill, it takes quite a bit bring them back, ⁓ whether that's medications therapy or both. in a to proceed context, I've seen people restore to competency without medications who have some significant delusions, but that's the rare case. J.D. Largent: Mm-hmm. Frankie Hupy: Whereas the the greater case is that people will need some sort of medical intervention in order to restore to competency just because these illnesses are so profoundly disorienting that there's medical intervention that's necessary. J.D. Largent: It is a real privilege to work with people who and it's just like a damn shame that it's because they're involved in the criminal justice system that's the first time they've had access to meaningful, consistent health care. But to see people become restored to competency and come back to consensus reality and be to witness that ⁓ massive anxiety panic go down is ⁓ Frankie Hupy: And it and it can be a complete night and day, you know. I've seen people who have significant delusions that, are off the from consensus reality and then they get on the right medication and suddenly they're holding down a job ⁓ and they're able to get driver's license, they're able to finish school, whatever it is, ⁓ and it's all be ⁓ of this little pill they're taking every day. ⁓ J.D. Largent: Yeah. Yeah. The magic of modern chemistry has assisted them. that's a really wonderful of the job is see people kind of come back to life. It's kind of like ⁓ watching clients get clean and sober ⁓ and you know, coming back to life, they're enjoying because ⁓ the people that I've worked with that are experiencing delusions hallucinations is ⁓ terrifying ⁓ for them. ⁓ they're living in the scariest possible world and Frankie Hupy: It's like the worst ass and trip of your life every single day. J.D. Largent: every single day and the ⁓ just the tremendous anxiety. So if you take a moment to to be with these people and try and and empathize with them, then everything, you know, becomes a lot you know, becomes easier to empathize and so just to take those those moments Frankie Hupy: And also just understanding that they're not choosing to be unhoused, they're not choosing to be where they're at. They may have been on medications at one point and gone off those medications. That is also based on the illness. Cause the medications at any any medication at any dose will only work appropriately for so long. You will eventually build a tolerance to any medication, even Advil, once have to a point where they have ⁓ Started to outgrow that medication dosage, unless they're actively working with a psychiatrist to monitor that, they may start again having the delusions that there's nothing wrong with them, that the medication is poison, and then they go off their medications. And then once they're off their medications and they're no longer living in consensus reality, it's very difficult for them to hold down a job, which is required for them to pay rent. ⁓ It's very hard for them to, be organized enough to show up to work, be organized enough to be at work and do their job. ⁓ J.D. Largent: to be able to think, I need to go to the doctor. To maintain like signing up for health insurance is ⁓ difficult so ⁓ I my neighbors, because ⁓ unhoused are your neighbors, ⁓ they are as much your neighbor as a person who lives in a house who lives next door to you. ⁓ that is a real failure of our society that we don't have an adequate care system or supported living system for people ⁓ Frankie Hupy: Yeah, exactly. Absolutely. J.D. Largent: to have access to to the supports that they need to stay on medication because it's ⁓ quality life ⁓ if were housed and on appropriate medications, but people just need support with that. ⁓ Frankie Hupy: And we're not offering that support, right? I've this before, ⁓ partly because my pet peeve right now, but House Bill two five that was passed by the Oregon legislature did a fantastic thing of creating some changes to the laws, which makes it easier for somebody to build a secure residential treatment facility or residential treatment home next to a psychiatric hospital and vice versa. Which is great. ⁓ it one piece of red tape to ⁓ build beds, which is what we need is more beds, both at the the inpatient and the ⁓ outpatient the residential level, all levels need more beds. What they did not do ⁓ was tie any money to ⁓ So we now have the legal ability to build all these beds, but there's no money in it. There's no money to do it and nobody has money to do it 'cause it's really fucking expensive to build a hospital. J.D. Largent: And so here's here's my pet peeve of the day, since we're listing them out. So work with a lot ⁓ young a lot of serious mental health ⁓ ⁓ the onset is ⁓ teen years ⁓ I I'll Frankie Hupy: Yes. Teens and early twenties. J.D. Largent: more my clients than what our would be, we're just discovering, this is early onset schizophrenia, this is bipolar one. they might have other conditions. ⁓ what need is something that's the equivalent to ⁓ D services with supported housing ⁓ and lifetime housing like an adult foster home. ⁓ And ⁓ your ⁓ Frankie Hupy: Mm. J.D. Largent: Problem or condition is mental health, even if you have intellectual disabilities that might otherwise qualify you for DD services, if the primary problem is determined to be mental health, you cannot access disability services and mental health is not considered ⁓ a qualifying disability. And the I it's called Title K program is nowhere near sufficient, and it's ⁓ really, really difficult get people into lifetime. ⁓ time supported housing ⁓ I don't understand we're living ⁓ in a state doesn't consider a serious mental health problem ⁓ which ⁓ is under federal guidelines to not be a disability under disability services. ⁓ Frankie Hupy: Yeah, disability services really only applies people who have either an organic deficiency ⁓ in their intellect or sort of brain injury before age of eighteen. and that it has be it has to be documented prior to the age of eighteen in order to be able to enroll in D D services. ⁓ J.D. Largent: And you have to have received services Frankie Hupy: Unfortunately, yeah, that's not available for people with severe and persistent mental illness. I guess the state is just expecting the civil commitment system to deal with those people, or the public guardian system, which there are not enough public guardians. time they ⁓ money for more public guardians, it's gone in a matter of months. ⁓ there are far, far more people who need it ⁓ ⁓ money for. ⁓ J.D. Largent: I live on a street with an adult foster home. And I'm big fan of the adult ⁓ foster It's wayaaaa better than the child foster system. So much. ⁓ By an exponential degree I can't even begin to describe it. ⁓ Frankie Hupy: There's actual licensing rules. J.D. Largent: ⁓ my god. Real training, ⁓ you know, it's truly supported living. ⁓ I'm happy there's this lovely house with a nice yard, there's put up these really cute decorations, I'm happy to have that as a part of my neighborhood. I wish that ⁓ there are more there's a of adult foster ⁓ So if you need it, there's one available. can you can get a bed and you can move cities. You can live close to your family. Frankie Hupy: they're easier to get than psychiatric but there's ⁓ there's still a wait list. J.D. Largent: So much easier. There's a wait list but there's ⁓ for youth that need a DD foster home, ⁓ it's way easier for to have like a teenage client get into a DD foster home than into a a regular foster home because people don't wanna foster teens. entering into that system, ⁓ you the support for to be successful, ⁓ about as individuals, really well trained providers in most circumstances. ⁓ Frankie Hupy: Mm-hmm. Absolutely. there's a report of abuse or neglect, then the home can get shut down, there's actual accountability ⁓ as opposed to ⁓ in foster care, with children it's horrific people will collect kids an income. J.D. Largent: The rate of abuse yeah. The rate of abuse for Oregon's children in foster care is way higher than most other states. we're one of the highest rates of abuse of any state in the United States. ⁓ Frankie Hupy: And I think part of the issue with that, aside from just people doing it for the wrong reasons, is that the agency will tend to believe the foster home over the bioparents. when I was doing dependency, I had ⁓ several clients say, I found a bruise on my kid, it looks like a belt, whatever it was. ⁓ And ⁓ I helped them bring it to the caseworker's attention and the caseworker was like, ⁓ the foster parent denied it and that's where we're gonna leave it. J.D. Largent: I don't a single attorney ⁓ who ⁓ ⁓ that been part of shutting down a a regular foster home. ⁓ I've helped down some licensed facilities. ⁓ Anyway, ⁓ ⁓ is ⁓ Well, thank so much for telling me about ⁓ the Matrix which is actually just another mental health defense ⁓ Frankie Hupy: Mm. Another Metal Health. this will probably, at least for the moment, be our last mental health case. We had a bunch a big series of them, but ⁓ week we are engaging in the tale of two Bundys ⁓ J.D. Largent: Yeah. I will be talking about ⁓ a dumb defence ⁓ by serial Ted Bundy. ⁓ Frankie Hupy: And I will be discussing Amon Bundy's ⁓ gallivants in eastern Oregon and Nevada. J.D. Largent: Yes. Well thank you, friends, and hi mom. Frankie, don't you dare cut that. Frankie Hupy: I didn't. last week and I won't this week. ⁓ And I and and I apologize for cutting it out the first two weeks. Judah does love you. ⁓ All right. like, subscribe, share, please help us grow this podcast and we will see you next week. ⁓ J.D. Largent: Okay. All right. Okay. Bye. See ya next week.