Criminal Accountability and the "I" Function
The prevalence and misuse of the insanity defense in our legal system is astounding. Cases upon cases site drugs, brain tumors, car accidents involving head injury, blackouts and antisocial behavior as circumstantial evidence of a crime that was committed. These crimes involve murder, rape and robbery. The question of where criminal accountability lies and how we are able to hold someone accountable for an act may boil down to the brain itself. Where in the brain do reason, morality and inhibition lie? If these areas are affected by some disorder does that then mean that a criminal is no longer held accountable for their actions? Is there a specific area of the brain where accountability itself may lie? These seem to be questions that are not only debated in the classroom, but hospitals and courtrooms as well.
The classic example of this dilemma is the case of Phineas Gage. Phineas lived circa 1845 and was a railroad worker known for being a kind and generous family man. However, Phineas suffered from a unfortunate accident. After a dynamite explosion caused a metal rod to be passed through Phineas's head, he was a changed man. Phineas no longer was interested in family life, his personality seemed somehow changed. He became a drifter and a rebel and has left scientists wondering to this day how he was able to be totally unaffected by a metal rod being passed through his skull despite the obvious change in his moral reasoning and values (1). This has led neurologists to believe that moral reasoning and the existence of values may be localized to one are of the brain. How else can we explain Phineas?
Neuroscientists at the University of Iowa were interested in this phenomeno...
... middle of paper ...
...ing of the brain itself. The legal system has to follow brain research. While we may not find exactly where the "I" is, we can become much closer to understanding what disorders truly effect the ability to understand one's actions and be held accountable for them.
WWW Sources
1) Cyberpunks.org ,
http://cyberpunks.org/display/176/article/
2) The Biological Basis of Morality part 2 ,
http://www.theatlantic.com/issues/98apr/bio2.htm
3)"> The Biological Basis of Morality ,
http://www.theatlantic.com/issues/98apr/biomoral.htm
4)"> Aggression and Insanity ,
http://www.forensic-psychologist.com/pub/or12-3.html
5)"> Mincey vs. Head ,
http://www.law.emory.edu/11circuit/mar2000/97-9078.man.html
6)"> Mental Illness and Criminal Responsibility , search results for "insanity defense" and "mental illness"
https://web.lexis-nexis.com/universe/,
Baseball?s reputation has been painted with a red asterisk. The non-medical use of steroids has been banned according to the Anabolic Steroid Control Act of 1990. Many baseball athletes have been caught or presumed illegal users of HGH or Steroids since the act passed in 1990. All these athletes have one thing in common, they want to have an edge or advantage on the game. Some athletes even admit to administering the drug to other athletes and themselves. Jose Conseco testified to personally injecting the steroids into Mark McGuire (Cote).
The MLB arguably has conveyed a series of mixed messages with regard to its players and their use of steroids. On the one hand, the League apparently cooperates with lawmakers on the issue of regulating drug use among its players; on the other, some of the best athletes in the MLB are suspected of drug use and yet continue to be marketed and revered. Examples of drugs used by MLB stars have included: Anavar, Andriol, Clomid, Depo-Testosterone, Insulin, Stanozolol, and Testosterone1. These drugs are steroids, typically prescribed by medical professionals to patients fighting specific disorders (such as low testosterone or infertility) or provide relief for immense pain or other severe symptoms; they are used “off-label” by athletes for increa...
In the history of baseball there are any legends that exceed many incredible records in every aspect of the game. There are players who defy the rules of records because some are very hard to reach or to get close. many of those players have been name hall of fame that will go down as players of hard sweat and blood put in and out the field. At least there will always be that moment of knowing the truth behind their abilities that will affect the evolution of the game. The impact of knowing the truth from many players has been devastating. A disappointment is the word that most fans would say when talking about some of the greatest hitters in baseball history. From 1976 to 2014 the list of names that have been investigated has multiply and more will be on the list. Names that hold titles like Barry Bonds, Mark McGwire, Sammy Sosa, Jason Giambi and many more faced or still facing accusations of using steroids. “March 17, 2...
The era in sports from the late 90s and into the 2000s has often been nicknamed “The Steroid Age” due to the raging use of anabolic steroids and other PEDs (performance enhancing drugs) by professional athletes. The usage of drugs in sports has never been more prevalent during this time, and many people are making it their goal to put an end to the abuse. Influential athletes such as Lance Armstrong, Alex Rodriguez, and Roger Clemens, who were once held as the highest role models to the American people, now watch as their legacies are tarnished by accusations of drug use. The American population, and lovers of sports everywhere, have followed in astonishment through recent years as many beloved athletes reveal their dark secrets. As organizations such as the USADA (United States Anti-Doping Agency) and BALCO (Bay Area Laboratory Co-Operative) attempt to halt the use of PEDs, both the drug users and their high-end suppliers work diligently to avoid detection. The use of performance enhancing drugs in recent years has proven to be cancerous to the honesty and competition of modern sports. Although some strides have been made over the past few decades, the use of steroids is in full swing in Major League Baseball, The dangerous side effects of the drugs are often overlooked and many do not realize the message this sends to the youth. The support for halting the usage of PEDs is in need of attention or professional sports will face the loss of all progress made through the past two decades in its war on steroids.
"STEROIDS SCANDAL / THE BALCO LEGACY / From Children to Pros, the Heat Is on to Stop Use of Performance Enhancers." SFGate. N.p., 24 Dec. 2006. Web. 13 May 2014. .
Anabolic steroids have been abused by Major League Baseball players for years, it’s time to forever ban the use of Performance Enhancing Drugs before they ruin America’s past time. Why should athletes be able to cheat when teammates or rivals are competing with honest effort? Every year records are broken and new heights are achieved, the game of baseball is very simple yet very humble, and to deceive the game you love, forever will you be punished. Let me inform you with the origin in which PEDs were first used and where they came from, regulation, and a possible solution.
Kessler, Carol Parley. "Charlotte Perkins Gilman 1860 -1935." Modem American Women Writers. Ed. Elaine Showalter, et al. New York: Charles Scribner’s Sons, 1991. 155 -169.
The problem of steroid use in baseball came into the national spotlight during the 1990s. It was during this time that home run records were being broken at an incredible pace. It was also during this period when several famous baseball players began to speak out about steroid use in baseball. The most controversial expose about steroid use in baseball is perhaps that of Ken Caminiti in 2002. Caminiti admitted publicly that he was using steroids when he won the National League’s Most Valuable Player in 1996 and in the several seasons following that. That revelation of his drug use highlighted the issue of steroid use in baseball. From that point on, the professional baseball league was under constant scrutiny from the public as well as from the federal agencies. Many had criticized Major League Baseball as ineffective in its efforts to address the issue of steroids use in professional baseball. When the BALCO incident exploded in late 2003 and affected many big name players in baseball, the public and Congress demanded answers from the accused baseball players. It was then that steroid use in baseball sparked media frenzy and legisl...
When someone commits a crime, he or she may use mental illness as a defense. This is called an insanity plea or insanity defense. What the insanity defense does is try to give the alleged perpetrator a fair trial. At least in extreme cases, society agrees with this principle. The problem is where do we draw the line. Under what circumstances is a person considered insane, and when are they not? The trouble with the insanity defense in recent years is the assumption that virtually all criminals have some sort of mental problem. One important point is that the crime itself, no matter how appalling, does not demonstrate insanity. Today, the insanity defense has become a major issue within the legal system. If the defendant is clearly out of touch with reality, the police and district attorney ordinarily agree to bypass the trial and let the defendant enter a mental hospital.
The insanity defense pertains that the issue of the concept of insanity which defines the extent to which a person accused of crimes may be alleviated of criminal responsibility by reason of mental disease. “The term insanity routinely attracts widespread public attention that is far out of proportion to the defense’s impact on criminal justice” (Butler,133). The decision of this defense is solely determined by the trial judge and the jury. They determine if a criminal suffers from a mental illness. The final determination of a mental disease is solely on the jury who uses evidence and information drawn from an expert witness. The result of such a determination places the individual accused, either in a mental facility, incarcerated or released from all charges. Due to the aforementioned factors, there are many problems raised by the insanity defense. Some problems would be the actual possibility of determining mental illness, justify the placement of the judged “mentally ill” offenders and the total usefulness of such a defense. In all it is believed that the insanity defense should be an invalid defense and that it is useless and should potentially be completely abolished.
Crime can be described combination between both behavior and mental factors. This will prove incredibly crucial in the definition of crime in relation to mental illness. Many of those that commit crimes are not convicted due to their illness so it is important to note, for the purpose of this analysis, that all illegal activity is considered crime, regardless of conviction (Monahan and Steadman 1983).
The focus is on the issues of police accountability in modern society, and in particular why their accountability is more important than other professions. This is not surprising considering the amount of power and discretion police officers have, and the level of trust that the public holds with these civil servants. Police officers accountability is the biggest thing in their profession which has been an issue of concern they have to be accountable to the police department who want the officer to be an effective and responsible person, to people in the community who have best expectation from an officer and being accountable to themselves for their acts. An ordinary citizen of a country cannot obtain the powers that police officer’s have.
There are two theories that justify punishment: retributivism according to which punishment ensures that justice is done, and utilitarianism which justifies punishment because it prevents further harm being done. The essence of defences is that those who do not freely choose to commit an offence should not be punished, especially in those cases where the defendant's actions are involuntary. All three of these defences concern mental abnormalities. Diminished responsibility is a partial statutory defence and a partial excuse. Insanity and automatism are excuses and defences of failure of proof. While automatism and diminished responsibility can only be raised by the defendant, insanity can be raised by the defence or the prosecution. It can be raised by the prosecution when the defendant pleads diminished responsibility or automatism. The defendant may also appeal against the insanity verdict. With insanity and diminished responsibility, the burden of proof is on the defendant. With automatism the burden of proof is on the prosecution and they must negate an automatism claim beyond reasonable doubt.
In his proposal “Severe Personality-Disordered Defendants and the Insanity Plea in the United States,” George Palermo, a forensic psychiatrist, presents his thesis for the insanity plea to be reversed back to its previous definition. People who had personality disorders that could cause them to become psychotic for even a brief moment used to be eligible to receive the verdict not guilty by reason of insanity, before the United States restricted it to only people affected by mental illnesses. A mental illness is a disorder such as schizophrenia or bipolar disorder, which can cause a person to be unable to determine whether an act is right or wrong. It d...
It is apparent that insanity, automatism and diminished responsibility share similarities and differences in their range of application and in definition. Insanity and automatism are most similar in that they both are full defences (with different outcomes) which exist when a defendant does not have the necessary actus reus or mens rea, whereas diminished responsibility is a partial defence which only applies to murder. The source of the defendant’s mental abnormality is the greatest point of distinction between all of the defences. Whether the abnormality is internal, external or a diagnosed medical condition will play a significant role in which defence can be used. As defences they are all used for a similar reason, and that is to eliminate or reduce liability for criminal offences.