Please, this is my last post on this.
It is very simple.
The ATF form asked: “Have you ever been adjudicated mentally defective (which includes having been adjudicated incompetent to manage your own affairs) or have you ever been committed to a mental institution?”
He answered “no” and swore to the truth of that statement.
A properly appointed agent of the State had previously signed an order that read in part (Steven Daniel Barbar is) “Mentally ill and in need of hospitalization, a danger to himself or others.”
I don’t care if it is an order for detention, an order for detainment, an order of confinement, an order for treatment or a judge’s order for a ham sandwich. The order said he was Mentally Ill.
Period. EOS
He was adjudicated mentally defective. Stop with the jailhouse lawyer krep about how he wasn’t this or that, that is was a magistrate not a judge, that no conservator was assigned so it’s not real, etc.
To adjudicate is to make an official decision with implications. The magistrate decided he was crazy…. and the more I hear about the case, I think the magistrate was right!
He perjured himself and he knows it.
The law is expected to be blind. It is not expected to be stupid. Judges do not like people who try to “game” the judicial system.
End of case.
Very well, I wont hold you to reply then. But I must stress that a magistrate’s order for you to be evaluated for a mental evaluation is not the same as a special justice adjudicating mental illness. You apparently would make the case that a warrant for an evaluation counts the same as being committed for the supposed “wrongdoing”. I believe this is a wrong and dangerous way of thinking. If a supposed crime dealt with body weight and a magistrate signed a warrant for you to be evaluated by a physician, that does not mean that you are immediately found guilty of the supposed wrongdoing. Its only AFTER the evaluation that the laws against you take effect.
You said:
A properly appointed agent of the State had previously signed an order that read in part (Steven Daniel [sic] Barbar is) “Mentally ill and in need of hospitalization, a danger to himself or others.”
I don’t care if it is an order for detention, an order for detainment, an order of confinement, an order for treatment or a judge’s order for a ham sandwich. The order said he was Mentally Ill.
How do you interpret
"...the undersigned judicial officer finds PROBABLE CAUSE to believe that the respondent pursuant to § 37.2-809 is mentally ill and in need of hospitalization..."
to fit the criteria established by the ATF form?
And while I'm sure you don't care if the TDO was an order for 'a ham sandwich', the law manifestly does.