Stanley V. Mary Bennett

In each trial, from theft to murder, the jury all have the same duty. Their burden is to determine whether the defendant is guilty for the crime they are accused of, or not. They are expected to take testimonies and facts into account and go forth with a decision from there. In Mary Bennett’s case, the jury must determine whether or not she is guilty of second degree murder of her infant daughter. For the defendant to be guilty of second degree murder, the jury must determine if Bennett intended to kill her daughter, made a conscious decision to do so at the moment, and was aware of the consequences of her actions (“Mary Bennett,” pg 5). Bennett decided to leave her daughter alone and unattended so that she could visit her fiancé in San Francisco.

The police officer states that he arrived at her apartment at 11 p.m. on January 30th. He witnessed Bennett sobbing while holding her dead infant in her arms. He states that he took a statement from the defendant at that time. When giving her statement, Bennett had claimed that she left her daughter with a babysitter, but later stated that she knew that she was leaving her daughter alone. Policeman A is considered a credible source. He is a professional and must follow certain procedures regarding crime scenes. Police officers are expected to take statements and then write a report that is unbiased. His memory does not skew the facts because they are written down at the time of the incident. The police officer is also a witness. He had witnessed the Bennett’s actions and witnessed her making conflicting

Bloom. Dr. Bloom stated that Bennett’s problems began after the birth of her daughter. He believes that she was suffering from postpartum depression. He also stated that her fiancé had left for California, which made her even more emotionally unstable. Dr. Bloom explained that she had used alcohol to cope, but eventually she was “depressed, desperate, anxious and an alcoholic.” He believes that this had sent her into a neurotic state, making her obsessed with seeing her fiancé. He states, “This single hope was the only thing she could focus on, and when she acted on it she was completely unaware that she was putting her daughter in danger.” Though Dr. Bloom’s statement made me second guess my opinion, there were a few things that made his opinion less credible. Dr. Bloom never stated what kind of professional he was, all he claimed to be was a professional. He also has never been involved in judicial hearings before, and is not aware of the proper testing. Because of these two facts, I found him less credible than Dr.