Argumentative Analysis: Death Penalty System
James Gragnano 10/19/12
Criminal Justice 202
Legal Research Sophia Snyder has had a long history of battling with the mental illness of schizophrenia. One afternoon, she drowned her four young children in a bathtub. She went on trial for capital murder charges and all of the mental health experts agreed that she suffered from schizophrenia when she had committed the murders but they all disagreed that the schizophrenia left her unable to know the difference between right and wrong. The state of Olympus implements and uses the M’Naghten test for insanity which requires the defendant to prove that she did not know the quality and nature of her acts and did not know in acting such a way was wrong. Since the mental health experts …show more content…
(Entzeroth 2011) The death penalty in the United States can be inconsistent and is a highly controversial subject. One Supreme Court Justice, Justice Scalia believes “the resolution to the constitutional inconsistencies and internal incompatibility of the modern U.S. death penalty system is to eliminate the constitutional requirement of discretion.” (Entzeroth, 2011) In other words, Justice Scalia believes that in order to fix the debates and inconsistency of death penalty rulings that the Supreme Court should follow the statues and requirements for sentencing someone to the death penalty. He believes that taking discretion or the power to make a judgment based on circumstantial evidence away from courts and following strictly to the statues of the death penalty is the only plausible way to end inconsistency with administering the death penalty. Take the death penalty as it is written and do not be biased to mitigating factors. (Akron Entzeroth, 2011) That being stated, it is next important to understand the …show more content…
It may be morally wrong due to the fact that she does in fact have a serious mental illness, but since she never passed the test for insanity in her state, she is considered eligible and no rights have been broken. This coupled with the fact that she is a fully competent person at the time of her trial only further go on to prove that she is deserving of the death penalty. As unfair and harsh as the death penalty may be its statues must be followed strictly with out discretion. It is the only way to ensure that there is more consistency, and that no rights are violated under the 8th Amendment. (Entzeroth,
Criminal Justice 202
Legal Research Sophia Snyder has had a long history of battling with the mental illness of schizophrenia. One afternoon, she drowned her four young children in a bathtub. She went on trial for capital murder charges and all of the mental health experts agreed that she suffered from schizophrenia when she had committed the murders but they all disagreed that the schizophrenia left her unable to know the difference between right and wrong. The state of Olympus implements and uses the M’Naghten test for insanity which requires the defendant to prove that she did not know the quality and nature of her acts and did not know in acting such a way was wrong. Since the mental health experts …show more content…
(Entzeroth 2011) The death penalty in the United States can be inconsistent and is a highly controversial subject. One Supreme Court Justice, Justice Scalia believes “the resolution to the constitutional inconsistencies and internal incompatibility of the modern U.S. death penalty system is to eliminate the constitutional requirement of discretion.” (Entzeroth, 2011) In other words, Justice Scalia believes that in order to fix the debates and inconsistency of death penalty rulings that the Supreme Court should follow the statues and requirements for sentencing someone to the death penalty. He believes that taking discretion or the power to make a judgment based on circumstantial evidence away from courts and following strictly to the statues of the death penalty is the only plausible way to end inconsistency with administering the death penalty. Take the death penalty as it is written and do not be biased to mitigating factors. (Akron Entzeroth, 2011) That being stated, it is next important to understand the …show more content…
It may be morally wrong due to the fact that she does in fact have a serious mental illness, but since she never passed the test for insanity in her state, she is considered eligible and no rights have been broken. This coupled with the fact that she is a fully competent person at the time of her trial only further go on to prove that she is deserving of the death penalty. As unfair and harsh as the death penalty may be its statues must be followed strictly with out discretion. It is the only way to ensure that there is more consistency, and that no rights are violated under the 8th Amendment. (Entzeroth,