He is calling out Governors, and urging viewers of his program The Factor to write their state representatives and push Jessica’s Law. On a recent interview on The Factor with Jesse Watters, Colorado Speaker of the House, Mark Ferrandino strongly opposed Jessica’s Law. He argued saying Colorado has “strict enough” laws concerning child sexual abuse. Just to illustrate how “strong” Colorado’s laws are, here is an example of their pathetic judicial system: a man in Colorado who raped ten children at a daycare center was sentenced to a laughable two years in prison (O’Reilly). Colorado is one of the only states in the Union that does not support Jessica’s Law, or the safety of children.
Running Header: STOP THE INCARCERATION AND START THE REHABILITATION 1 Stop the Incarceration and Start the Rehabilitation Amber Pritt English 215 Professor Dorothy Hoerr December 8th 2013 STOP THE INCARCERATION AND START THE REHABILITATION 2 Abstract About 9,700 American prisoners are serving life sentences for crimes they committed before they could vote, serve on a jury or gamble in a casino - in short, before they turned 18. More than a fifth have no chance for parole. Juvenile criminals are serving life terms in at least 48 states. The increased prosecution of juveniles in adult court is another failed “get tough” policy which is excessive and harmful to children and does nothing to increase
Since then 2,800 rapists were convicted and sent to jail, including one hundred and twenty-one who raped repeatedly. Because this law was passed it became mandatory for repeat offenders, however only eight of those offenders were sentenced to chemical castration. Around the country there are increasingly severe sex offender laws that are convincing criminals to take drastic measures to try to prove that they are fit to be in our society. As drastic as resorting to a treatment so brutal that it hasn’t been in use in the justice system for decades. This is known as voluntary castration and was first offered in the state of Texas for repeat offenders.
The case of Graham vs Florida cleared out any confusion about the LWOP. When Terrace Graham was 16 years old, he was convicted of armed burglary and attempted armed robbery. He served a 12 month sentence and was released. Six months later, Graham was tried and convicted by a Florida State Court of armed home robbery and he was sentenced to life in prison without parole. On appeal, he argued that the imposition of a life sentence without parole on a juvenile violated the Eighth Amendment and moreover constituted cruel and unusual punishment, and that violated the Eighth Amendment.
The cost of health care that he receives for the heart transplant after leaving a hospital is about $1 million. As the guy recovered, he still had to serve 25 years to life in prison. There is a debate about whether the felons deserve organ transplantation. Most people would find it troubling that a criminal would get a major organ transplant while hundreds of law-abiding citizens who desperately need the organ, such as heart, kidney, liver, lung, and etc., are made to wait. National Kidney Foundation stated, “Over 95,000 U.S. patients are currently waiting for an organ transplant; nearly 4,000 new patients are added to the waiting list each month.” On the other hand, there is valid argument regarding convicted felons should receive organ transplants .
Monday, January 14, 2008 Pros and Cons Three Strike Law Is the three-strikes law, which provides mandatory 25-to-life sentences for a third felony conviction, a good idea? In a Nutshell Yes No It provides a fix for a flawed justice system so that repeat offenders stay in prison. The law provides a very effective deterrent after the 2nd conviction. The media distorts the true effectiveness of the law by showing trivial cases (like someone stealing pizza) rather than the usual perpetrators. The law applies to 3 convictions, not 3 crimes (i.e.
Tonight he would overcome his fear of talking to the public about something he really cares deeply about. This topic was surprisingly unselfish in the reasons he was bringing it up as an issue. Dan has a problem with the ‘Three Strike’ law in California, stating that if you have obtained three felony accounts, violent or nonviolent, you will be sentenced to life imprisonment. The three strikes law in California, instituted in 1993, had the original purpose of taking career criminals off the streets, making out communities and our and streets more safe. However the real impact of the law was filling prisons with non-violent offenders for decades at a time.
Article Rebuttal Article Rebuttal Unraveling the “Three Strikes law and making it unconstitutional is the primary focus of the Criminal Defense Clinic at Stanford Law School, It’s founder Michael Romano States in his article “Striking Back: Using Death Penalty Cases to Fight Disproportionate Sentences Imposed Under California’s Three Strike Law” (2010), his clinic believes the “Three Strikes Law” is unconstitutional and unfair punishment. In our argument we will make the case stating he is using fallacies to strengthen his argument. In California there are no class systems for felonies. Whether or not the felony is violent or not violent, California imposes a harsh sentence. We will give you an overview of what “The Three Strikes” law are, the “Death Penalty” and our rebuttal.
This month Kip Kinkel was sentenced to life in prison in Oregon for the murders of his parents and a shooting rampage at his high school that killed two studen ts. A psychiatrist who speciali zes in the care of adolescents testified that Kinkel, now 17, had been hearing voices since he was 12. Sam Manzie is also 17. He is serving a 70-year sentence for luring a n 11- year-old boy named Eddie Werner into his New Jersey home and strangling him with the cord of an alarm clock because his Sega Genesis was out of reach. Manzie had his firs t psychological evaluation in the first grade.
He was wrongfully convicted when he was 16 years old and served 20 years in prison before proving his innocence. That mistake took two decades from him, but it took Carlos DeLuna's life. Proof of Carlos' innocence has only come out now, 29 years after the crime and two decades after he was executed, because of the painstaking work of professors and students at The Columbia Human Rights Law Review. Doubts always existed in Carlos' case, but it took 29 years and what some are calling the most comprehensive criminal investigation in U.S. Carlos DeLuna's case is proof that these kinds of cases are not isolated; they are the inevitable result of an imperfect system. As long as we have a death penalty, we risk executing innocent people like Carlos