Our courts and criminal justice system have long struggled with the handling of mentally ill people who commit acts of violence. In June, in a ruling reminiscent of medieval bloodletting and alchemy in its logic and compassion, the Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia ordered that a severely mentally ill person be forcibly administered powerful antipsychotic medication against his will. This was done in order to get him well enough to stand trial for acts committed while he was indisputably in the throes of a powerful mental illness.  In all likelihood, even after being forcibly medicated into so-called wellness, he will have little or no memory of these acts. 

       You may have heard about him. Russell Eugene Weston, Jr., a paranoid schizophrenic from Montana, burst through a security checkpoint at the U.S. Capitol on July 24, 1998, and, amid a large crowd of tourists, began shooting a pistol. Capitol police fired back. Weston killed two guards before he was badly wounded. Weston has since been held in isolation in a psychiatric facility in North Carolina while federal prosecutors and defense lawyers argued about what to do with him. 

       No one disputes that Weston was profoundly mentally ill when the shooting occurred. When asked why he did it, Weston said he stormed the Capitol to prevent the United States from being destroyed by Black Heva, an imaginary disease born wholly within his mind. Weston said it was the "most deadliest disease known to mankind" and was caused by the rotting of the corpses of the victims of cannibals. He said he had to get into the Capitol because there was a device in a Senate safe called the Ruby Satellite, which was the only way to stop the cannibalism and save America from destruction. 

       Weston was obviously unable to begin to comprehend the nature of the charges against him or to help his lawyers defend him. But prosecutors want to forcibly medicate him to make him "well enough" to stand trial for his actions. They plan to forcibly administer powerful antipsychotic drugs that can cause, among other things, body and facial tremors similar to those produced by Parkinson's disease; a frozen mask-like facial expression; involuntary tongue protrusions, cheek puffing, chewing motions and puffing of cheeks; an inability to sit still; profound sedation; a dulling of personality and ability to speak; body rigidity, and gastrointestinal distress. 

       To what end will this be done? It is possible Weston may be more lucid in thought after being medicated, but he can never be of the same mind he was at the time of the shooting.  Which Weston, then, would be put on trial? The one who invaded the Capitol to save the United States from annihilation or a heavily medicated man possibly experiencing side effects that will be impossible to hide from a jury? 

       Following Weston's arrest, there was a torrent of evidence that he'd been severely mentally ill for a long time but, due to a series of bureaucratic bungles and medical ineptitude, he had simply slipped through the cracks of the mental health system. Don't the doctors and mental health workers who failed, deliberately or inadvertently, to recognize and treat Weston share as much or more of the blame for what Weston did? 

       The U.S. criminal justice has always placed great weight on requiring proof of intent to harm when dealing with serious crimes. However, the D.C. Court of Appeals, in what seems to be more of a politically based ruling than a legal one, said that the location of the alleged crimes was a significant factor in reaching its decision about what to do with Weston. So, had Weston believed the Ruby Satellite was in a local Montana supermarket instead of the U.S. Capitol, the court is suggesting its ruling may have been different. 

       It is time for courts to stop criminalizing mental illness. As tragic as Weston's psychotic actions were, they were plainly the product of his profound schizophrenia and not any intent to harm anyone. Forcibly medicating Weston into being someone he is not and may never have been is a throwback to the Dark Ages of medicine and jurisprudence.

       It is also evidence that his disease is still sadly misunderstood.