Schoenborn not criminally responsible for the murder of his children is undisputable and an appropriate decision based on the evidence and the administration’s objectives. The actus reus of the case cannot be disputed, as the accused confessed to the crime and both the defence and the crown agree that Mr. Schoenborn killed his children. However, the mental element of the crime is arguable, as the possibility of Mr. Schoenborn being in a psychotic state during the time of the offence is high. The evidence to support the fact that he did not form the mens rea of the crime can be derived from his history of mental illness as well as the evidence given by Ms. Clarke that he was a good and caring father. This demonstrates that he greatly cared for his children and their safety but was prone to having psychotic episodes that muddled his mind and led him to commit dangerous and unusual acts.
Cecil had no understanding of what he did wrong and also had no understanding of what was happening to him. “In the past decade, six psychiatric evaluations have found that Clayton should be exempt from execution because he does not understand that he will be executed, or the reasons for his execution. However, since his execution date was set, he did not have a competency hearing before a judge that could spare him from execution” (“Mentally Ill Prisoners Who Were Executed”). This shows another example of the court ignoring someone's psychological illnesses and continuing to treat this person like they were an average person who killed someone. This relates heavily to Bryan Stevenson’s case with Herbert Richardson and how his psychological illness was ignored and he was also sentenced to death and executed.
The Articles of Confederation gave states more power which lead to a weak central government. The Articles of Confederation has some weaknesses because it because the central government lacked the power to impose taxes. Additionally, the Articles of Confederation made it hard to enforce the laws which caused the need for a Constitution Convention to be held since there was extensive debt and no control over the people to keep them in line with the laws. Federalists wanted a strong Central government by having the constitution ratified as well as a system of checks and balances. Anti-Federalists wanted the bill of rights passed to guarantee safety of right for citizens.
Once the horrific crime is examined, Carol Naisbitt is laid to rest and the perpetrators apprehended the author is then consumed with detailing the physical and psychological harm that is manifested in Cortney Naisbitt’s struggle to recover and his father’s role in assisting him. The critical damage experienced by being forced to swallow Drano and then being shot in the back of the head left his mother dead however Cortney managed to survive with the same injuries, although barely. While we know that Byron Naisbitt did not experience any physical harm as a victim of this tragedy, there is no question that he experienced psychological harm after losing his wife of thirty-plus years and dealing with the devastating harm experienced by his son. Throughout the book, Byron demonstrates an incredible resolve to stay strong for his family, even as he contemplates numerous times that he cannot understand how anyone could do the things that were perpetrated against is wife and son and the other three victims. In many ways, the crime caused Byron to become so over-protective however that it actually threatened his continued recovery once he was able to leave the hospital for good.
John Brown dissented slavery and thought to be God’s chosen weapon to fight it. He slaughtered innocent people, only to try to ‘save’ slaves who did not wish to join his rebellion. The court that held his case found him guilty of treason, murder, inciting a slave insurrection and sentenced him to death by hanging. Was it right for him to be sentenced to death? It indeed justified for him to be punished for all that he did.
If the extrinsic factors have a more evident involvement than mental illness, imprisonment is the result. By examining the motivations behind Dick and Perry’s crimes, it is possible to determine to what extent those who have mental illness should be imprisoned or institutionalized. Though Capote suggests Dick has a form of mental illness, his past directed the murders as certain emotions and principles were triggered, not his mental illness, suggesting it was right to have them imprisoned not institutionalized. Throughout the novel Capote alludes to events in Dick and Perry’s history revealing past incidents which provide motive for their crimes. One titular event in Dick’s normal life was his parent’s inability to pay for college, despite an impressive resume.
This is an example of crime and punishment. The man committed a crime, and he was punished for it. However, as stated earlier, it is not clear, and there is no clear distinction if this man deserved his
Instead, of being thrown into prison or having the death penalty. He needs help and he could be given the help he needs at a Mental Hospital. Why sentence him to prison or to death when he could become better. Mr. Poe stated “Meantime the hellish tattoo of the heart increased. It grew quicker and quicker, and louder and louder every instant.”
Cullen couldn’t control his anger, and lacked a conscience which he demonstrated when he tried to fight against bullying by spiking drinks at a party with rat poison (Jennifer Hash, 2006, p.1). Charles believed that being victim of bullying justifies killing people. He justified killing people because he thought of himself as a victim. He was the target of bullying in school and in the Navy. Then, both his mother and brother died young.
On March 5, 1770, British soldiers fired into a crowd on King’s Street in Boston. Five people died and the soldiers were charged with murder. The events of the Boston Massacre made the colonies hunger for independence even stronger, however I believe that the soldiers are not guilty of committing murder. I will prove through historical accounts and eyewitness testimony that the British Soldiers are indeed not guilty of murder, but were acting purely out of self-defense. William Sawyer, a Boston citizen, gave this account of the incident during the trial, “The people kept huzzaing.
When it comes to moral responsibility, the manner in which guilt is given is far messier than the libertarian methods of assigning guilt. The scale of morality falls more under the jurisdiction of the compatibilist and the skeptic than the libertarian. The compatibilist would argue that taking in Harris’s condition, he was not in a conscious state of mind. The argument is that given Harris’s reaction to the murder, there is no way he is of sound and stable mind. He began to develop the characteristics of a psychopath.
In “The Brain on Trial”, David Eagleman claims that the justice system needs to change its sentencing policies due to the discoveries of neurobiological diseases that cause their sufferers to behave in socially unacceptable ways and/or commit crimes. Eagleman uses a variety of rhetorical strategies to present his viewpoint. The most important one is his appeal to logic. By using mostly examples, along with direct address to the readers, Eagleman is able to argue that the legal system has to modify its sentencing policies to take into account the advances made in neuroscience due to the increase in the amount of accused and/or convicted people who have been found to have harbored some kind of brain disease or damage. Eagleman
Commonly, psychopaths are among those individuals who commit such daunting crimes. According to the American Psychiatric Association, the diagnostic criteria for psychopathology are deceitfulness, repetitive lying or using aliases, manipulation and irritability, and arrogant self-appraisal. Psychopaths also have a general disregard for the safety of others. Berit Brogaard, DMSci, author of “The Superhuman Mind,” adds: “The main traits of a psychopath [are] callousness, blunted emotions, impulsive inclinations and an inability to feel guilt or remorse.” These characteristics certainly pertain to Charles
Should people in life or death situations be held accountable? Yes and no, it is and isn’t that person 's fault it’s they could have thought about it and realized that he could get hurt and die or live it’s like mountain climbing it’s like what if you fall off and hit your head.it depends on how you think of it, wheather you want to doecause its dangerous or you may not know if it is dangerous yet you do it anyway. Likewise it can be where you get hurt and will be held accountable even though you know that you can get hurt and die.
Although there is not much information about this case on the documentary, nor it shows the suspects personality, because there was something wrong with his brain I believe that we might be dealing with a psychiatric or paranoid person. To me, someone who goes on and starts killing off people with no reason, is just a psychopath. There was clearly something wrong with his brain that lead him to do what he did. As I stated before, there is not much information about Charles personality, but I believe there was something hidden deep inside him with his personality , along with his brain issues that caused him to act in such
