DataBreaches.Net

Menu
  • About
  • Breach Notification Laws
  • Privacy Policy
  • Transparency Report
Menu

Tucson shooter's prison records to be released

Posted on May 7, 2011 by Dissent

When are doctor-patient communications not privileged and confidential? Apparently when the government requests them as part of determining competence to stand trial. David Schwartz of Reuters reports:

District Court Judge Larry Burns, in a ruling made public on Thursday, said there is no reason to prohibit the U.S. Bureau of Prisons from releasing to law enforcement and federal prosecutors psychological records and other information about the 22-year-old college dropout.

Loughner’s lawyers said such a release would violate the federal government’s own guidelines and Loughner’s constitutional right to protection from self-incrimination and due process.

“The Court finds that neither the psychotherapist-patient privilege nor the Fifth and Sixth Amendments bar the disclosure of this information to the Government,” Burns wrote in rejecting that argument.

In related coverage, Jennifer Epstein of Politico reports:

Staff from the Bureau of Prisons have met with Loughner on many occasions and recorded his “demeanor, affect, behavior, incoming and outgoing mail, verbal and non-verbal communications, and confidential information about visits with his legal team,” his lawyers said in their filing.

The lawyers had argued that providing private information from Loughner to the prosecution would violate his rights as a prisoner, as well as psychotherapist-patient privilege.

Behavioral observations in a prison are one thing, but therapist’s notes from sessions are another. Then, too, requesting pre-shooting mental health records, when Lochner may have had a clear expectation of confidentiality and privilege is yet something else.

So does the prosecution make a compelling case that they need his medical records as part of their determination/evaluation as to whether he is competent to stand trial? Ladd Egan provides some background and justification for the request.

I find this whole thing troubling. It seems to me that if the defense wants to introduce those records, then they need to make them available to the prosecution. But if the defense doesn’t intend to use them, should the prosecution still be able to access them? What do you think?

Category: Uncategorized

Post navigation

← Central Oregon Community College Hackers May Have Compromised Student Information
Huntington National Bank sues ex-workers for allegedly stealing sensitive customer data →

Now more than ever

"Stand with Ukraine:" above raised hands. The illustration is in blue and yellow, the colors of Ukraine's flag.

Search

Browse by Categories

Recent Posts

  • Central Maine Healthcare tackles suspected cybersecurity issue; hospitals remain open
  • Cartier Data Breach: Luxury Retailer Warns Customers that Personal Data Was Exposed
  • Beyond the Pond Phish: Unraveling Lazarus Group’s Evolving Tactics
  • Akira doesn’t keep its promises to victims — SuspectFile
  • Fraudsters, murderers, students: who the GRU assembled a team of hacker provocateurs from and why it failed
  • Order of Psychologists of Lombardy fined 30,000 € for inadequate data security protection and detection following ransomware attack
  • Lower Merion School District says a data breach was caused by a computer glitch (1)
  • After $1 Million Ransom Demand, Virgin Islands Lottery Restores Operations Without Paying Hackers
  • Junior Defence Contractor Arrested For Leaking Indian Naval Secrets To Suspected Pakistani Spies
  • Mysterious leaker GangExposed outs Conti kingpins in massive ransomware data dump

No, You Can’t Buy a Post or an Interview

This site does not accept sponsored posts or link-back arrangements. Inquiries about either are ignored.

And despite what some trolls may try to claim: DataBreaches has never accepted even one dime to interview or report on anyone. Nor will DataBreaches ever pay anyone for data or to interview them.

Want to Get Our RSS Feed?

Grab it here:

https://databreaches.net/feed/

RSS Recent Posts on PogoWasRight.org

  • Stewart Baker vs. Orin Kerr on “The Digital Fourth Amendment”
  • Fears Grow Over ICE’s Reach Into Schools
  • Resource: HoganLovells Asia-Pacific Data, Privacy and Cybersecurity Guide 2025
  • She Got an Abortion. So A Texas Cop Used 83,000 Cameras to Track Her Down.
  • Why AI May Be Listening In on Your Next Doctor’s Appointment
  • Watch out for activist judges trying to deprive us of our rights to safe reproductive healthcare
  • Nebraska Bans Minor Social Media Accounts Without Parental Consent

Have a News Tip?

Email: Tips[at]DataBreaches.net

Signal: +1 516-776-7756

Contact Me

Email: info[at]databreaches.net

Mastodon: Infosec.Exchange/@PogoWasRight

Signal: +1 516-776-7756

DMCA Concern: dmca[at]databreaches.net
© 2009 – 2025 DataBreaches.net and DataBreaches LLC. All rights reserved.