I am no lawyer, I am just therealscootaloo's friend from across the planet, desperately reading as many laws of South Dakota as possible in case I can do anything to stop this injustice. Below is the most relevant stuff I've found, and what I think about it. (unsure if I should include surnames because of possible hatemail/spam etc)


According to South Dakota Law
"‎27A-1-2. Involuntary commitment. A person is subject to involuntary commitment if:

(1) The person has a severe mental illness;
(2) Due to the severe mental illness, the person is a danger to self or others; and
(3) The individual needs and is likely to benefit from treatment.

Source: SL 1966, ch 186, § 1; SDCL, §§ 27-3-1, 27-5-1; SL 1975, ch 181, §§ 1, 45; SDCL Supp, § 27-1-1.1; SL 1987, ch 197, § 2; SL 1989, ch 21, § 49; SL 1991, ch 220, § 2."

Unless therealscootaloo's depression and act of underaged sex show not just that he has SEVERE mental illness, but an illness that makes him a danger to society, it would not be right to commit him to an institution...

Especially when it would mean taking him away from his friends. not just irl friends, family and his girlfriend, but tens, (probably bordering on hundreds at time) of friends that he talks to and confides in over the medium of "funnyjunk", in particular it's "pony threads".

even if he is believed to be dangerously ill, I do not think it would benefit therealscootaloo. IN THE SLIGHTEST.



I would like to look in more detail at how emotional disturbance in minors is defined, to help make it clearer why I feel therealscootaloo does not meet the "requirements".

"27A-15-1.1.   Severe emotional disturbance defined. For the purposes of this chapter, an individual with a serious emotional disturbance is an individual who:

             (1)      Is under eighteen years of age;
             (2)      Exhibits behavior resulting in functional impairment which substantially interferes with, or limits the individual's role or functioning in the community, school, family, or peer group;
             (3)      Has a mental disorder diagnosed under the Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders, fourth edition revised, 1994;
             (4)      Has demonstrated a need for one or more special care services, in addition to mental health; and
             (5)      Has problems with a demonstrated or expected longevity of at least one year or has an impairment of short duration and high severity. For purposes of this section, mental retardation, epilepsy, other developmental disability, alcohol or substance abuse, brief period of intoxication, or criminal or delinquent behavior do not, alone, constitute serious emotional disturbance.

Source: SL 1994, ch 255, § 2; SL 2000, ch 129, § 19. "

Now, obviously he is under eighteen, and although I have not read it, I think it likely depression was diagnosed under manual revised in 1994, and I assume in this it is considered a "serious emotional disturbance" because otherwise his single act of criminal behaviour would definately not be a reasonable thing to base it on.

However I do not feel he has "exhibited behaviours that would substantially intefere with or limit his role or functioning" in anything; he has plenty of friends and had a girlfriend. (which is tricky whether or not you're crazy)

Bringing me on to my next point: He has not demonstated a need for "special care services", EVERYONE GETS SAD, MANY GET DEPRESSED. He, like many before and after him have dealt with it fine simply by talking things out with their friends, instead of being committed.

I have no idea if this will help, or if I'll even get to talk to him in the next few years, (perhaps not at all, as much as I hate the thought... without his friends to help him and with the prospect of 3 years in an institution at such a young age his life looks quite bleak at the moment.)
I just wanted to make this in case it helps even reduce his sentence in the slightest. I do not like being powerless to help my friends.