Twinkie Defense, Step Aside: Caffeine Defense

  1. jcsd
  2. cronxeh

    cronxeh 1,232
    Gold Member

    Pfft.. you know how many people died because I didn't get my morning coffee? :rolleyes:
     
  3. Hurkyl

    Hurkyl 16,090
    Staff Emeritus
    Science Advisor
    Gold Member

    Temporary insanity isn't a particularly new defense.
     
  4. Ivan Seeking

    Ivan Seeking 12,529
    Staff Emeritus
    Science Advisor
    Gold Member

    Heck, I've been using it for years.
     
  5. This is rediculous. Please, jury, dont be stupid
     
  6. Ivan Seeking

    Ivan Seeking 12,529
    Staff Emeritus
    Science Advisor
    Gold Member

    Is is possible that some people could be susceptible to various drugs in this way - that sugar really can drive a few people in a mllion, to murder; for others, it's caffeine, and maybe MSG or peanuts for others?

    Can allergies drive a person into a state of temporary insanity?
     
  7. Evo

    Staff: Mentor

    Oh please. Too much caffeine?
     
  8. I really hope you're kidding. If this was true many, many more people would be murdering.
     
  9. Evo

    Staff: Mentor

    Maybe they are but they don't have a coniving lawyer drumming up a bogus defense for them.
     
  10. Ivan Seeking

    Ivan Seeking 12,529
    Staff Emeritus
    Science Advisor
    Gold Member

    Not necessarily. I'm not saying such a thing is possible, but, if it is, then it might be a matter of circumstance - perhaps a trigger of some sort is needed, perhaps an emotional trigger. We would have to know if and how such a thing is possible in order to speculate on the specifics.

    Beyond that, if it is possible, perhaps this could explain some percentage of existing convictions. We can't assume it doesn't happen in order to conclude that it can't.
     
    Last edited: Sep 20, 2010
  11. Ivan Seeking

    Ivan Seeking 12,529
    Staff Emeritus
    Science Advisor
    Gold Member

    From my point of view, a child's rage is a form of temporary insanity. I don't know the current thinking, but the last time I checked, feeding a kid sugar was considered a good way to trigger a problem.
     
  12. Ivan Seeking

    Ivan Seeking 12,529
    Staff Emeritus
    Science Advisor
    Gold Member

    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Caffeine
     
  13. Evo

    Staff: Mentor

    I've also seen studies where half of the children were given sugar and half were given a placebo, and the parents observed "sugar induced hyperactivity" in as many or more of the placebo fed children.

    http://edition.cnn.com/HEALTH/children/9911/22/diet.sugar.myth.kids.wmd/
     
  14. Evo

    Staff: Mentor

    But the article also states that he'd need to ingest, in a relatively short timeframe
    If he indeed had an overdose this significant, he'd likely have ended up in the ER. I didn't read that he was actually tested to have had an overdose or that was treated medically. I'm wondering if there is another article that shows there is medical evidence that backs up this guy had such a an overdose at the time of the murder and that backs up his lawyer's claim?
     
  15. turbo

    turbo 7,366
    Gold Member

    There's a wrinkle in this story. Smith's lawyer initially wanted to rely on a temporary insanity plea (citing the high caffeine use), but now he is saying that Smith's confession is inadmissible because Smith was "out of it" due to sleep deprivation cause by caffeine use.
     
  16. 7 ???
     
  17. caffeine itself, i'd say no. sleep deprivation could be a definite yes. modafinil can cause psychosis with no direct stimulation at all.
     
  18. True, but so can methamphetamine or cocaine, and intoxication due to either isn't a defense for murder. One chooses to take a drug, be it caffeine or cocaine, and if that drives you to a psychotic state, you get to live with the consequences.


    Anyway, I was pretty sure you folks would enjoy this one, I know it made me laugh out loud.
     
  19. it wouldn't surprise me if methamphetimine turns out to be the actual cause. it may be that caffeine is just a friendlier defense. meth became popular at one time because it allowed blue collar folks to work 2 or 3 jobs at once. but juries would not be sympathetic to meth use. meth = bad. caffeine = good, good people use caffeine. so the argument becomes this is a good guy trying to do well for himself, and then something unfortunate happens.
     
  20. Now THAT, I can believe.
     
Know someone interested in this topic? Share a link to this question via email, Google+, Twitter, or Facebook

Have something to add?