Introduction. The Justice System Is A Set Of Institutions,

Chapter one also discusses the importance of the need to have a system of justice in America. Crime was thought to have been previously been linked with poverty, however, this is not the case. The President's Commission on Law Enforcement and Administration of Justice was a group of 19 people appointed by former president Lyndon B. Johnson in order to study the criminal justice system in America. The Challenge of Crime in a Free Society is a report that summarized objectives that shaped the criminal justice system. The chapter also focusses on the models of criminal justice. The Due Process Model, associated mainly with the Warren Court, is a model that wants citizens to have equal fairness of the law. The Crime Control Model, however, suggests that the most important function is the suppression of crime. Overall, the main purpose of chapter one is to inform readers as to why the criminal justice system was created and the need for a justice system in

The insanity defense has become popularized by criminal television shows, but it is not used as portrayed. According to Dr. Zachary Torry, a psychiatrist, the defense is actually used in one percent of cases and not even one-fourth of those cases will succeed in front of a jury (Torry). Furthermore, the legal definition of insanity is very different than the societal definition. As stated by George Blau, a criminal defense lawyer, “insane” does not describe someone who is psychotic or crazy, but it instead describes someone who does not know the difference between right or wrong. They are found not guilty by reason of insanity (NGRI) because one of the three traits of a crime is not evident. The three traits are a guilty mind (mens rea), a prohibited act, and a pre-established sentence (Blau). For the insane, there is no mens rea because someone cannot feel guilty for an act that they do not know is wrong. Therefore, those found NGRI have a different punishment than those convicted of a crime. Their sentence is often time at a mental institution where treatment is available, but the sentences can be irregular and unchecked by government associations. Therefore, the insanity defense may need to be amended, by requiring monitoring of the cases and adopting the mens rea approach or to be completely abolished because of its potential improper use and a lack of proof.

In the states Idaho, Montana, Utah and Kansas the insanity defense has been abolished due to John Hinckley being neither found or guilty by reason of insanity in his attempted assassination of President Ronald Reagan. In cases where there is no option of the Insanity Defense, evidence of the defendant’s mental state may

"Not Guilty, By reason of Insanity!" These words have stung the ears of many courtroom observers, especially the families and friends of victims whose lives were snuffed out by a so-called 'insane' assailant. While there are indeed many insane people running around the streets today, I feel that many persons who use the temporary insanity defense are more conniving than insane. Also, being an inexact science, the psychiatric community often offers up differing opinions as to any particular individual's sanity. Furthermore, money or lack thereof can play a major role in the success or failure of an insanity defense. The temporary insanity defense should therefore be abolished, especially for felony offenses such as murder.

The insanity defense has been used in several cases in criminal law. This defense basically states that the accused cannot be held responsible for what he/she did because they had no control over their actions. Many times the defense attorney will plea for a deal that the defendant be sent to a mental rehabilitation center for proper treatment. When using this defense the defense attorney will argue that there may be a chemical imbalance in his brain therefore he had no idea what he was doing at the time.

The insanity defense is seldom used for minor criminal charges and is more often used in murder cases and for other serious felony charges (Gardner & Anderson, 2015, pg. 116). This type of defense is not an easy way out for the criminal because it is very hard to prove someone is criminally insane. Of the two percent of criminal defendants charged with serious felony charges use the insanity plea. When the plea is used, there must be some proof showing this person is criminally insane.

rial,73 the Unabomber case,74 and the John Hinckley Jr. trial. These cases renewed the insanity defense debate, 76 regardless of whether the defendant was actually mentally ill 77 or whether the insanity plea was ultimately successful. 78 The widespread public belief that defendants frequently use the insanity defense to avoid punishment79 is largely attributable to high profile cases and the attention the media gives them. The public also believes that the availability of the insanity defense will result in the opportunity for those faking mental illness to avoid punishment.80

There is an extreme difference between the criminal justice systems used in Norway with that of the one used in Texas. In Texas, we see a tough justice system that seeks to punish the guilty. On the other hand, Norway attempts to teach its prisoners to be good citizens by treating them with respect, like normal people. On this essay I plan to compare and contrast both criminal justice systems and discover which one is the best approach.

The insanity defense has been affirmed as “a defense asserted by an accused in a criminal prosecution to avoid liability for the commission of a crime because, at the time of the crime, the person did not appreciate the nature or quality or wrongfulness of the acts” (Insanity). In terms of economic and futuristic principles the plea is viewed with hesitation. The concern comes from the belief that criminals will act insane up to their trial date to convince the jury they are insane (Starr), and it’s cost because sending all those deemed mentally not guilty by reason of insanity to the proper institutions.

The justice system in the United States has two systems, federal and state levels and not only one nationwide structure such as in Finland. The resemblance and differential among the justice systems of the United States and Finland. The similarities and dissimilarities amongst the U.S. and Finland to a degree, the format

Literacy and competency are essential to these criminal investigations. Any false allegations, misjudgment or misunderstanding of the case can set a criminal free within seconds. “The layman claims that sane men are escaping responsibility for their crimes on the plea of insanity by reason of the venality of experts, the strong and corrupt partisanship of counsel for the refense, and the incompetency of the judge and the prosecuting attorney” (Insanity and Criminal Responsibility). There are many individuals who are involved in the sanctions of these cases and although they maintain proper credibility, the cases will prosper according to their beliefs and findings. It is understood that mental health professionals, physicians and psychologists stand ground in front of the jury with hopes of proving the individual sane or insane. “The insanity defense traces its roots back to the 1843 assassination attempt on British Prime Minister Robert Peel. In this case, a psychotic individual named Daniel M’Naghten intentionally and with premeditation killed an assistant to a prime minister of England because he believed he was being persecuted. The defendant plead insanity at the trial. The prosecution attempted to prove sanity by illustrating M’Nagten’s behavior in planning and executing the attack. Several physicians testified as to the defendant’s even though they never examined the defendant; their conclusions were based on hearing the testimony and observing the defendant’s behavior. After the judge gave weight to the physician’s opinion, the prosecution agreed to stop the case and the defendant was declared insane” (The John Hincklney Trial). In other words, insanity cases are in the hands of professionals that are able to evaluate, analyze and conclude based on behavior, excluding mental illness. Although these processes change drastically over time, the basis of the cases will always be

In the world of forensic psychology and law there are various amounts of individuals whom have committed a crime and out of those people are those who cannot stand trial due to mental illness or not being competent to stand trial. Sometimes these individuals are not able to defend themselves against what they are being accused of. What I have taken an interest to in reference to what I addressed above are the individuals who utilize the insanity defense due to their mental illness. A case that represents my interest with this topic is a case that many have been following, the case of the James Holmes. James Holmes is a man who attacked a Colorado movie theatre resulting in twelve lives being taken and seventy others injured. This shooting

The insanity defense has been a controversial issue among many individuals and legal experts. Whether or not an individual 's current mental state can get in the way of their ability to differentiate right from wrong at the time of a committed crime has been a discussion of great debate among society. Although it is rarely used in criminal proceedings its credibility is still questioned by many people. People who believe that the insanity defense should be abolished argue that the individual committed the crime regardless of being insane or not and they deserve to be punished. On the other end of the spectrum, some people believe that individuals should not be punished for the crime they have committed because they suffer from a mental illness that made them unaware of their actions at the time of the crime.

Looking into criminal justice procedure, many administrations are at work. Starting with the police, to the courts and concluding in corrections. Though all these sectors have different tasks, their combined focus is processing the law. Regardless what the process is called criminal justice will continue to serve with discretion, conviction, and correction. When first presented with the question whether criminal justice is a system, non-system, and network I leaned toward a network. Throughout our discussions, lectures, and readings I felt the process presented itself as a network. Intertwined divisions working for a common goal. Further into my research and help from Webster, I decided that the criminal justice

The United States criminal procedures are its strengths due to the way we handle things. Our criminal procedure starts with our law enforcement. They conduct investigations, look at cases and if they need more evidence to convict the offender they get a warrant to get a hold of the offenders belongings so they can go through all the evidence thoroughly and effectively. Then the investigation leads into the courts were the offender pleads guilty or not guilty. The judge determines the sentencing with the help of the jurors. This process may take a while, especially in murder cases. All evidence is crucial to determine the sentence. The evidence is what helps the jurors and the judge decide if the offender is guilty.