Suspect in Shooting of Giffords Ruled Unfit for Trial

The ruling by Judge Larry A. Burns of Federal District Court suspends the court proceedings against Mr. Loughner while the suspect, who experts said has schizophrenia, undergoes treatment at a federal psychiatric facility in Springfield, Mo.

Before the judge’s decision, Mr. Loughner disrupted the hearing with an outburst that prompted deputy marshals to carry him from the room. He will return to court on Sept. 21, when the judge will review again whether Mr. Loughner understands the 49 charges against him and can assist in his defense.

It remains possible, legal experts said, that Mr. Loughner will never be found competent, and could remain in a psychiatric facility indefinitely, but prosecutors said they hoped the trial would resume. “Our goal has always been and always will be to go to trial,” said Dennis K. Burke, a United States attorney, speaking to reporters outside the courthouse.

Mr. Loughner, 22, looked haggard when he walked into court in shackles. Shaved bald and standing erect during his first court appearance in January, he now has long sideburns and unkempt hair and walks stooped over. He rocked back and forth in his chair during the proceedings, buried his face in his hands midway through and interrupted the judge with an outburst.

“Thank you for the freak show,” he appeared to say. “She died right in front of me. You’re treasonous.”

Other witnesses heard him say, “Thank you for the free shot,” and court officials were reviewing the recording to confirm.

A lawyer close to the case said that Mr. Loughner continued to believe he killed Ms. Giffords and that he has clashed with his lawyer, Judy Clarke, who told him the congresswoman survived a bullet wound to the head.

Expecting that he might act out, security personnel were positioned within two feet of Mr. Loughner and quickly spirited him out of the room. He was escorted back moments later and told the judge he would prefer to watch on a television screen in an adjoining holding cell.

Judge Burns’s ruling that Mr. Loughner was incompetent followed the recommendations of two experts, Christina Pietz, a psychologist who works for the Bureau of Prisons and was appointed by the prosecution, and Dr. Matthew Carroll, a psychiatrist in private practice in San Diego appointed by the judge.

Dr. Pietz conducted 12 interviews with Mr. Loughner over nine hours. She found that his thoughts were random and disorganized and that he suffered delusions and offered nonsensical answers to her questions. She diagnosed schizophrenia.

Similarly, Dr. Carroll found after five interviews over seven hours that Mr. Loughner experienced delusions, bizarre thoughts and hallucinations and appeared to suffer from paranoid schizophrenia, the judge said. Dr. Carroll considered whether Mr. Loughner was faking a mental illness but reported that he showed no signs of that, the judge said.

Judge Burns said he reviewed the hours of videotaped interviews and agreed with the experts’ conclusions. “At the present time, Mr. Loughner does not have a rational understanding of these proceedings,” Judge Burns said, ordering him treated for up to four months.

Paul G. Cassell, a criminal justice expert at the S. J. Quinney College of Law at the University of Utah, said psychiatric evaluations would continue to determine whether Mr. Loughner’s condition has improved. If the experts believe that Mr. Loughner can be rendered competent through psychiatric treatment, then he can be forced to take medications, said Mr. Cassell, a former federal judge.

Forcing medication raises troubling issues for society, said Cynthia Hujar Orr, a lawyer in San Antonio who is a past president of the National Association of Criminal Defense Lawyers. “Is it ethical and proper to help someone regain competence just to go after them for a death penalty offense or a murder offense?” she asked.

John Schwartz contributed reporting from New York.

View the original article here

Deal Reached in Albany to Cap Property Taxes

The proposed property tax cap, which must be approved by the Legislature, is aimed at reversing the economic decline in many parts of the state outside of New York City. It also seeks to curb soaring property tax bills in areas like Long Island, Westchester County and pockets of upstate New York, where residents are facing among the highest property taxes in the nation.

Some residents, particularly those who are older and live on fixed incomes, are being forced out of their homes by rising property taxes.

“It is going to be a game changer, and it’s going to change the trajectory of this state,” Mr. Cuomo said.

New York has long had some of the highest property taxes in the nation, and those taxes increased by 5.5 percent, on average, each year from 1999 to 2009, according to statistics provided by the Cuomo administration.

The Tax Foundation, a nonpartisan research group, said this month that three of the five highest-taxed counties in the nation were in New York: Nassau, Westchester and Rockland Counties. In Nassau and Westchester, the median annual property tax bill exceeds $8,000.

The tax-cap agreement was welcomed by business and farm groups, but teachers’ unions reacted with dismay, saying the move would cause cuts to money for education and would diminish the quality of public schools. The unions pointed to California as an example, saying a property tax cap and broader budget woes have had a harmful effect on schools in that state.

“New York would be devastated by the toughest cap in the nation at a time when its public schools have suffered three years of the toughest cuts to education,” said Richard C. Iannuzzi, president of New York State United Teachers. “There’s no question this strikes at the heart of the educational needs of the most vulnerable students, especially children of color and children who live in poverty.”

The agreement gives the Democratic governor, who made limiting property tax increases a cornerstone of his campaign, his biggest political victory since the Legislature approved an on-time and relatively austere budget in March, and it further establishes Mr. Cuomo’s record of fiscal conservatism.

The agreement, which would take effect next year, would limit the annual increase in the overall amount of property taxes collected by a local government or a school district. Property tax increases for individual homeowners could vary as properties are reassessed.

“This issue is probably the most powerful and pervasive issue across this state,” the governor said at an appearance with legislative leaders on Tuesday. “People in New York City don’t feel it, but I can’t tell you how many times somebody has come up to me and said, ‘You have to do something about property taxes; I just can’t afford to stay in my home anymore.’ ”

The Assembly speaker, Sheldon Silver, a Manhattan Democrat, has said the tax cap should be approved only in concert with the renewal, and the strengthening, of rent-stabilization regulations in New York City. But Mr. Cuomo, who supports strengthening rent stabilization, and the Senate majority leader, Dean G. Skelos, a Republican from Long Island who does not, said they did not believe the rent issue would jeopardize the passage of a property tax cap before the scheduled end of the legislative session, June 20.

Forty-three other states have some limits on property taxes. But New York is unusual because property taxes are the main source of support for schools outside of the city, where the schools are primarily financed by a municipal income tax.

While some details remain to be worked out, particularly the length of time before the legislation expires, legislative leaders in both parties said they were confident that a final agreement was at hand.

“This is a great day,” said Mr. Skelos, adding, “New York State once again can be competitive in creating jobs, and rather than exporting people, bringing people to the state.”

Mr. Silver said, “With this legislation, we are finally able to bring property taxes under control and still provide critical services.”

View the original article here