I don't care if he was mentally ill. If I knew the victim or was close to them in anyway, I'd hunt down this guy, and kill him. I would, and apart of me feels bad for him, and I feel bad for him. But if it was my friend that was killed, I'd take revenge, even though it's not the smart thing to do.
Is it that by its indefiniteness it shadows forth the heartless voids and immensities of the universe, and thus stabs us from behind with the thought of annihilation, when beholding the white depths of the milky way?
I'm glad he's going to an institution instead of to jail. But I don't know how I would feel if he made an amazing recovery and got out in five or ten years. I think once you gut, behead, and partially consume another human being, you may forever lose the right to be free. Keep him safe, treat his illness, and never let him go would be my preference. The stakes are too high if he ever went off his meds or became ill again after recovering and going free.
I don't think he's very likely to ever get out, though. But since it's not nailed down like a jail sentence would be (in theory), it's open ended (in theory). It feels a little unsafe not to just go ahead and call this one.
The one who buggers a fire burns his penis
-anonymous graffiti in the basilica at Pompeii
USA laws do not allow for cruel and unusual punishments. They do this for good reason. (study history) I don't think this case is a very good reason to make a break with our laws on this.
Also he's insane and torturning him won't change anything. It won't serve as deterent for someone else equally insane.
By not torturing him, you're giving incentive for people to commit crimes without severe punishment, or any punishment in this case. It's stupid. Kill the guy, especially for what he did. If he's insane, he should have gotten some help or somebody should have gotten him some help. Now he takes the life of another, and people realize.