Iryna Zarutska was stabbed to death. Why might her alleged killer be released?

The murder of Iryna Zarutska, a 23-year-old Ukrainian woman stabbed on a light rail train in Charlotte last August, has sparked public outrage and prompted new state legislation. However, the alleged perpetrator, Decarlos Brown Jr., a repeat offender with mental health issues who was out on bail, may not face trial, according to an analysis published by City Journal.

Brown is currently in federal custody and will soon be transferred to a high-security prison medical facility. There, he will begin a four-month course of psychiatric treatment whose primary goal is to restore his mental competence so he can stand trial.

Schizophrenic with a history of violence

Brown, who has been diagnosed with schizophrenia and has a history of 14 prior arrests in Mecklenburg County—some for violent crimes—faces both state and federal murder charges. However, a federal judge has currently declared him “incompetent” to stand trial. His attorneys have argued this incompetence in both state and federal courts, which has caused delays in the proceedings.

If federal authorities are unable to restore Decarlos Brown Jr.’s mental competence, the case will most likely be transferred to North Carolina. Although there is the possibility of indefinite civil commitment at the federal level, this option is less feasible in practice.

At his most recent hearing, Brown shouted at the judge, rambled about having “material in his body,” and threatened to sue the FBI, for which he was removed from the courtroom.

Brown could be released due to loopholes in state law

If he is returned to state authorities, City Journal argues that the situation is particularly problematic. North Carolina law stipulates that if Brown is deemed irrecoverable within the maximum term of his sentence—10 years for felonies—the charges could be dropped entirely.

This would open the door to his release without supervision, despite his history of violence and his untreated schizophrenia. Although this outcome is unlikely in a murder case, it is not impossible, since the final decision on his competency rests with the clerk of the relevant county court.

According to current state legislation, no person may be tried, convicted, sentenced or punished for a crime if, due to mental illness or disability, they are unable to understand the nature and purpose of the legal proceedings against them, to comprehend their own situation with respect to those proceedings, or to rationally and reasonably assist in their own defense.

A system criticized for its failures

The case has highlighted deficiencies in the laws governing involuntary commitment and mental competency evaluations at both the state and federal levels. According to a report by City Journal, these regulations often allow for the release of individuals with a history of violence without treatment or court-ordered supervision.

Prior to Zarutska’s murder, Brown had exhibited increasingly erratic behavior, including 911 calls prompted by delusions. Despite this, authorities prosecuted him on multiple occasions without conducting comprehensive competency evaluations until after the murder. North Carolina law does not require ordering a psychiatric evaluation or necessarily considering its results, which has been identified as a weakness in the system.

Although federal policy is slightly less deficient than state policy, both have serious flaws and require urgent reform.

How to improve the system: Early evaluations and mandatory commitment

To prevent tragedies like this, City Journal proposes reforming the current system to “make competency evaluations mandatory, expand them to lower-level crimes when the perpetrator’s mental state is in question, and make the results of the evaluation part of the perpetrator’s permanent court record.” In this way, cases of individuals with mental disorders who repeatedly commit crimes could be detected and treated in a timely manner.

Furthermore, when a defendant is determined to be incompetent to stand trial and treatment is unlikely to restore their capacity, mandatory residential treatment should be required. Under no circumstances, it states, should the state allow the release of a dangerous individual simply because a court declared them incompetent.

North Carolina is not the only state with shortcomings in these areas. Similar laws in states such as South Carolina, Oklahoma, New York, Kentucky and Illinois have also been the subject of criticism.