Criminal Defense Case Analysis

1261 Words6 Pages
Criminal Defense Case Analysis Lina Webb CJA 354-Criminal Law Instructor: Stephanie Smith December 20, 2013 Criminal Defense Case Analysis The insanity defense is a very controversial one. Throughout history there have been many shows, books, and movies displaying insanity to avoid being convicted of murder. The insanity defense is used in-frequently and is not a popular one and usually only used in cases that are very serious. Society seems to be becoming more open to the idea of defenses that were once thought of with a less serious tone. Justification and excuse both play an interesting role in the criminal justice field. Justification is a legal defense used when a defendant will admit to the crime committed, but will also claim that the act was necessary and justified, to avoid something that would be worse than the initial act in question (Schmalleger, Hall, & Dolatowski, 2009). Excuse differs because it is a legal defense that the defendant will state that some sort of personal circumstance or condition was occurring during the act, was that in nature that she or he should not be held liable for that act (Schmalleger, Hall, & Dolatowski, 2009). In turn, justification is more of physical act, and excuse is more of the status or “mental capacity” of the individual that is committing the crime (Schmalleger, Hall, & Dolatowski, 2009). Commonwealth v. Lorena Bobbitt In the case Commonwealth v. Lorena Bobbitt, Lorena on June 23, 1993 took a twelve inch knife and severed the penis of her husband John Bobbitt. She left their apartment and took the partial penis and threw it into a field nearby their home. She turned herself in and told police where they could find the remains of her husband’s penis, where it was then retrieved and surgically reattached. She stated that John Bobbitt had come

More about Criminal Defense Case Analysis

Open Document