Fear can cause you to kill. South Africa’s paralympic and olympic athlete known as “blade runner” gold medalist, Oscar Pistorius twenty-nine years old, kills law graduate and model who was his girlfriend Reeva Steenkamp on the morning of February 14th 2013. Oscar claims that he killed his girlfriend by mistake because he thought there was an intruder in his bathroom who put Reeva and Oscar’s life at danger. The court argues weather Oscar shoots at the bathroom door because he thought there was an intruder who was threatening his life or whether he deliberately murders his girlfriend Reeva. Pistorius was found guilty for culpable homicide, South African law which is described as; actions which led to the death of an individual but not with the intend of murder. Throughout the court case Pistorius claims that he was suffering from anxiety disorder but his psychiatric examination prove that he is sane a person and does not suffer any mental illness, which could not argue against the case in Pistorius favor. Investigation prove that “both reports found that Pistorius did not suffer from a mental defect that would make him …show more content…
Arguing the reasons why people do the things they do, comes from their mental state. Human development throughout their lifetime leads to the choices they make in the future. If a person has had a troubled childhood it is most likely that they would grow into a troubled adult which leads to a vicious cycle, as this adult would be be a troubled parent too. Regarding the Oscar Pistorius trial he claims that he suffers from anxiety disorder which makes him impulsive to his fears, but reports prove that Oscar does not suffer from any mental illness. Examining mental state, emotions and the development of the accused is just as important as the physical evidence of the crime scene. The importance of clinical psychologist can determine the outcome of a trial and sentencing of the
He also spoke on the phone with respondent’s wife and mother. He attempted once, unsuccessfully to meet with them; however, he did not follow up a second time. Additionally, the counsel did not seek out additional character witnesses for respondent. The counsel’s conversations with his client led him to believe he did not need to request a psychiatric examination because he did not believe the respondent had psychological problems. In a state of hopelessness, the counsel decided not to present nor look for further evidence concerning respondent’s character and emotional state, because he believed it would not overcome the evidentiary effect of the respondent’s confessions to the crimes.
There is also an inclination to believe that if he had not suffered from this state, then the offence would not have been committed, specially not in the barbaric way it was done. Thus, it cannot be concluded that the accused willfully preformed the act, nor that the mens rea and the actus reus coincided while he was not in a psychotic state. (Roach, 113) Related to this finding is another element that supports the verdict of the Honorable Judge, which is the Principle of Fundamental Justice that states that no one should be “punished for morally involuntary actions.” (Roach, 82) A person who successfully raises the mental disorder defence is considered to be morally innocent of the act because they were not acting freely, in this case, free from psychotic ideations.
The legal guideline aims to remind psychologists about their primary obligations as well as rational “precautions to respect the confidentiality rights of those with whom they work or consult, recognizing that confidentiality may be established by law, institutional rules, or professional or scientific relationships.” Maintaining privacy and confidentiality of the defendant facilitate their openness assisting them to recall and relate “pertinent facts and events, including his motives and actions at the time of the offense, and be able to testify in his behalf and to challenge prosecution witnesses.”
Psychological Monographs: General and Applied, 2(4), i-109. Greene, E., & Heilbrun, K. (2011). Wrightsmans psychology and the legal system (7th ed.). 20 Davis Drive Belmont, CA 94002 USA: Wadsworth, Cengage Learning. Thompson-Cannino, J., Cotton, R., & Torneo, E. (2010).
The Brock Turner case is a very controversial case that spark debate on the subject of white male privilege and the abuse of power. People speculate that the only reason Turner received such a minimal sentence is because his parents are affluent and influential, due to their success and status as a white professional. He was found guilty and the judge gave him a very lenient sentence. Many people saw this as unfair to the girl that was raped and to everyone else impacted by this man 's crime. The judge 's name is Aaron Persky.
The Case of Breanna Wood vs. Joseph Matthew Tejeda Breanna Woods was reported missing by her mother on October 18 of 2016. Wood’s was last seen with Joseph Matthew Tejeda at a PMI market at the intersection of Tancahua Street and Hancock Avenue, according to Corpus Christi police. Her mother last heard from the 21-year-old about 10 p.m. that night when the two texted. Woods told her mom she was headed home. On January 2, 2017, her body was found in Flour Buff, Corpus Christi.
In the case of Mary Barnett, I agree with the courts decision to find her guilty of second degree murder and manslaughter. This is largely based on my analysis of the witnesses presented during the trial and the demeanor and actions of the defendant. Having an associates degree in psychology helped me formulate decisions about the role of each character and what part they were to play during the course of the trial. I utilized the teaching from the text book as well as the concepts from my social psychology class which required me to people watch and analyze the surroundings, body language, and actions of others.
First-Degree Murder is the most serious crime that can be committed, punishable by the death penalty. Once someone commits this crime, they are forever known as a dangerous and terrible person. The decision to murder someone is usually conscious, but in some occasions the suspect can plead innocent for reasons of temporary insanity. In the short story “The Tell-Tale Heart” by Edgar Allan Poe, a man decided to murder his neighbor because he was scared of the neighbor’s eye. When the police came to interrogate him, the man heard a heartbeat in his head.
The correctional facilities should provide evaluations and specific psychological test to determine if the person has a mental illness or if they do not while in jail. Inmates that have mental illness should be sent to a mental health facilities rather than being kept in jail where they not receiving the help they need. If the inmate is not treated for the proper mental disorder than they can be a danger to the correctional facilities and themselves. Lastly, if inmates are giving a psychological test then the correctional facilities will stop overlooking the inmates with a mental illness that need to be in a mental health facilities rather than housed in jail. How forensic psychologist can play a role?
This deals with the thoughts, intentions and reactions of criminals. This also includes all that partakes in the criminal behaviour. In comparison to anthropological criminology, psychology deals with everything that makes the criminal “tick”, as opposed to the physical evidence. The questions that I formed can easily be related to the article because they are thought-provoking, and they ask about the actual intentions and thought process related to the crime. All of my questions could explain why certain things happened that was stated in the article, including why cigarettes and money was stolen, why the crime was committed at 4:00 AM, and many more.
Criminal Justice Psychologist The psychologist is a vital asset to the criminal justice system. The psychologist can examine victims, police officials and various witnesses thus making them ethically obligated to make the right decisions and evaluations. This essay will discuss the roles of psychologist as they work within the criminal justice system. I will Identify and describe the psychologists’ roles within the criminal justice system as it pertains to the applied scientist, the basic scientist, the policy evaluator, and the advocate.
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
However, that is not the case it’s only the surface level. Until you explore the details of the underlying issue(in this case it’s the psychological impairment of the said killer) it’s impossible to make a justified claim. A good strong point that they make is "Movies and TV have put an image into our minds that these are the characteristics of a murderer when in reality they are masters at disguising their emotions and thoughts letting them blend into society.”
I saw the jury sitting at a long table. “Good morning,” I said nervously. “Today I am here to speak with you about the current situation of the suspect’s mental health. The suspect has had violent outbursts, and even believed hallucination. I believe that this man is not well.
To some, Arias came across as a manipulative psycho, while to others, she was a bit more understandable as a scorned and potentially abused lover. Because of these complications, the jury relied heavily on the expert testimony of two forensic psychologists to explain the facts behind the deception (Perrotti, 2012). Forensic psychology,