Hinckley's progress has been gradual but steady.
Until Saturday, he was spending 17 days each month at his mother’s home. He has gone bowling, attended lectures and concerts, and volunteered at a nearby church.
From the court's July opinion:
All of the experts and treatment providers who testified during the evidentiary hearing, including Dr. Patterson, are in agreement that Mr. Hinckley's Axis I diagnoses- his major depression and psychotic disorder- are in full and sustained remission and have been for more than twenty years. During this long period of sustained remission- more than 27 years, in the Court's view- Mr. Hinckley, by all accounts, has shown no signs of psychotic symptoms, delusional thinking, or any violent tendencies.
After 34 years as an inpatient at St. Elizabeths Hospital, and in view of the findings of fact set forth in this Opinion and the successful completion of over 80 unsupervised visits to Williamsburg over the last ten years, the
Court Jinds that Mr. Hinckley has received the maximum benelits possible in the in-patient
setting, that in-patient treatment is no longer clinically warranted or beneficial, and that- as
even Dr. Patterson has acknowledged- Mr. Hinckley is clinically ready for full-time convalescent leave. On the ultimate mixed question of law and fact- dangerousness- the Court finds by a preponderance of the evidence that Mr. Hinckley presents no danger to himself or to others in the reasonable future if released on full-time convalescent leave to Williamsburg under the conditions proposed by the Hospital, as modified and supplemented by the Court....
How much does the Court know about Hinckley? A lot. As the judge wrote:
Between the many psychiatrists, psychologists, social workers, case managers, therapists, and other professionals who have treated John Hinckley since 1982, or independently examined him as part of the proceedings before this Court since 2003 -many of whose work and opinions have been dissected by lawyers on direct and cross-examination in open court for over a decade -it is fair to say that the lives of few people have been scrutinized with the care and detail that John Hinckley's has been. Indeed, it is difficult for the Court to imagine a more thorough evidentiary and clinical record on which to base a conclusion as to whether a specific person will present a danger to himself or others in the reasonable future.
The judge imposed a lot of conditions. He has to live with his mother for a year (if she is no longer available, one of his siblings has to live with him.) He can only drive by himself within a 30 mile radius, except to go to DC to meet with his treatment team. He must continue with psychiatric care and medications. He has to keep a daily log of his activities.
The judge rejected the Government's request for Hinckley to wear an ankle monitor, for 24/7 tracking on his car, and to install tracking software on his computer. When not at his mother's, he has to carry a GPS-enabled cell phone. But he can make calls from any phone.
The hospital's social work staff were ordered to determine all public benefit programs for which Hinckley might be eligible and assist him in applying for the programs. He can use the internet, but he can't open or use social media accounts without permission. He cannot contact the media.
Good luck, John Hinckley.
