Excerpt from Term Paper:
Would you like to merge this question into it? MERGE already exists as an alternate of this question. Would you like to make it the primary and merge this question into it?
MERGE exists and is an alternate of. The idea of punishment is based on the philosophy that a person should receive retribution for doing something wrong as well as given reason not to do it again in the future.
However, in the case of the mentally ill, neither of these is upheld. Arguments against- First, people worry that somebody who is not insane will be found innocent and sent to a mental hospital instead of a prison.
Many reforms to the system in America occurred after the John Hinckley case, in which Hinckley attempted to assassinate the president and was found innocent Not Guilty Reason Insanity. Second, courts have long grappled with the problem of defining insanity.
In a court mental illness is not based on the current mental state of the defendant but rather their mental state when the crime was committed. Furthermore, very little medical evidence is used when a court is determining whether somebody is insane or not.
For example, somebody may be diagnosed with schizophrenia, but that diagnosis often does not play a role in the court proceedings. Often courts generally try to answer questions like "Did the defendant know what they were doing was wrong?
The requirements for this are more or less that the defendant must know they are going to court, what charges they are going on, and understand who critical members of the court are the judge, defense attorney, etc. If they are not found fit to stand trial they are sent to a mental institution and receive treatment until they are deemed fit.
To try and compensate for some of the error involved in trial, many states have incorporated a Guilty But Mentally Ill plea. Currently only 4 states do not have the insanity plea Montana, Utah, Idaho, and Kansas. All four of these states have GBMI verdicts. The insanity plea is a fair deal for people that were truly insaneat the time of the crime.
It offers no solace for the victim ortheir family. The crime was still committed. What are some arguments against Presbyterianism?Intro to the American Criminal Justice System. Unlike in most countries, the United States criminal justice system is not represented by a single, all-encompassing institution.
Rather, it is a network of criminal justice systems at the federal, state, and special jurisdictional levels like . It is vital that states provide for the ongoing availability of a complete insanity defense resulting in a verdict of not guilty by reason of insanity.
When the insanity defense does not apply, the availability of mens rea and diminished . Id. at We have therefore repeatedly recognized that appellate and collateral review waivers cannot be invoked against claims that counsel was ineffective in the negotiation of the plea agreement.
United States v. Jemison, F.3d , n. 8 (7th Cir); United States v. United States – U.S.
()) as well as a legal concept also not mentioned there, “Battered Woman Syndrome” (as a legal defense), which supplements my discussion of the insanity defense in SaG. All of this was compiled in response to Sam Harris’ (IMO awful) book Free Will. I have a lot of problems with that book.
"Plea Bargaining and Convicting the Innocent: The Role of Prosecutor, the Defense Counsel, and the Judge." BYU Journal of Public Law Heumann, Milton. "Plea Bargaining: Process and Out-come." Criminal Law Bulletin Nasheri, Hedieh. Betrayal of Due Process: A Comparative Assessment of Plea Bargaining in the United States and Canada.
In the adversary system of justice like you have in the United States, the prosecutor and the defendant are on opposing sides and have an adverse relationship hence the name.
Adversarial justice allows both sides to make a logical argument to the judge and jury and allows both arguments to be heard equally.