Does the punishment received, fit the crime committed? Does Chris Watts receiving five life sentences, fit to murder his family? The majority of the time, people receive sentences that may not fit the crime due to certain circumstances. Since there are laws/ specific sentences that go with each crime that is committed, that is the minimum that, that person has to get. In this case, what Chris got, is what Chris deserved for what he has done for his family. On August 13th, 2018, Chris Watts pregnant wife, Shanann, and two daughters, Bella and Celeste, were declared missing. On the morning of the 13th, Chris and Shanann were arguing, because she “accused” him of cheating. This led to Watts strangling and killing Shanann. The argument woke up …show more content…
On November 19th, 2018, Watts admitted to killing his family, and was sentenced to five life sentences, without the possibility of parole. Watts pleaded guilty in exchange for not getting the death penalty. Although at first, he blamed his pregnant wife for killing his two daughters, and only admitted to killing her. Then eventually admitted to murdering all of them. According to the newspaper, “Chris Watts gets life in prison for killing daughters and pregnant wife,” Shanann’s mother stated, “I did not want death for you because that is not my right.” (Garcia, 2018). Shanann’s mother believes that retribution/ revenge is not a good punishment for Chris. She believes that Incapacitation, is the best fit, and that he should be behind bars for the rest of his life, which is what he ended up getting. In the newspaper, “After plea on TV for family's safe return, murder charges” it stated, “Shanann, Bella, Celeste, if you're out there, just come back” (Zaveri, 2018) The fact that he knew what he had done to them and went on live TV begging for them to come back, that is evil. The purpose of this punishment given by the court is to let Chris suffer for what he has done to his
One of the problems with the law is its principle of removing judicial discretion. This severely hinders a judge's ability to make a punishment fit the crime. While some felons deserve life in prison, it is unfair to create a standard that would force judges to sentence offenders to life imprisonment for relatively minor crimes.
On the premise that punishment is justified so long as it meted out as retribution for the offense committed; asserting that punishment of death for murderers is morally justified simply because of the degree of the crime and requires a vengeful punishment. Could this premise be applied to other crimes such as rape, arson, or burglary?
In my conclusion, I think the boyfriend should not get 25 years to life in prison, but a death penalty, I can understand that a person killing another person that is also an adult like yourself, but this is a child, a three years old little girl that knows nothing, unable to live her full life. The boyfriend did not show any remorse, the mother cried, but also considering of her neglecting her own daughter too. Krueger and the boyfriend went too far for what they had committed, there shouldn’t be any pity, so in conclusion by what the mother and boyfriend had done, to have a voluntary manslaughter, neglect homicide, and without shown any remorse for this crime, death penalty.
Families do not receive the privilege to see their family members again so to equal out the justices, the one that has committed the crime should get the punish they deserve. Just in record, the death penalty will do no good because they will never have the time to think about what they did. They should serve jail time a minimal of ten years with no parole. Let’s us start by education are children in a young age of what is right and wrong and we can make a
Most people don 't look at every aspect of a crime. They don 't think about everyone that was affected, other than the victim. In her article "On Punishment and Teen Killers", Jennifer Jenkins explains how her younger sister was taken from her by a murderer who shot and killed her. In her article she states, "So few who work on the juvenile offender side can truly understand what the victims of their crimes sometimes go through. Some never recover." Jenkins is explaining her personal experience of losing her younger sister to help others understand what the families of the victim have to deal with for the rest of their lives. She brings a point of view that most people have never been in because they 've never experienced what it 's like to have a loved one taken away from you by murder. In her story she also states, "If brain development were the reason, then teens would kill at roughly the same rates all over the world." Many people believe that the supreme court needs to be more lenient on juveniles because their brain is not fully developed as that of an adult, but brain development cannot be used as an excuse because as Jenkins explains, the teens would be killing at the same rate all over the world. Jenkins also brings up a good point about how the US as a whole needs to step up to prevent these crimes from happening. Jenkins states, "We in America have to own to this particular problem, with weapons so easily available to our youth, and the violence-loving culture we raise them. She is trying to bring awareness to society that America is also at fault for these crimes. Furthermore, she also explains why life sentencing is not as cruel as some may feel it is when she says, "… a life sentencing still allows a great deal of good living to be done, even from behind bars, far more than these teen killers gave to our murdered love
If a family member was murdered, a family member was murdered, age should not dictate if the punishment for homicide will be more lenient or not. If anyone not just juveniles has the capabilities to take someone's life and does so knowing the repercussions, they should be convicted as an adult. In the case of Jennifer Bishop Jenkins who lost her sister, the husband and their unborn child, is a strong advocate of juveniles being sentenced to life without parole. In her article “Jennifer Bishop Jenkins On Punishment and Teen Killers” she shows the world the other side of the spectrum, how it is to be the victim of a juvenile in a changing society where people are fighting against life sentences for juveniles. As she states in the article “There are no words adequate to describe what this kind of traumatic loss does to a victims family. So few who work on the juvenile offender side can truly understand what the victims of their crimes sometimes go through. Some never
I believe first degree murder is a definitely life sentence. Greg Ousley blames his surroundings about how he was beaten by his parents and his sisters as well. Greg stated that he killed his parents to have a better life. By telling his friends what he was gonna do has convinced him and determined himself to kill his parents. When things went right he didn't feel like doing the wrong thing and taking their life away, but he thought to himself, all of Greg's friends will think he was a liar, and couldn't be trusted. When Greg came home he grabbed his friend gun and walked inside the house. There he was standing, he took aim, and shot his dad in the head with a twelve gage shotgun! When he fired at his mom, his mom ran away and Greg shot her once and she was still alive, so he shot her again and she died. After he killed them he ran to his neighbor's house and yelled “Somebody killed my parents” his neighbors knew what had happened. After serving 15 years he has made a request to be released early, but he needed to get his family to say yes to his early release. However I believe he should not get a shorter sentence because he had this planned out and could have stopped it various times but decided not too. If a juvenile is willing to plan a murder and murder someone. It's a sign that Greg Ousley should not be released because of first degree
Dick and Perry both were involved with the murders of the Clutter family, but only Perry killed the four members of the family. Perry deserves to be hanged but Dick does not. Although Dick didn’t kill anyone there, he helped and planned going to the Clutter home. Therefore Dick does deserve to be punished, but the death penalty was extreme for his crimes. Perry does the death penalty unlike Dick. He openly confessed to killing the family and showed no remorse for the family. Some people think it safer for citizens if the criminals are executed after committing horrible crimes. Some also think its only fair if someone kills someone then they should not be able to live. Many people think the death penalty should be abolished. Numerous innocent people were convicted for crimes they didn’t commit. Also many religions believe that punishment is immoral. Having the death penalty does not have any regard for those religious
This sounds very bad but based on the circumstance they were in it doesn’t make sense to give these men the death penalty. The law is not a valid factor in this case because a circumstance like this was not even thought of when the rules were being made. Therefore the law should not even be considered.
Cases end up in life sentences in jail. The goal is to end all cases, for murdering someone, to life sentences.
Unfortunately, the Peterson's case is not unique. Their case is only an example of one of a million crimes that are committed daily in which the death penalty could be applicable to punish the perpetrators and therefore stop them before they attack, kill, rape, or rob another victim. However, not all of the murderers or serial killers are captured; and most of the time, it takes many years to get enough evidence to give closure to their innocent victims and their families.
When juvenile are being sentenced life in prison for committing murder has always been an issue in many court cases. Some believe that they don 't deserve a second chance and that they should be sentenced life in prison but others do believe in second chances. There are many reasons to why juveniles should be given a second chance in life when they commit a crime such as murder. For example, the brain of these juveniles is not fully developed, the environment can influence them to do such crimes and there 's still ways for them to change and turn their life around.
Life in prison did not seem like a harsh enough punishment for taking a life. Berns also found that victims who did not have the killer receive the death penalty were, “haunted by the
I actually believe in our legal system and I believe in justice. I believe in justice as an ideal that we strive for and that is what it means to me. The legal system, when looked at closer is not justice but instead - judgment. You can be punished when found guilty, in a number of ways, but who knows if they’re “fair” punishments, it’s all a matter of opinion. Is life in jail, say 25 years, going to be enough punishment for the parents charged with brutally murdering their daughter Farah Khan? Her life was brief, but whoever killed her also mutilated her body parts. The possibilities for her life were endless, she could have lived to the old age of 95. So is 25 years enough for her killers? They’ll be able to walk free at the end of their term, and perhaps few will remember them then and what they did. Why is justice important then? Because although the legal system is not always right, it needs that lofty ideal of justice as something to strive for, something to hope gets accomplished, the hope for every victim of a crime of any nature. The seeking of justice is a tiring and long quest akin to the seeking of truth, for they are closely linked and without one there may not be the other.
A thirty five year old white male kidnaps and rapes two sisters, one eight years old and the other eleven. The man then brutally murders the two helpless children; letting one watch as the other one was killed. He then leaves the bloody and beaten bodies, of the innocent sisters, in the neighborhood playground. Does this man deserve to die? The death penalty is a necessary evil that has a positive effect on society today. The death penalty should be sought in cases that carry the death penalty as a form of punishment because retribution should be taken for the heinous crimes that are committed, people that commit crime or kill will do it again, and the death penalty deters crime.