Early Life And Psychological Issues In Jared Loughner's Case

Kinkel had a long history of paranoid schizophrenia and depression. He also had a very long blood line history of mental illness. Medical experts evaluated Kinkel to the possibility of him being able to be rehabilitated and possibilities of returning to a regular life. The experts were very skeptical and doubtful. His sentence was challenged as inhumane, but Oregon State Constitution was very clear about his

Under Ariz. Rev. Stat. Ann. § 13-502, does Aaron Wilson, 1) suffer from a mental disease or defect at the time of the incident, and 2) know right from wrong at the time of the incident; and will therefore be found guilty except insane? A.R.S § 13-502 states “a person may be found guilty except insane if at the time of the commission of the criminal act, the person was afflicted with a mental disorder or defect of such severity that the person did not know the criminal act was wrong.” Ariz. Rev. Stat.

While Simmons was starting to serve his time, the U.S. Supreme Court decided that it was unconstitutional to give the death penalty to the mentally challenged in 2003. Due to this new law Simmons case was reviewed once again. They had come to the conclusion that due to a national consensus, many are against the death penalty of juvenile offenders. They then sentenced Simmons to life in prison without the chance of parole. The State of Missouri appealed the decision to the U.S. Supreme Court.

TERM PAPER JARED LEE LOUGHNER: COMPETENT OR INCOMPETENT? SUBMITTED TO PROFESSOR T. TULLY IN PARTIAL FULFILLMENT OF THE REQUIREMENTS FOR CRJ 202, SECTION 007 CORRECTIONS FALL 2014 BOROUGH OF MANHATTAN COMMUNITY COLLEGE CUNY BY TIFFANY SANO NEW YORK, NEW YORK OCTOBER 20, 2014 On January 8th, 2o11, the city of Tucson, Arizona, suffered a traumatic experience.

He underwent a complete personality change after his girlfriend left him, however, this was just the cherry on top of everything else he had been going through. His neighbor expressed that the family was always private which was indicative of abuse and could have been a factor long before his girlfriend left him. His friend Zachary confirmed this as he described Loughner’s home as a “hostile” environment. Loughner’s parents were alcoholics which he claimed would abuse him during his childhood. Personally, as a daughter of an alcoholic this story hits home as that could have easily been my life had I not had others around supporting me.

Even though Loughner wasn’t fully competent, they had to proceed the case, because the Government could drop the charges if Loughner was still incompetent. Loughner wasn’t fully competent; however, he was doing much well than his first hearing after receiving the treatment he needed. Based on evidence and professional opinion of experts, U.S District Judge Burn found Loughner mentally competent to stand his trial. He said, “My personal observation of him leave no questions in my mind that loughner knows what is going on today”. His decision was based on Loughner’s behavior in court and also on Christina Pietz who believed that Loughner was competent to stand trial.

On April 20, 1999, Eric Harris and Dylan Klebold carried out an attack on Columbine High School in Littleton, Colorado. They fired guns towards students, killing thirteen people and injuring more than twenty. Afterwards, they turned the firearms on themselves. In his book ‘Columbine’, Dave Cullen analyses how and why Eric and Dylan massacred the victims at the school. When viewed in hindsight, events such as this are inspected to every minute detail; there are always ways in which the outcome could be changed.

In Roper v. Simmons there are two issues that must be addressed, the first being the issue of moral maturity and culpability. The defense in the trial phase of this case argued that Mr. Simmons was an at an age where he was not responsible enough to fully understand the effects and consequences of his actions. The majority draws on Atkins v. Virginia to argue that this specific precedent supports their case that the death penalty should not be imposed on the mentally immature or impaired. However, an important point to be made is that the Atkins v. Virginia decision is geared towards the clinical definition of mental retardation: significant limitations that limit adaptive skills. Also, another important question to consider is the competency and premeditation of Mr. Simmons’ crime in this case.

What exactly is the insanity defense? In a criminal trial situation the insanity defense is used to explain that the defendant was not responsible for his or her actions at the time the crime was committed due to a mental health illness or a mental handicap. Now you have to think of the reasoning, is this form of defense used as an actual defense for one who irresponsibly committed a crime or as a last resort hoping for an acquittal before a defendant is about to be handed a guilty verdict? Most people being asked would say it is being used for sane people trying to get out of a crime they committed, but I believe the insanity defense is misunderstood by society and should strictly be used for its creation of mentally ill individuals.

In this case the only factor seen as a mitigating circumstance was his age which was the same for the case of Thomason v. Oklahoma. This is where Justice John Paul Stevens states that aspects like “inexperience, less education, less intelligence, emotions, peer pressure, and irresponsibility” were all factors as to why someone who was a juveniles during their crime doesn't deserve the death penalty. The cases dealing with mental retardation of a criminal as well suggest why someone like Simmons shouldn't get the death penalty. In the case of Penry v. Lynaugh a statement is made that says “because of their mental disabilities, mentally retarded people do not possess the level of moral culpability to justify imposing the sentence.” This case as well brings up the national consensus that is against the death penalty which was a factor in the fate of Simmons.

Insanity is an illness an individual cannot overcome and will make decisions without thinking. Lacking the further knowledge of a criminal's mental state does not endorse the fate of acquiring the death

The 1984 Insanity Defense Reform Act was passed by Congress after an infamous trial that shocked the United States. United States v. Hinckley was notorious because it was one of the rare cases where the insanity defense worked and the defendant was found not guilty by reason of insanity. The result of this case caused a huge public outcry against the insanity defense. Debate began to form over how to amend the insanity defense. This paper will critically analyze three scholarly journals.

Should the Not Criminally Responsible Law Remain in Canada? As of 1992, the Canadian Criminal Justice system introduced a new Law to its Criminal Code. NCR stands for “Not Criminally Responsible.” It is defined in section 16 of the Criminal Code."

The verdict basically classifies as the same as finding someone guilty. This consideration turned into an alternative to the insanity defense, with no real benefit to the criminal defendants. If someone classifies as guilty but mentally ill, he or she will be sent to prison, no matter what the situation. In a murder case, there even remains a possibility of even a death sentence, whether or not the victim’s family/friends decide to be for or against it. If no death penalty presents, the villain attains mental health services the entire time they occupy prison.

School Shootings: How We All Miss the Point... The aftermath of a school shooting is tragic, depressing, and causes hatred for the lives lost and the person who took them. Everyone, especially the media, tries to interpret why the shooter killed their victims, or why they felt the need to end others’ lives and their own. How We All Miss the Point on School Shootings, by Mark Manson, explains what and why these mass shootings happen. He starts by using examples of shootings and the murderer’s past.