Ignorance and awareness are in reality and law two separate things.
I have been committed for my lack of mental hygiene from time to time, but that was a 'civil' matter which was settled to almost everyone's satisfaction.
As someone said in another post possession may be 9/10 of the law, but I hope I displaced that notion by referring to the odd exception. Equity's darling ie a bona fide purchaser who takes title without knowledge of any wrongdoing in the chain of custody can dispossess another.
I am not suggesting for one minute that there is any analogy of sorts with 'ownership' of one's mind, which of course can't be commodified in any way and bought, traded or otherwise dealt with by any third party, either wittingly or unwittingly. To suggest that is the case would be far fetched and fanciful.
There are also a litany of cases....in property law....regarding those who 'find' property rightfully belonging to another and at what point they can be legally said to rightfully claim ownership of the said property in dispute and thus dispossess the rightful owner of the property of their title.
Once again no analogy with the mind is suggested by any necessary implication.
One can take a leave of absence with or without notice of their minds, and I think it could be fairly argued that in a fashion, notional or actual ownership of the mind can be said to vest in another for the purposes of conducting certain transactions whilst the person is out to lunch.
Hold that thought whilst I absent myself.....
Bookmarks