If someone is mentally ill, their condition should not excuse them from their crime or offense. They should still receive the proper treatment for their condition while serving time for whatever crime they committed.If one is truly clinically insane then they should not go unpunished, but they should receive an appropriate punishment. An appropriate punishment should all depend on the nature of the crime and the nature of the illness. It would be very beneficial to everyone to put their attention towards the treatment instead of the punishment. It would not be safe to place a grossly insane person in prison for basically the rest of his/her life.
Homicide is murder but not all homicides are illegal some are considered justified homicide an example of justified homicide is when its done as an act of self defense. Homicide is a heinous crime that is very serious and will result in going to jail for a long time.This is what homicide is. Scenario Two: What is the most serious offense Lori can be convicted of? Explain. Lori committed a controversial crime that many people believe was the right call to make but a crime is a crime you can’t break the law just because you don't like it and in this paragraph i will explain to you what law Lori will most likely be charged for.
What steps must be taken to prove insanity? When the defense claims that their client was not in a state of understanding for what he or she did due to mental disorder is often known as the insanity defense. This is to show that the defendant was unaware at what he or she was doing and should not be held accountable for the alleged actions. In this particular case the term insanity is used more legally than medically, so it is the court’s decision on if there should be a medical professional involved or not. Stu Dents was charged with homicide, kidnapping, assault of a police officer, burglary, and crimes related to drugs.
Furthermore, I explained the hardships faced by indigent defendants who truly need a mental health professional to assist with their defense. Denying an indigent defendant of the tools and expert witnesses needed to support their insanity plea is a blatant disregard for the valuable concept of due process. References American Civil Liberties Union. (2015). Mental Illness and the Death Penalty.
Even though it is already legal, at first when it became legal it spread around quickly. The fear was that doctors would be basically killing patients who maybe have psychological problems and have nothing to do with being physically ill. There was a statement made where it said: “Dutch doctors have gone from killing the severely ill, to the disabled and even the depressed who aren’t physically sick.” In addition too, this case about assisted suicide is iffy because under age patients like 18 year old may ask for it if they do have a problem and are in contact with a physician. The problem with that is maybe they aren’t sure of what they want and are taking the toll on their lives. The way of looking at this is giving medical care and love and compassion to these people.
Week 6 Check Point: Mind Over Matter By Mary Setzer The difference between mental illness and insanity is that insanity is a more severe form of mental illness where a person fails to realize what is real and what is fantasy. The M'Naghten rule can't be used to defend the actions of someone who drinks alcohol because drinking is a voluntary act. Had the person not had alcohol, they would not have committed a crime. If someone receives a rational and guilty verdict after committing a crime, it means that the person convicted knew what they were doing and aware of the consequences. A guilty but insane verdict means that the person convicted was insane to have killed someone (for example) but realizes what they have done is wrong.
But in contrast there are very different at the same time. The crime control model is used in the criminal justice system for the prevention of crime. The crime control does not exclude that is possible to make a mistake, but based on the circumstances of the laws, the person is considered guilty until her or she is proven innocent. This model is based on old fashion laws which allow rapid and speedy convictions despite the mitigating factors of the case and the victim. The results, of the crime control model are wrongful convictions, being over-turned and this is a major downfall in the criminal justice system.
The American Medical Association has generally argued against physician assisted suicide on the grounds that it undermines the integrity of the profession (Braddock & Tonelli 1998). Although patients can commit suicide without the aid of their physician it is still against the law and it can affect family members after they are gone. Opinions differ on the ethical consequences of trying to make physician assisted suicide the responsibility of doctors, but prior consideration of such ethically relevant consequences the question arises of whether the provision assisted suicide can logically be part of the doctor’s role (Fiona Randall & Robin Downie 2010). At the same time the state needs to monitor physician to see that they do not break the law and take it into their hands to participate in physician assisted suicide. A physician job description is to aim at the provision of treatments with health benefits in the patient’s best interest, and to avoid adverse outcomes (Fiona Randall & Robin Downie 2010).
Should one subsequently face legal execution, the method may vary in dignity. Whilst an American death-row inmate likely faces lethal injection conducted in private (Death Penalty Information Center), his Saudi Arabian counterpart faces public beheading (National Post, 2013). The risk of violating the right to life by incorrect verdicts, in conjunction with unproportional costs and failure to deter, makes Capital Punishment highly questionable. “Innocent until proven guilty”, the same legal and moral principles should indeed apply for “Innocent until proven guilty, innocent if proven non-guilty following false verdict”. Many, if not all, would agree.
Criminal defense of insanity is one type of popular strategy which is tried to be used by many criminal offenders whom are found to be guilty of their crimes or are about to fall within law’s hands. This type of defense is not just common in the courtroom but within the public television shows or movies, it is that of a great factor that plays roles well in sitcoms or popular movie scenes. What the insanity defense means is that a person has indeed committed the crime, but cannot be trialed or be sentenced to any jail time or anything because he/she did not know they were doing anything wrong due to their illness. There was case of a women by the name of “Andrea Yates who filled a bath with water and methodically drowned, one by one, her five children; Noah, 7 years old, John, 5 years, Paul, 3 years, Luke, 2 years, and Mary, who was just 6 months” and after being sentenced to life in prison and not the death penalty she was retrialed and clarified after she pleaded insanity (web.ebscohost.com). The affirmative criminal defense can be described as being like an option of actually agreeing with the prosecutors, but with the