HONOLULU – The retired AMERICAN judge, who was tied up after a man allegedly shot and killed three people in Honolulu in 2006, says that he is satisfied with a statement which indicates any and all costs, but recommits him to a psychiatric hospital.
The cover of one of Hawaii’s most notorious cases, a state judge last week found Adam Mau incompetent to stand trial and dismissed all charges, including murder and kidnapping. Mau was accused of taking a taxi to a lookout point, where he killed the driver and a few pictures of the lights of the city. He drove to the nearby home of former US Judge Joseph Gedan, and strapped Owner, his wife and their housekeeper before the flight in Gedan cars.
“I think that that is necessary because if he went to trial, he would be acquitted on account of insanity,” the Owner told The Associated Press Monday, adding the ruling seemed to be a “foregone conclusion.”
The Gedans satisfied with the outcome, as long as Mau continues to Gedan said.
The 124-page ruling says Mau is re-committed to the authority of the state of the Ministry of Health, is to be placed in an appropriate medical setting, such as the hawai’i State Hospital.
Mau, who is also known as Adam, His Wai Mau-Goffredo, has been in the hospital since 2008 and will remain there for a long time, said his attorney, Brook Hart.
“Adam never tried to leave or even spoke of leaving,” Heart said, in contrast to other patient who was found not guilty on account of insanity of a 1979 murder. Randall Saito left the state hospital out of Honolulu in November and took a taxi to a chartered plane that took him to the island of Maui and then to board another plane to San Jose, California, where he was captured.
The ruling concluded that the Mau is unable to assist in his defense. “The court concludes that defendant has memory deficits in conjunction with the ongoing symptoms of schizophrenia, as well as six brain injury in addition to birth trauma, impair his ability to understand abstract concepts and rational to weigh the different factors involved in making the legal decisions that would be required of him in a trial in these criminal proceedings,” the statement said.
Honolulu prosecutors, who oppose an underestimation of the cost and argued that he should be found fit to stand trial, would not comment on the ruling.
Peter Carlisle, who was the Honolulu prosecutor in 2006, called it one of the worst cases he has seen. “I think the bottom line is that there is absolutely no way this man should be set free in the community before he is dead,” said Carlisle.