After the fact most people are sorry for a person who has mental problems when they commit a senseless act. At the least the young man did cause elder abuse, both mentally and physically by grabbing and pulling Professor Wiesel off of a hotel elavator. The suprise and shock of being grabbed and ordered to go to his room for an interview could have caused the Professor to have a stroke or heart attack. If he died he’d be held for murder. It’s good to receive an apology, but if anyone did that to my husband or father it wouldn’t be enough.

Did this man know he had pre-existing mental problems? Was he doing anything about it? Was he following a doctor’s direction and taking his meds, or attending therapy, or whatever he needed to do to keep it under control?
When I was in my early teens I happened to be friends with a paranoid-schizophrenic, who was the nicest guy in the world when he was medicated. However, one day over a game of cards (MtG; if you know what that stands for I salute you, geeky brethren!) we had a minor disagreement over some trivial rule. I was perfectly happy to let it go, when out of nowhere he grabbed a set of scissors from his mother’s sewing basket, literally jumped across the table, pinned me down and held them to my throat.
The small pentagram necklace I was wearing at the time stopped them from actually touching my skin, although it broke the pentagram off the chain and left me with an angry red mark for several days.
Now, I’m all for reaching out and offering a hand-up to people who’ve been dealt a raw deal by life. I’m all for giving them the assistance they need to overcome adversity and thrive, and to live a full and productive life.
However…
The law says that people in need of medication to remain safe (to themselves and others) have the right to refuse that medication. While that may be the law, I do not believe that such individuals should be able to have their cake and eat it too. If they make the choice to not seek help in dealing with their potentially violent mental issues, or if they choose to go off their meds and as a result another person is victimized by them during an ‘episode,’ I think they should be held accountable.
I’m sure they feel true remorse when they are medicated and stable enough to understand what they did, and I’m sure a drunk driver regrets taking a life when s/he sobers up, too. However, heartfelt apologies, while they may be a balm to the soul, are no quick-fix to bruises, broken limbs, and shattered senses of security… or worse.

“I’m hoping that in (Wiesel’s) lifelong struggle to help oppressed people, he reaches out to one of them, and that’s Eric Hunt,” Runfola said.
Okay, I understand that he was having psychiatric problems, and may not have understood what he was doing, and all that, but if I was Mr. Wiesel I would still find that statement really, really annoying. “Oh, I’m sorry if pressing charges over you attacking me is oppressive, Mr. Hunt.” @@
“MtG; if you know what that stands for I salute you, geeky brethren!”
Ah! I’ve heard of (though never played) that. Apparently we’re not so different after all.
God bless.

The defense lawyer has sent 20 letters from Hunt’s family, friends and teachers, along with a psychiatrist’s report to Wiesel. Do they really think that the “evidence” that he is really a nice kid is going to help the situation? Hunt may be mentally ill, and,as was asked in a previous post, is this the first time he has gotten out of control or was it known that he was mentally ill and had stopped his meds?
Hunt needs to have some kind of consequences for his actions. His actions could have killed Wiesel. His apology to Wiesel was obviously not acknowledged, and perhaps the 20 letters and the doctor’s report won’t be either.

I interpreted Wiesel’s nonresponse to the apologetic outburst to be a refusal to reward that interruption and break in appropriate courtroom decorum. I did not interpret it as refusal to accept the apology – it’s just that there’s a time and a place for everything, that may have been the place but it emphatically wasn’t the time. ‘Sides, apparently, impulse-control is the (do we still have to say ‘alleged’?) assailant’s problem, after all.
I believe strongly that facts and only the facts are to be considered in the guilt phase of criminal trials. Did he attack him? (Obviously.) Was it a hate crime? (Doesn’t appear so.) And so on. The defendant’s mental illness is relevant at the arraignment phase, when the State decides whether or not to prosecute, and at the penalty phase, when, I hope, the court will be a merciful to this misbegotten soul as the law permits.

It’s easy to appear to be contrite. I won’t comment further because I don’t know enough about the situation.
NightLad, did the local paper run an article about “Pentagram Saves Local Man”? I remember when it was common to see articles about how a Bible stopped a bullet, etc.

“I’m hoping that in (Wiesel’s) lifelong struggle to help oppressed people, he reaches out to one of them, and that’s Eric Hunt,” Runfola said.
That statement strikes me as offensive. To reduce it to the absurd, “Wiesel has a reputation as a humanitarian, therefore he should just let bygones be bygones”? It’s simply not okay to lay hands on someone else, particularly a very old someone else. If Hunt’s illness is such that he can’t recognize that fact or restrain himself, then he clearly needs treatment. But it is not Elie Wiesel’s task in this case to see that he gets it. Wiesel was the victim of an attack. He is not the judge, lawyer, jury or a mental health professional. The defendant’s family should stop harassing Mr. Wiesel with letters and reports. They should just expect the court to deal with the matter in the best way possible and leave the victim alone.

Joey;
Ah! I’ve heard of (though never played) that. Apparently we’re not so different after all.
Of course not. If your prick me, do I not bleed? If I watch Star Trek, do I not bliss out?
Nnmns:
NightLad, did the local paper run an article about “Pentagram Saves Local Man”? I remember when it was common to see articles about how a Bible stopped a bullet, etc.
Nah, I was only a kid at the time and rather shaken up. He later confessed that he had only been ‘sporadically’ taking his meds, and that caused the ‘outburst.’ I told him he had to tell his parents what happened, and go back on his meds. Then, If he was better in 2 weeks, we could still be friends. However, if I even so much as got the impression he was off his meds, we were finished.
He didn’t have many friends to begin with, and he agreed. 2 weeks later he was better and we continued our friendship for a couple more years, until he screwed up again. (Not towards me personally, but I warned him.) I wish him well wherever he is.