6 ms·
I would have to go back and find another article, but her public defender thinks she's not competent to understand what is actually happening. In the times she
by dingusdew 3y ago
I would have to go back and find another article, but her public defender thinks she's not competent to understand what is actually happening. In the times she has been in court, she has mostly complained about the amount of papers and summons she has received, and has threatened suicide if they keep sending her letters/serving her paperwork. Her communication has been described as "erratic" so there may be something mental health related going on here that is preventing her from actually understanding the seriousness of what is going on. I will update this post when I find the article in question.
EDIT: https://www.thenewstribune.com/news/local/article272657405.html https://www.thenewstribune.com/news/local/article272657405.h...
"Tofflemire’s filing stated, “She has not acknowledged the existence of her own medical condition. Because counsel is bound to represent the respondent’s stated interest, a guardian ad litem would be able to provide representation of her best interests, which are not currently clear.
A guardian ad litem is defined by Washington courts as “an individual appointed by the court to represent the best interests of a child or incapacitated person involved in a case in Superior Court."
The filing added that when “the respondent has joined proceedings, she has spoken out of turn with rapid, disorganized speech.”
It noted, “She has primarily focused on how she dislikes papers coming to her home, and not the import of the process in which she finds herself. She has repeatedly threatened suicide in relationship to papers being served upon her home.”
(Emphasis mine)
- godshatter 3y agoI'm curious why this comment is dead. This is useful information, especially with the edit and link. Is there some kind of political dimension to this story I'm unaware of?
- Jtsummers 3y agohttps://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=34208686 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=34208686 Bad past behavior. Their comment wasn't flag-killed, it was dead on arrival but can be vouched for (presumably you did). When comments show up [dead] (no [flagged]) it's usually some moderation (auto or manual) action that caused it. [flagged][dead] is the result of user flagging. They can reach out to dang and appeal it (looking briefly through their comments since then I didn't see anything quite like that one that caused the initial ban, but it was a cursory check).