What Other States Are Doing Right: Protecting Public Safety in NGRI Cases
- jughead73
- Jun 25
- 9 min read
The Pattern of Failure: Arkansas Act 911 of 1989 Kills Innocent People
Arkansas Act 911 of 1989 doesn't just threaten future victims—it has already killed innocent people.
Patrick Massey (March 28, 2019): Brutal Murder
Philip Reynolds committed crimes so horrific they shocked even experienced investigators:
Patrick Massey was shot nine times, stabbed multiple times, and mutilated
Patrick's body was burned post-mortem, with four fingers severed from his left hand
Jerry Mauldin, a neighbor, was shot in the leg by Reynolds
Reynolds shot at law enforcement officers when they arrived
Reynolds had a documented history of methamphetamine use and mental illness
Despite the brutality, Reynolds was found Not Guilty by Reason of Insanity under Act 911. He will not go to prison. He will not face a jury trial. Instead, he's at Arkansas State Hospital and will be released when deemed "no longer dangerous."
C.T. Perkins (January 3, 2023): Act 911 Kills Again
James Earl Lambert II, a 31-year-old with schizophrenia, was a "former mental patient" who had been released under Arkansas Act 911's conditional release program for attempted murder. On January 3, 2023, just two weeks before the victim's 41st birthday, Lambert stabbed C.T. Perkins to death in Little Rock.
This is exactly what everyone fears could happen with Reynolds—an Act 911 release committing murder.
Lambert was sentenced to 36 years in November 2024, but C.T. Perkins is dead because Arkansas Act 911 of 1989 failed to protect him.
The Documented Pattern of Death
According to the Encyclopedia of Arkansas, these aren't isolated incidents: "The 911 program has received recent media attention due to individuals on 911 status receiving new criminal charges while living in the community. In April 2010 in Garland County, and in March 2012 in Jacksonville (Pulaski County), individuals on conditional release were charged with murder."
Arkansas Act 911 of 1989 has now failed with deadly consequences at least three documented times:
April 2010 - Garland County murder by Act 911 conditional release
March 2012 - Jacksonville murder by Act 911 conditional release
January 2023 - James Earl Lambert II murdered C.T. Perkins
Three murders. Three families destroyed. Three preventable tragedies caused by conditional releases.
This is exactly why other states reformed or abolished their NGRI laws—because people like C.T. and the victims in 2010 and 2012 keep dying.
How Other States Protect Public Safety
Washington State: Enhanced Review and Restrictions
After high-profile cases involving NGRI patients, Washington State implemented comprehensive reforms that Arkansas should study closely.
Washington's 2010 NGRI Reforms Include:
Public Safety Review Panel: A multi-disciplinary panel including a psychiatrist, psychologist, prosecutor, law enforcement representative, consumer advocate, and public defender that reviews all decisions about community access
Court Orders Required: NGRI patients must obtain court orders to leave facilities, even for family visits or walks on hospital grounds
Enhanced Security Protocols: Stricter oversight of treatment and release decisions
Prison Transfer Authority: In extreme cases, NGRI patients who cannot be managed in hospitals due to security concerns can be transferred to correctional facilities
Why This Matters: Washington recognized that public safety requires multiple layers of review, not just clinical judgment.
Virginia: Comprehensive NGRI Management System
Virginia has developed one of the most thorough NGRI oversight systems in the country, addressing the exact concerns raised by cases like Patrick Massey's.
Virginia's NGRI Protections:
Dedicated NGRI Coordinators: Each Community Services Board has designated staff to oversee compliance with court orders and coordinate reports
Detailed Guidelines: Comprehensive manuals outlining expectations for managing NGRI individuals in both hospital and community settings
Regular Court Review: Systematic review processes that prioritize public safety alongside treatment needs
Conditional Release Monitoring: Strict supervision requirements for any community placement
The Result: Virginia's system ensures that dangerous individuals like Reynolds don't slip through cracks in the system.
Federal Reforms After Hinckley
The 1982 John Hinckley case (Reagan assassination attempt) led to nationwide federal reforms that Arkansas has failed to fully implement.
Federal Insanity Defense Reform Act of 1984:
Shifted Burden of Proof: Defense must prove insanity by "clear and convincing evidence" rather than prosecution proving sanity
Stricter Standards: Only defendants with severe mental illness can successfully use the defense
Enhanced Expert Testimony Rules: Stricter procedures for psychiatric testimony
Improved Hospitalization/Release Procedures: Better oversight of commitment and release decisions
Critical Point: These federal reforms were specifically designed to prevent cases like Reynolds from resulting in inadequate public protection.
The "Hinckley Effect" and Lessons for Arkansas
After Hinckley was found NGRI for attempting to assassinate President Reagan, many states eliminated the insanity defense entirely. Idaho, Kansas, Montana, and Utah now use "guilty but insane" verdicts instead, ensuring defendants serve prison sentences while receiving psychiatric treatment.
Why Some States Abolished NGRI:
Public Safety Concerns: Risk of dangerous individuals being released too early
Inadequate Oversight: Difficulty monitoring and controlling release decisions
System Failures: Cases where NGRI patients committed new violent crimes after release
Michigan's Experience: Michigan created the "Guilty But Mentally Ill" (GBMI) verdict after two NGRI patients released within a year committed violent crimes—one rape, one murder. This directly parallels concerns about Reynolds potentially being released in Arkansas.
The Public Safety Crisis Arkansas Faces
Current Failure Points in Arkansas Act 911 of 1989:
Inadequate Release Standards: The law lacks the rigorous public safety reviews other states require
Limited Oversight: No multi-disciplinary public safety panel like Washington's system
Insufficient Expert Requirements: Less stringent standards for expert testimony than federal reforms require
Weak Monitoring: Inadequate systems for tracking and supervising NGRI patients
No Victim Input: No consideration of victim impact and community safety concerns
Real-World Consequences:
According to news reports, people in Arkansas's NGRI program have committed new crimes after release.
This is exactly what happened in Michigan before they reformed their system.
What Arkansas Must Learn From Other States
Washington's Multi-Layer Approach
Multi-disciplinary review of all release decisions
Law enforcement input in all determinations
Victim advocate representation
Enhanced court oversight requiring judicial approval for any community access
Virginia's Comprehensive Management
Dedicated NGRI coordinators in every judicial district
Detailed management protocols for hospital and community supervision
Regular court review requirements with public safety prioritization
Strict conditional release monitoring
Federal Standard Implementation
Arkansas should fully implement federal reforms:
"Clear and convincing evidence" standard for NGRI defense
Stricter expert testimony requirements
Enhanced burden of proof on defendants
Improved release procedures prioritizing public safety
Consider the "Guilty But Insane" Alternative
Like Idaho, Kansas, Montana, and Utah, Arkansas should consider replacing NGRI with "Guilty But Mentally Ill" verdicts that ensure:
Prison sentences for violent crimes like Reynolds committed
Mandatory psychiatric treatment within secure facilities
No early release based solely on mental health improvement
Public safety as the primary concern
States That Chose Public Safety: The "Guilty But Mentally Ill" Success Stories
Michigan: The Pioneer State (1975)
Michigan created the first "Guilty But Mentally Ill" (GBMI) law after two NGRI patients committed violent crimes within a year of release—one rape, one murder. This is exactly what Arkansas fears could happen with Reynolds.
What Happens Under Michigan's GBMI Law:
Same criminal sentence as a regular guilty verdict—no reduced time for mental illness
Mandatory 5-year minimum probation with required mental health treatment
Prison-based treatment through Department of Corrections or Department of Mental Health
No early release just because mental health improves
Results: Studies show GBMI defendants often receive harsher sentences than regular guilty verdicts, ensuring public safety while providing treatment.
Georgia: The Toughest GBMI State
Georgia's GBMI law produces the strictest outcomes in the nation:
Georgia's GBMI Results:
GBMI murder defendants get 5 years longer sentences than regular guilty verdicts
80% of GBMI defendants go to prison, 20% get probation with mandatory treatment
Made NGRI acquittals much less likely, especially for violent crimes
98% of NGRI defendants still go to psychiatric hospitals vs. 80% of GBMI defendants go to prison
What This Means: In Georgia, someone like Reynolds would serve a longer prison sentence than a regular murderer, not a shorter psychiatric commitment.
States That Completely Abolished NGRI
Four states decided NGRI was too dangerous and eliminated it entirely:
Idaho, Kansas, Montana, and Utah:
No NGRI defense exists at all
All mentally ill defendants found guilty serve prison sentences
Mental health treatment provided in secure prison facilities
Zero risk of early release based on psychiatric improvement
Nevada:
Replaced NGRI entirely with GBMI
Every mentally ill violent criminal serves their full sentence
Community safety prioritized over psychiatric considerations
What Philip Reynolds Would Face Under GBMI
If Arkansas adopted Michigan or Georgia's GBMI laws instead of Act 911 of 1989:
Reynolds' Sentence:
Life in prison for Patrick's murder (same as any murderer)
Possibly 5 additional years (following Georgia's pattern for GBMI murder cases)
Full sentence in a correctional facility, not a hospital
Mandatory mental health treatment while incarcerated
Public Safety Guaranteed:
No possibility of early release based on psychiatric evaluations
No risk to Lazy Bend community of Reynolds returning
Patrick's family sees real justice through actual imprisonment
Mental illness acknowledged but doesn't excuse consequences
Treatment Provided:
Psychiatric care in secure prison setting
Professional mental health services within corrections system
Treatment continues but doesn't override public safety
The Evidence: GBMI Works for Public Safety
Research from GBMI states shows:
Violent offenders less likely to get NGRI acquittals when GBMI is available
GBMI defendants often receive longer sentences than regular guilty verdicts
Public safety prioritized while still providing mental health treatment
Communities protected from potentially dangerous individuals
The Urgent Need for Reform
Learning From Tragedies
Every state that has reformed their NGRI laws did so after a tragedy. Washington reformed after high-profile violent cases. Michigan reformed after NGRI releases committed new violent crimes. The federal government reformed after Hinckley.
Arkansas has its tragedy now. The C.T. Perkins murder by James Earl Lambert II shows exactly why Act 911 of 1989 fails to protect public safety."
The Community Speaks
According to South Arkansas Reckoning, "the community of Lazy Bend, worries about Reynolds returning—one day." They have every right to be terrified. A man who committed unspeakable violence could potentially walk free based on psychiatric evaluations alone.
But their fears aren't hypothetical, C.T. Perkins' family lived this nightmare when James Earl Lambert II was released and then murdered C.T. in 2023.
How many more victims like C.T. must die before Arkansas acts?
Other States Prove Change Is Possible
States like Washington and Virginia have shown that you can:
Provide appropriate mental health treatment while maintaining public safety
Implement rigorous oversight without abandoning treatment goals
Protect communities while respecting legal requirements
Learn from past failures to prevent future tragedies
The Bottom Line
Arkansas Act 911 of 1989 is a killer. It has already murdered at least three innocent people:
C.T. Perkins - stabbed to death by James Earl Lambert II (2023)
Two unnamed victims in Garland County (2010) and Jacksonville (2012)
These are just the documented cases that made headlines. How many more Act 911 failures have occurred without media attention?
Arkansas Hides the True Scope of the Problem
The most disturbing aspect of Arkansas Act 911 failures may be what we don't know. Arkansas appears to lack comprehensive public reporting on how often their conditional releases commit new crimes. Other states with reformed systems maintain detailed databases tracking recidivism and failures.
What Arkansas isn't telling us:
How many Act 911 releases have committed non-fatal violent crimes
How many assaults, domestic violence incidents, or threats go unreported
Whether smaller communities have experienced Act 911 failures that didn't make statewide news
The total number of revocations and reasons for bringing people back into custody
The lack of transparency is itself an indictment of the system. States with effective NGRI reforms typically publish annual reports showing exactly how their programs perform. Arkansas's silence suggests they either don't track failures properly, or they don't want the public to know how often their system fails.
This makes reform even more urgent - if Arkansas won't even honestly report their failures, how can families trust that dangerous individuals are being properly monitored or contained?
These aren't accidents. They're not rare exceptions. They're the predictable result of a flawed law that prioritizes the rights of violent criminals over public safety.
Other states faced identical cases and reformed their laws to prioritize public safety. They implemented:
Multi-disciplinary review panels
Enhanced court oversight
Stricter release standards
Better monitoring systems
Victim and community input
Some states went further and eliminated NGRI entirely, ensuring violent criminals serve prison time regardless of mental health status.
Arkansas has a choice: Learn from other states' reforms or wait for Reynolds—or someone like Lambert—to be released and murder again.
Patrick Massey's family shouldn't have to live in fear that his killer might return to their community. C.T. Perkins' family shouldn't have had to bury him because Arkansas failed to protect him. The people of Lazy Bend shouldn't have to worry about Reynolds coming back. And other Arkansas families shouldn't have to suffer similar tragedies because our laws fail to protect them.
What Must Happen Now
Immediate Review: Arkansas legislature must review Act 911 of 1989 against other states' reformed standards
Expert Analysis: Commission study of Washington's Public Safety Review Panel and Virginia's NGRI management system
Community Input: Include victim advocates and law enforcement in any reform discussions
Federal Alignment: Ensure Arkansas meets or exceeds federal standards for NGRI cases
Consider Abolition: Evaluate whether Arkansas should join states that have eliminated NGRI in favor of "Guilty But Insane" verdicts
The evidence is clear. The models exist. The urgency is undeniable.
Other states have protected their communities. Arkansas must do the same.
If these brutal murders lead to reforms that protect other families, then some meaning can come from these senseless tragedies. But only if Arkansas acts now.
If you've been affected by violent crime or are concerned about public safety in NGRI cases, please contact us. Your voice matters in this fight for reform.
Together, we can ensure Arkansas learns from other states, stops the killing, and protects our communities.
Comments