Pros And Cons Of Justin Harris

In society crime is something that the government tries to prevent from happening. If a crime were to occur then the government would take control of the situation and take steps to properly punish the wrongdoer. Whether it be a misdemeanor or a felony society believes that crimes are a blemish on who they are as whole and make them look bad. Many people feel that whenever some breaks the law they should be punished in a way that will correct their behavior and teach others not do the same type of behavior.

Georgia man Justin Ross Harris has been sentenced to life in prison without the possibility of parole in the death of his 22 month old son which occurred in June 2014. Harris was convicted on several charges including malice murder, felony

During the trial it was found that Harris was sending sexually explicit messages to several women and underage girls. In addition, it was found that the defendant was aware of his actions as he viewed highlighting the detrimental effects of leaving animals and children in hot vehicles just five days prior to his son’s death. Both the prosecution and defense agree that it was Harris’s fault for leaving his son in the car. However, the prosecution believes that the defendant is responsible for leaving his son in the car, that his actions were criminal, and that he did this because he wanted to rid himself of parenting responsibilities as he was engaging in sexual behavior and pursuing relationships with other women. On the other hand, the defense believes that he is indeed responsible for his actions but his actions were not criminal and that his son’s death was a tragic accident rather than the result of criminal behavior. The prosecution recommended that Harris serve the maximum life sentence without the possibility of parole with an additional 32 years. The judge claims that the defendant “intentionally and unnecessarily inflicted wanton,

Harris was charged with the maximum life sentence, life in prison without the possibility of parole. The judge did not accept the additional 32 years as then the punishment would not fit the crime and would go against the 8th amendment. The 8th amendment and the principles of sentencing relate to each other. The 8th amendment talks mainly about bail but also has to do with the infliction of cruel and unusual punishments and how they are not allowed. The principles of sentencing have to do with the reasons specific punishments are applied to those who break the law. A major piece of this concept is that the punishment must fit the crime. Therefore, no cruel and unusual punishment can occur if the punishment fits the crime. During the trial the prosecution claimed that Harris’s motive in killing his son was the fact that he did not want parenting responsibilities, marital responsibilities, and engaged in immoral, illegal sexual behavior so he could pursue other women. On the hand, the defense claimed that though he engaged in immoral behavior he was trying to turn his life around. I do not agree with the prosecution and the defense about how he did not want parenting and marital responsibilities and how the defendant was trying to turn his life around. If Harris wanted to leave his marriage there were other options in doing so. For example, Harris could have