Suspect is 5 feet 10 inches, approximately 160 pounds. He’s being charged for breaking and entering as well as murder. The suspect admitted to doing so after the police came to his door in suspicion of foul play. He screamed in a fit of rage as he screamed “Villains, dissemble no more! I admit the deed! - tear up the planks! -here, here! - it is the beating of his hideous heart.” Such rash actions have cause for some suspicion about the well-being of his mental state. I, mental doctor Thaddaeus Smith have been given the job of undergoing his psychiatric evaluation. “He certainly seemed crazy to me.” Said Officer Williams. “We prefer to use the term mentally ill,” I replied. Officer Williams rolled his eyes and continued. “He was just going on and on in his conversation after he let us in. He kept getting louder and louder until he had a terrifying dramatic outburst.” “That’s when he admitted to the crime. He said he loved the victim, but despised his said vulture eye. I has been revealed that the victim had cataracts. I don’t know where he got the vulture eye from. He said that he saw the eye, which severely angered him and out of a fit of rage, smothered the victim in his …show more content…
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. He shouldn’t be held responsible for the crimes he committed, and most of all, he needs help. “I don’t believe a word you’re saying,” a stubborn old man replied. “You don’t understand!” I exclaimed. This man needs help and your planning to lock him up somewhere he doesn’t belong?” “No. He does belong there. That man is dangerous,” the man replied. “Have some compassion for the man!” I yelled. The man gave me a dirty look and walked
One of the major ethical implications in serving justice for someone who is claiming a mental illness is balancing the severity of the illness with that of the crime. Mainly to also prevent the perception that these murders would not be impugned. However, it should be considered that physicians at the Veterans Administration Hospital did not offer the PTSD care the patient deemed necessary. Nonmaleficence is at the core of a doctor’s actions, however, in this case not treating resulted in more harm to the patient and others.
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.
His eye would trouble me no more.” Knowing this, he was glad he was dead, as he was relieved of the burden that the man was alive with the “vulture” eye. Having killed him relieved him of stress and that is not normal for other people. His schizophrenia supported the fact that he was relieved after killing him. Finally, after killing the old man- he cleans up after himself, as he cut the man up in pieces.
As a juror, you must render a verdict of guilty or not guilty, and follow the law and do so based on your opinion from the evidence that has presented in court over the last several weeks on the case of Valentine Shortis (Friedland, 1986). After going over my notes from the trial numerous times, the verdict that I have chosen to write down on my ballot is “not guilty.” As a reader, you might not comprehend my reasoning for this vote that goes against all the odds of what the Crown has been trying to persuade me not to consider. I have analyzed all the evidence, and in my opinion, I believe that Valentine Shortis is an insane man, and has suffered from a disease of the mind since childhood. On the night of March 1st 1895, Valentine Shortis
Though there was much proof that he wasn’t anywhere close to mentally healthy, he was deemed “sane and having full knowledge of right and wrong”. Though he had seen a few mental institutions he didn’t get much of any
Sanely Guilty - Indeed There has been a tragic death befall this town - the murder of Mr. Johnson - and today, the task at hand for the judge and jury is to decide the state of mind of Mr. Smith at the time of the murder of Mr. Johnson. There is absolutely no question that Mr. Smith murdered Mr. Johnson; Mr. Smith admitted to two policers: “I admit the deed!” (61). Mr. Smith further directed the police officers to the location of the body when he demanded they “ . . . tear up the planks!
The narrator was so consumed with the man's eye that he killed him just to get rid of the man's judgment. Though there were some repercussions with his immoral choices,he cannot take the terrible things
This article talked a great deal about how the rules and procedures when it comes to the insanity defense are inconsistent and unclear. United States v. Hinckley showed the public how inconsistent and unclear the criminal procedures are. The article provided a statement from a juror involved in the Hinckley case. The gist of the statement was that even the experts used in the trial could not determine the defendant’s sanity, which made it even harder for the jurors to determine as well.
The definition of insane is what Mr.Smith was. Insanity is not being able to decipher fantasy and reality, is a subject to uncontrollable behavior, or not being able to manage your own affairs. Mr.Smith didn’t know what was real, how to control himself, and he didn’t know right from wrong as you will learn. Starting off, Mr.Smith couldn’t distinguish fantasy from reality. As Mr. Smith states on page 55,”I heard all things in heaven and in hell.”
While this may be the case, many people may think he was fully aware of what he was doing. This can be proven wrong because the narrator states, “I loved the old man. He had never wronged me... I think it was his eye yes, it was this!”(2).This quote reveals that it was not the old man at all that had made him want to murder him, it was his eye that was his motivation.
“Insanity: n. mental illness of such a severe nature that a person cannot distinguish fantasy from reality, cannot conduct her/his affairs due to psychosis, or is subject to uncontrollable impulsive behavior” (Hill). This definition describes the narrator, a sweet yet deadly man, of “The Tell-Tale Heart” by Edgar Allen Poe seamlessly. (Appositive) A few prominent characteristics demonstrate the narrator’s insanity, and those include his motives, his actions, and his thoughts.
and observe how healthily” (Poe 303). The narrator shares an event from the past which he tells us about his hatred for this old man’s eye which resembled that of a “vulture, a pale blue eye, with a film over it”(Poe 303). The narrator uses these illustrative images of this pernicious eye to assist in building the plot. He is trying to convince readers that all of this is because of the “Evil eye”(Poe 303).
The narrator 's sole reason for such murder is purely in his disturbed mind, as he develops an obsession with the old man 's eye and the plot unfolds from here where his insanity augments with the events of the story. Due to Poe’s illustrative language, various evidence can be presented to confirm the state of mind of the narrator, including, his obsession with the old man’s eye, his precision in committing the impeccable crime and finally the sound of the man’s beating heart solely inside his head. Perhaps it all started with the narrator’s obsession with the man’s “vulture eye” since he believes the eye of being evil, proving the insanity he is gravely trying to deny “I think it was
As a result, the narrator is insane and should not be prosecuted. To start off , the eye drove the narrator to insanity, which led him to take the life of the old man, The narrator does not know right from wrong. In the story, the narrator said that “For it was not the old man who vexed me, but his evil eye”(Poe). This quote from the passage proves that he is insane because he is deciding to kill someone over his “vulture eye”. A sane person would realize that killing someone over a eye is a silly, wrong thing
The Calculated Killer Would you be scared if you heard of a man that lived near you and killed an old man because he did not like the old man's eye? There was a man who killed an old man because the eye he had with film over it vexed him. I think he was a calculated killer because he gets vexed by the old man’s eye, and he killed the old man. He also tried to hide all of the evidence after he killed him.