Topical Blog Due 9/1 @ midnight

I read 'Drug Court, Everything you have to know', 'Multiple Personality Disorder' and 'Time Out to Hard Time'.
The Time Out to Hard Time article opened my eyes a little bit to the reality of underage offenders in the adult prisons. There are 22 states that allow children as young as 7 to be tried as adults. 80 kids a year 13 or younger are transferred to adult court. These were numbers right at the start of the article. That was surprising to me. I had never heard of children that young being tried as adults.
` The rest of the article talked about how to keep children out of trouble in the first place and how to keep them within the juvenile justice system if they do find themselves in trouble. This article raised my attention to the concept of seven year old children being tried as adults. I was interested by how the juvenile court system can work, even though people this young are hardly adults.

The first article that I read was "Mentallu Ill are More Often Crime Victims. This really surprised me because I am so used to thinking that a lot of mentally ill persons are so sheltered and that this may have less of a chance to happen to them. The research stated that the mentally ill are victims of rape, robbery, theft, assault, etc..More often than non mentally ill persons. Over 1/4 of all criminal acts are associated with the mentally ill.
The second topic that I choose was a very interesting one. "Multiple Personality Disorder" In this article, in 1992 a hunter came across a dead decomposing body. The man suspected of killing the woman was known for bringing women out to that sight and beating and raping them. While confessing to the murders, this man said that he was "Kyle" or various other names for each murder making it look like he had multiple personality disorder. Later on this man plead insanity and the article ends with a psychologist giving testamony that this is impossible because he was able to recall different aspects of each murder from each person he claimed to be. This did not hold up because with multiple personality disorder it would be impossible to remember such things from each personality. This article was in particular funny from the aspect that this man did not do his research on multiple personality disorder before deciding to pretend he had this mental illness.
The last article that I found interesting was "Woman Killed Infant, Ate Part of Brain". A woman proceeded to tell authorities that satan was telling her to do this terrible act to her 3 week old child. This article also states that a psychiatric hospital was looking for this woman since she did have a mental illness. This article really made me think think if we had better health care, then some people would get the help they need before resorting to acts of violence.

The first blog I came across that I found most interesting was titled "Autopsy of a Murder" 2/10/10. This blog featured a link to a game in which you can educate yourself as to the different accessories and the different types of labs, used to analyse evidence. You can also get information on the education and training needed to work in such labs and do such jobs as photographing a crime scene or taking smaples at one. There also included history lessons and famous cases that analyzers have worked. Very informative and interesting!

I also enjoyed "Blood Splatter Anaysis...Where do you go to get Training?". Being a fan of Dexter this was interesting to learn the truths about the job and the links provided were very interesting as well.

"The right of Jury Nullification" was the third blog I found interesting. Since this is my role for our mock trial, I cound the links incredibly interesting and loved the reminder quote as to the "true function" of jurors.

After searching the website for a while, I ended up reading The Story of Allie: Molested as a Baby, Missing ISU Student Found, and watched a video called "Understanding Serial Killers".

The story of a baby named Allie talked about a girls experience at a daycare where a young girl named Allie had been molested by her father from when she was one to five years old. She went on to explain her social problems with boys and even gave an update to how she was doing today.

I have always felt sympathetic to families who have missing children, but the story I read about a missing ISU student hit a little closer to home for me because I used to go to school there. It took the police 3 months to find him. It was a tragic ending to a death that probably could have been prevented.

I have always been highly interested in serial killers. So I decided to watch a highly recommended video that I found to be somewhat contradictory to what I have learned in classes here at UNI. The video is entitled “Understanding Serial Killers” and right away I was picking up on things I remembered from class, specifically the homicide class I had last semester. Dr. Jeff Gardere first states that to be labeled a serial killer, an individual must kill 3 or more people in a certain amount of time with a “cooling off” period in between the murders. I remembered in class that the FBI had changed the definition to two people instead of 3. He was correct that serial killers do tend to be white males in their 20’s or 30’s with dysfunctional childhoods including physical and sexual abuse. A lot of the facts of the video were correct, but another disagreement I had with it was that it stated serial killers had IQ’s in the above normal range, when it was actually proven that they had normal IQ’s, at least according to my homicide class! It was a good video, but I still feel that there will never be a complete agreement on who serial killers are because they are never exactly the same.

The first section that caught my attention was the prison section...in particular the Write a Prisoner post. I think everyone has heard about people (or might be one of those people) that have kept a relationship with an inmate through writing letters (or more so today e-mails). Does it help inmates have contact with the outside world? Or does it give some of those inmates a false sense of hope, especially the ones that are doing a life term or even might be facing the death penalty. I think it is both good and bad—I believe that a calm inmate is a good inmate, they are under enough stress and an outlet is probably a good thing but, at the same time they are in prison, presumably for a crime they did commit.
Another section that did catch my eye was about drug court. Knowing some people that have been convicted of some severe drug crimes, I thought I would read up a little and see if there was some more insight on some things that I already knew. Do I think that our court system is a little flawed in the area of drugs? Yes. I personally know people that have been arrested for the same crime two or even three different times and the only things they had to do was pay a fine and were on probation for a time. If we want to fix the drug problems in the U.S. then I think that our laws need to be looked at again to see which ones need to be fixed.
The last section that I liked was in the civil cases category—in particular the article about the mistress having to pay $9 million to her lover’s wife (or ex-wife by now). I wish I lived in North Carolina---maybe my ex-wife would have thought differently when she left me for another man!!

The first section that caught my eye was the Serial Killer section. The blog that really grabbed my attention was called, "Multiple Personality Disorder." This blog was about a man named Thomas Huskey, who in 1992 was investigated for the murder of 4 women. When brought in for questioning and continuing through his trail, Huskey made it seem as though he had MP D by changing his voice and facial features and actually confessed to the murders in his other personality, "Kyle." However, there were flaws in his story such as though when he was himself, Thomas, he knew things that his other personality, "Kyle," who he said killed the girls would only know. Also, his parents disregarded his leap for insanity saying that he never had MPD before. I found it very interesting for someone crazy enough to take on an actual disorder, and a rare one at that, to attempt an insanity plea. However, it turned out that the murder charges against Huskey were dropped due to dectective errors. But, on a twisted plus side, Huskey is currently in jail serving a 44 year sentence due to previous rape charges.

The other articles I found interesting were, "Vampire Killer," and "Woman Killed Infant, Ate Part of Brain," in the Criminal Cases tab. "Vampire Killer," was a creepy story about a guy named Allan Menzies, who took the movie, "Queen of the Damned," way too far when he ended up killing Thomas McKendrick, drinking his blood, and eating part of his flesh. I found this story to be very creepy, yet intriguing as to how some people can take fiction for reality. "Woman Killed Infant, Ate Part of Brain," caught my eye too of course. The title alone makes you read the blog! As creepy and gruesome as the story was, it told the story of a 33 year old woman from San Antonio, TX who killed her 3 week old son with a knife and two swords. She then preceeded to bit his toes off, eat part of his brain, and apparantly rip his face off. After this, she then stabbed herself twice, yet lived. She told the police the devil told her to do this. I found this article very interesting, not only for the gruesome and disturbing images, and just utter sickness, but for the thoughts on the possiblity of post partum depression being the culprit, or maybe just pure psychosis.

Im pretty excited to begin blogging and learning more about psychology tied into our legal system!

Lindsey Fails

I read "Arrested for Financial Elder Abuse", "Does Sleep Really Help Your Memory?", and "Multiple Personality Disorder".
The one, of these three, that I found the most interesting was the "Multiple Personality Disorder" story about Thomas Huskey. I am unjustifiably shocked that this man would pretend to have this particular mental disorder to plead insanity. It seems that there could have been better choices that would not be so difficult to pretend. However, I am sure he is not the first person to try this.
The best thing about this article was the Sybil reference simply because I love that movie. I think it is unfortunate that someone, Thomas, would fake a disorder not only because it is disrespectful to people who truly suffer from such mental issues, but also because it is such a waste of time.
Overall, what I have taken from this article, is people should know that pleading insanity is hardly ever successful.
I am also surprised and saddened to hear that Huskey was only sentenced to 44 years in prison. I am interested in how that happened and why that happened. Clearly he deserves something far worse.

The three articles I read were 'The Case of Amanda Knox', 'How Psychopaths Choose their Victims', and 'Serial Killer Info'

The article I found most interesting was 'How Serial Killers Choose their Victims'. This article made me wonder if antisocial personality disorder is genetic or not. If someone knows which verbal cues to look for that would mean someone is more submissive or a better target, then it must either be learned or taught. I doubt that there is a seriall killer club out there where people who want to start killing others meet up and learn how to do it. This leads me to believe that it is ingrained into them. Does that mean psychopathy is genetic? If so, does it run in families? Can all serial killers be traced back to one person or town, where it all started? Are there serial killers in Asia and Africa? Or is it just a western phenomenon?

I would also like to know what the rates are of psychopaths to non-psychopaths. The article I read talked about varying rates of psychopathy. What are the varying rates? Does it depend on thoughts or actions? Is it a continuum or does it have stages? What do people with mild antisocial personality disorder do compared to people without a personality disorder or with severe antisocial personality disorder. Is there a possibility of creating a drug that could control this disorder, like you can treat depression or bipolar disorder?

Another thought is claiming insanity when you are brought to trial. After all, people with dissociative identity disorder can claim they weren't in control of their actions because of their disease. Couldn't serial killers claim they had no choice either? Obviously this is a real disease, but is it something they could control? I understand that people with antisocial pd don't feel empathy towards others, but does that necessarily lead to them killing people? Are there people with a severe level of antisocial personality disorder who don't end up to be serial killers? If so, then what is it that keeps them from being killers? Is it because they have a support system? Do they go to therapy? The more I keep thinking about serial killers, the more questions I end up having. This personality disorder really is not something psychologists know a whole lot about, and I think it's a fascinating one.

The three articles that I read were, "The Lindbergh Kidnapping", "Rape Myths", and "Mom of Decapitated Baby Says, 'I didn't mean to do it'."

The article that I found the most interesting was about a mother who killed her child and once she was caught, she claimed that the "devil" told her to do it. She claimed insanity in court. To me, this brought up an interesting question about claiming insanity. To me, I feel like if you commit a horrible crime such as murder, or murdering a child, claiming insanity seems like an easy way out. I know that once you claim insanity, you are evaluated by psychologists, etc. but I still feel like it is an easy way out for those who have been caught and don't have any way to explain themselves.

Specifically in this case, a woman cut off her babies head, ate three of it's toes, and ate some of it's brain. The sister of the woman found her and called the police. According to the sister, and the woman's ex-husband, this woman was a paranoid schizophrenic. After being put in jail, she told authorities that the devil told her to kill her son. The ex-husband, who was also a diagnosed schizophrenic quoted that he wanted her to receive the death penalty.

I think that the insanity plea is always an interesting concept. It raises many questions about what qualifies someone to be criminally insane, and what makes someone "insane" at the time of a crime?

I read 'How the Innocent Confess to Crimes,' 'Multiple Personality Disorder,' and 'How Psychopaths Choose Their Victims.'

I found the article about how psychopaths choose their victims very interesting and yet not that shocking. I am very into the show Dexter and he is a serial killer that kills other serial killers. As negative as crime is, a lot of perpetrators are extremely intelligent and there is no denying that. If a lady walking down the street gets mugged, it seems so sudden at the time, but it is amazing to think that the mugger may have had that planned for days or maybe even weeks. Someone could be watching you and pick you out as a victim just by the way you walk or present yourself. Being a shy person, I feel I could be at risk for something like this. With the law keeping us safe, it takes a lot of careful planning to pull off a crime, which is why I agree that psychopaths are very smart. This article proves that and shows that us law-abiding citizens need to step our game up to protect our selves and not be so naive.

The three articles I found most interesting were: "Kurt Cobain, Murder or Suicide", "Understanding Serial Killers", and "Liar, Liar!! How to tell is Someone is Lying".

1. I have read a few different articles on the suicide/murder of Kurt Cobain. What actually sparked my curiosity of Kurt Cobain in the first place has to do with him being a member of the Forever 27 Club (not a club you want to be apart of I might ad). There are many people including Janice Joplin, Jimi Hendrix, Jim Morrison, and most recently Amy Winehouse who have all died at the age of 27. I found this article interesting because it seems that there are some holes in the supposed suicide of Kurt Cobain. The article states that there were no finger prints found on his suicide note, however when he was found dead in his house he wasn't wearing any gloves. Also the levels of cocaine in his body were so incredibly high even for an avid user he would have been unconscious or at the very least unable to stabilize a gun long enough to shoot himself in the head. This seems frustrating to me that based off his history or depression and drug use that they didn't do a more extensive search or investigation of his death, especially with all the evidence that could point at a possible murder.

2. Serial Killers fascinate me! I have read Jeffery Dauhmer's, "Step into my Parlor". I also like to watch documentaries on them whenever they are on T.V., so this article really caught my attention. It is scary to think that most serial killers are just average Joe's. The typical serial killer is a white male typically between the ages of 20 and 30; most had dysfunctional childhoods and disregard the difference between right and wrong. Serial killers usual beam with charisma and have an overly high IQ. Dennis Rader also known as the BTK killer was a man with charisma. He killed for over two decades; and during this time he held a job, had a wife and kids, and was the leader at his church! I don't know how a person could go out and kill innocent people and then come home at night to tuck your kids into bed.

3. This last article really caught my attention because everyone hates when they are lied to, and now there may be some ways that you can point out if someone is lying to you or not. You can tell if a person is lying by their body language, if they face away from you, or itch their neck or face. A friend of mine once asked if I liked an outfit she had on and I said I did (to be nice) but I must have made a weird face because she called me out about my expression not matching what I said. Another way to tell if a person is lying that I would have never thought about is, if a person is lying they most likely will NOT use contractions. So instead of saying "I didn't break your glasses," they instead would say, "I did not break your glasses." Now, these are not always indicators that your people are lying, so don't go calling people out, because they might actually be telling the truth :)

I read over the criminal justice systems category, the punishment category, and the drug courts cateogry.

When reading the Vigilantes: Menace or Heroes? I thought to my self how much I had always wanted to be one. How neat would that be to take from the rich and give to the poor? This really reminded me of the movie Law Abiding Citizen. People rely on this justice system to put away the bad and help the good, but as we find out it doesn't always work that way. The judiciary system is so screwed up that it isn't about right or wrong, but whether or not you can prove without a doubt that it was done. Too much compelling evidence can be thrown out.I feel like Vigilantes are great, except the ones that screw up and cause harm to the people who aren't bad. I think it has to do alot with being a man, but in my opinion Vigilantes are great!

The first article I read was "Drug Court: Everything You Need to Know". This article included some very interesting facts. For example, 1/3 of people in jail are drug offenders, and the US is the leading country for drug offenders.

The second article I read was "No Longer a Registered Sex Offender, but the Stigma Still Remains". This article talked about Ricky Blackman, a 16-year-old boy who had sex with a 13-year-old who he thought was 15. He was then marked as a sex-offender and forced to live is life as almost a second-class citizen--being treated differently because of his title as a sex offender. I think the circumstances should be a greater factor in who gets this title, or maybe their should be other titles for different situations.

The third article I read was "Would You Confess to a Crime You Didn't Commit?". This article discussed the reasoning behind those who do confess to crimes they did not commit because of being tricked or taken advantage of. It is hard to believe that someone could actually be so desperate or fooled that they would commit to a crime they did not commit. Most of these individual were under the age of 18 or were mentally ill, and many did not know their rights, or did not have lawers during interrogation and were taken advantage of by authorities. Some states have passed laws stating that cameras must be present during interrogations to prevent this from happening, but it still occurs. Jurors often find the confessions, whether legitamate or not, to be the most compelling evidence when finding a suspect guilty or not. I think laws should be made so video-taping interrogations should be enforced in every state to be sure suspects are treated fairly and not taken advantage of or manipulated.

I read A letter from behind Bars on Presidents day, How Psychopaths choose their Victims and Federal Sentencing Guidelines.

A letter from behind Bars on Presidents day show how flawed out justice system is in this country. Hamedah Hasan was sentenced to a 27 year prison sentence for conspiracy to distribute cocaine. She did not even have any cocaine on her person. A person who would have been convicted of there first possession of a controlled substance would have received a lesser sentence than she did for conspiracy to distribute. After appeals to the highest court the only way she can be released from prison early is from a grant her clemency. This case shows how flawed our system can be in the case of drug offenses.

The three articles I read were "Sleep after learning aids memory recall," "The Lindbergh Kidnapping," and "Finding untainted jurors in the age of the internet."

Originally I thought I was going to be the most interested in the memory recall article but when I began reading it, it was kind of a disappointment. I had always thought a lot of memory but in all of the studies they did they found it helpful at weird times during the night and only certain types of memory. It just didn't seem very practical and it wouldn't be useful in real life when you have to be awake during the day.

The Lindbergh kidnapping was interesting because it shows a lot about how investigations have changed over time. Yes there are cases that I am sure take a very long time to solve but in the 1930s I would imagine two years is a long time to wait. One of the things that came up a lot, more specifically twelve times, were ransom notes and I bet that doesn't actually happen as much today.

Finding untainted jurors in the age of the internet was the one I was most curious to read about because of my role as a juror in the mock trial we will be doing. I had always thought that in small towns it would be hard to get a jury with out a bias but this article made me realize high profile cases have that problem too. One case even caused a rap song to be written about them called "Drop the S off Shilling" which I honestly think is really clever. Another thing that I read is that a change of venue really doesn't help out very much with high profile cases. The complete state takes one side and it is not in favor of the supposed perpetrator. Sometimes I wonder what difference would it make if the members of the jury were all college students. Yes there are many who are really interested in the news but also since we are considered to be living in a "bubble," would it make a difference in the courtroom?

I read the articles Confessing to Crime, but innocent, Multiple Personalities: Crime and Defense, and How Psychopaths choose their victims.

I really like all three that I read so it's difficult to pinpoint one as my favorite. The article about confessing to crimes was really interesting because I didn't realize how often it happens to suspects. I know the police officers and detectives are just doing their jobs but for them to make someone confess to a crime they didn't commit is a little over the top. I know that they don't believe the suspect is innocent, but what about the saying innocent until proven guilty? I like how in the article it says that the officers are too focused on the goal of confession and they go about it the wrong way.

Multiple Personalities Disorders are very tricky in the court room. You never know if they are truly "sick" or just faking it to not go to prison. I understand why they wouldn't want to go to prison but its not a vacation when going to an asylum. There are multiple tests you must do and you have to pass them all the time. It makes me really angry when some perpetrator use the insanity plea because I think it gets overused.

The psychopath article was really interesting because I didn't realize how much studying the psychopaths did. They watch how people walk to determine their confidence levels. It all comes down to confidence and who can be easily mugged. I mean that shows that they are smart in a way by picking up non-verbal skills such as the length of the strides and weight shifts if you are standing still.

The three articles I found interesting were "Ben Roethlisberger in Question... Again", "Good You Identified the Witness", "Most Charges Made and Dropped for 3 Lucky Burglars".

The one article I found most interesting was "Ben Roethlisberger in Question... Again" because it's a pretty recent and popular topic. This article was about Ben Roethlisberger being accused of sexual assault for a second time. The only amount of evidence found was male DNA, but not enough to make a DNA profile so the case was dropped by the DA. This case fascinates me because of its prime example of discretion in the penal system towards celebrities.

As I began to browse through the content on this website I realized that there was going to be more to write about than I had originally thought. I am extremely interested in psychology and law and decided to take a closer look at juveniles, criminal justice systems, and finally jury selection.
I ran across the Jonesboro Westside Massacre. This caught my attention because it dealt with two young teenagers. These boys decided to take guns to school because their girlfriends had broke up with them. After pulling the fire alarm and sending everyone outside they began shooting. What was shocking about this case was, they didn't have to serve a life sentence for killing multiple people and injuring others. I had never heard of this case before but was shocked after reading it. My question was, why did they get off so easy? Just because they are young, that's no excuse! What does this tell society and other teens? That it's okay to kill people because in the end they'll just get a slap on the wrist. As far as I am concerned being young is a bullshit excuse and people know right from wrong. I agree with what kjr6321 had to say about the victims families, what about them? I would have to say I couldn't agree more.
Continuing to browse the different blogs, I then stumbled across, "Are more laws targeting predators the answer." This talked about the "one strike" law against predators in California. I would have to say that I don't agree with this law at all. What is this telling predators, they can do the crime and just get a jail free card? If they do it once and get away with it, they are going to think that they can get away with it again. It's like someone who steals for the first time. If they steal and don't get caught, they try and steal again. By continuously thinking you can get away with something, most people keep doing it. I believe in, "if you commit the crime you should be ready to do the time, no exceptions."
Lastly, I was very interested in reading about jury selection. I like what was brought up about the media and how easy it is for them to get involved in a case. I also agree with what it said about people wanting a different venue, stating they wanted a fair trial, but even then, they can be found just by typing their name into google. It is so true, you can find whatever you want just by looking on the internet. In reality, no matter where you go, if you have a history and people want to find it, they're going to find it. Continuing through this content I thought to myself, how would I handle being on a jury? To be honest, I would be really scared because I would not want to make a wrong decision and then have to live with that decision if something happened in the future. I enjoyed reading "Art of Questions Asking in Juror Selection." Lawyers really work on getting the jury involved by asking questions to really make them think. Not just to think about the trial but to get them to think about themselves and how they may relate to the case even if they really don't. Asking these types of questions can really benefit the case in the end because now the jury can think about themselves and how they would want to get treated if they were the ones sitting in the "hot seat."

First, I read a blog about our mock trial project preperation for jurors. Since I am going to be a juror in our mock trial I thought it would be smart to explore that area in the category section. The blog gave a link to a case and asked you to describe what you would do as a juror. Then I read a blog titled "It's your duty" it was about how people feel about jury duty and how some websites and books tell you ways you can avoid serving on a jury. Finally I read an article in the local CF/Waterloo category. The article was about last years trial involving Mark Becker murdering Ed Thomas in Parkersburg, IA.
In this trial, Mark Becker, a former student of Coach Ed Thomas, tracked coach Thomas down and shoot him repeatedly in the weight room of the high school. The defense claimed that Becker was legally insane when he murdered Thomas. After many expert testimonies and evaluations Becker was deemed Paranoid Schizophrenic. There is a huge debate over the treatment of mentally ill criminals. Sending them to prison is costly and insufficient as it is not made to serve as a rehab center. Some also believe that asylums are not suffiecent punishment and does not allow the person to be held accountably for their actions. Even though Becker had a mental illness he was found guilty of 1st degree murder by a jury of his peers.