Recently in Punishment Category

http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/39726149/ns/us_news-security/

This article was published on msnbc.com by Associated Press on October 18, 2010.  The FBI were involved in this investigation (mainly because it has to do with threats of bombing).


"The trial featured 13 days of testimony by undercover informant Shahed Hussain, who met Cromitie at a mosque north of New York City. Prosecutors also relied on hundreds of hours of video and audiotape of the men discussing the scheme at the informant's home, handling fake weapons -- even praying together."

"Jurors deliberated for more than a week. A judge denied a request for a mistrial last week after a juror came across a document in an evidence binder that shouldn't have been there. The juror was dismissed."


What are the processes that the jury went through?

Do you think it was fair that the judge denied a request for a mistrial after a juror came across a document in an evidence binder?

What would you have done if you were that Judge and presented with that dilemma?

 

On April 29, a 40 year old man came into a preschool classroom and injured 5 preschoolers with a hammer. Right after this, he set himself on fire, killing himself. Officials think this is a copycat attack because there have been several similar attacks on young children. The previous day, a man went into a kindergarten classroom and stabbed 29 students. The day before this incident, a man injured 18 children in a different primary school. Luckily, no one died.  Last month, a former doctor, Zheng Minsheng, went into a classroom and stabbed 8 children to death and wounded 5 others. He was executed on April 27. Why would these men want to harm innocent children? Before Minsheng was executed, he said that he committed these murders because of his "failures in his romantic life and in society". It seems that he had some psychologically issues to take out his failures on young children. The other men who carried out similar attacks most likely had some psychological issues as well. They may have had depression or at worst, antisocial personality disorder, or something similar.

The trauma that students, parents, and children had to go through will need some counseling. The article states that schools have brought in people to help with these issues. The students will definitely suffer from some psychological problems but hopefully they can be resolved early on to prohibit further issues.

Here is the article: http://www.cnn.com/2010/WORLD/asiapcf/04/30/china.school.attack/index.html?iref=allsearch

"April 10, 2010-A letter from 1985 shows Cardinal Joseph Ratzinger -- the future Pope Benedict XVI -- actively delayed in defrocking a priest who had been charged with molesting several young boys. One reason, according to the letter, which is signed by Ratzinger, is that the Vatican needed to "consider the good of the Universal Church."

http://www.npr.org/templates/story/story.php?storyId=125803561



     Imagine you occupy a high-ranking position within the Roman Catholic church, and it is your duty to address allegations of pedophilia involving Catholic priests.  In recent years, odds are you'd be hard pressed to make time for a vacation.

     In the last few weeks, documents have surfaced that seem to indicate prior to his appointment as the Holy Father, then Cardinal Ratzinger delayed the defrocking of a priest charged with molesting boys.  Should we be outraged?  Doesn't Pope Benedict deserve some sort of reprimand, or owe someone an apology?  I submit no, he does not. 

     Consider what we have been exposed to throughout this course, which I believe can be surmised in one word: DOUBT. 

     I remain in some sort of psychological Purgatory on my position or regard for the criminal justice system.  Things that I thought could be trusted, have been demonstrated to be untrustworthy.  Protocol and procedures I believed to be reliable and valid have been shown to be unreliable and false.  Issues that I previously thought to be "cut and dry" have been observed to be "loosey goosey". 

     In short, the "good guys" don't seem as good, and the "bad guys" don't seem as bad anymore.  There is always more to every story than anyone could ever know. 

     Back to the issue at hand, I submit the following scenarios, and plan to circle back to the Holy See.

SCENARIO #1: 
     Father Kiesle manipulates and endangers 6 young boys, molests them, gets caught, and pleads no contest to the charges.  This scenario is essentially what is presented in the article linked above.  "Bad guy" is caught, justice is served. 

SCENARIO#2: 
     During one of the "darker" times in the history of Psychology as a discipline, the creation of false memories of previous abuse were not that uncommon.  Dr. Samuel Saint, a young, aspiring, and charismatic school psychologist reads an article in the Times about a Catholic priest facing sexual abuse charges.  Samuel knows that many of the children in his school attend catechism classes at Our Lady of the Rosary parish, where Father Kiesle is a priest.
     Over the next few weeks, Samuel starts to pay close attention to the boys who frequently attend classes at Our Lady of the Rosary parish, and notices one of the boys, Nathan, is very quiet and distant, almost melancholy.  He asks Nathan's teacher, Mrs. Beckett about his performance in classes.  Mrs. Beckett tells Samuel "Nathan used to be one of my best students, always engaged in classwork, very eager to learn" she explained.  "In the last few months though, Nathan's performance has plummeted.  I've sent a few letters to his parents, asking about his situation at home, and offering extra help, but I've never received a response". 
     "Hmmm, something seems wrong here" Samuel thinks to himself, stirring a cup of stale Maxwell House in the teachers lounge.  Samuel writes a quick note to Mrs. Beckett, and drops it in her mailbox, asking her if she would mind sending Nathan to his office for a few minutes Thursday at first recess.
     In the days leading up to his meeting with Nathan, Samuel spends hours investigating pedophilia.  He reads accounts about the ways children are manipulated, and told to keep quiet.  He trudges through transcripts taken from interviews with convicted sex offenders, that reveal in tragic detail how these offenders touched, molested, and abused their victims.  In a phone call to his mother, Samuel remembers saying "If I find out one of my students has EVER been abused like this, I'm going to find the son of a b----- who did it, and make them pay". 
     Thursday morning, Mrs. Beckett peeks through the mini-blinds covering Samuels' office door, and Samuel motions her in.  "Nathan is here to see you Dr. Saint".  Nathan was wearing a red and yellow checkered shirt with what appeared to be a grape jelly stain on the sleeve.
     "Hi Nathan, I'm Sam, thanks for coming to see me" Samuel says in an upbeat voice.  "I've been speaking with Mrs. Beckett, and she tells me you're usually a great student, but lately you haven't been doing as well as she thinks you can.  My job here at the school is to talk to students, find out how they're doing, and see if there is anything we can help with" he explained.  "Has anything out of the ordinary happened that may be affecting your schoolwork?" 
     "No, everything is fine" Nathan replied quickly.  "Oh, well that's good to hear" said Samuel.  "You go to Our Lady of the Rosary right?" he asked Nathan.  "I used to, but I don't go anymore".  Samuel could feel his pulse through his shirt, "Why don't you go anymore Nathan?".  "Can I go to recess now?" Nathan asked.  "Sure, but would you mind meeting with me again next week?  I'd like to get to know you a little better, and if you come back you can have anything you want out of my candy jar" Samuel said quickly.  "Yeah, okay" replied Nathan.
     As Nathan walked to the playground, he wished that his Dad had never lost his job.  He wished that his Mom hadn't run out on them.  He wished that his Dad would start taking him to church again, as he missed his time with the kind and welcoming staff who worked there. 
     As soon as Nathan had left the office, Samuel picked up the phone and dialed.  "Our Lady of the Rosary parish, how can I help you" said the voice on the other end. "Yes, I'd like to talk to Father Kiesle please"....

     Now, I don't claim that this scenario is what happens every time.  I don't mean to exonerate every allegation against a priest.  And I certainly don't mean to negate or lessen or overlook those that have experienced such damaging and hurtful things as abuse. 
     But its possible that SCENARIO#2 could happen.  Maybe Father Kiesle was counseled by his superior, and was told "Hey, this is a ticking time bomb Father Kiesle.  If you plead guilty, we'll relocate you somewhere, and this will be behind you forever.  This guy, Dr. Samuel Saint is on some sort of crusade against us.  You just need to sign here and...."
    
     Now you're Pope Benedict, and you get a report about this situation on your desk.  You see the predicament?  As we have seen in the case with Michael Peterson, things may not always be what they seem.  So what do you do?  Maybe you will "consider the good of the Universal Church", while also considering the good of Father Kiesle. 

I remain, in "psychological purgatory" uncertain of who's right, who's wrong, who to believe, who to disregard, and looking for effective ways to address a science that shall ever be imperfect.   

·         In 2008, 7,703 children under age 18 were held in American adult local jails.

·         3,650 children under the age 18 were held in American adult state prisons.

·         22 states allow children as young as 7 to be tried as adults.

·         Every year, nearly 80 children age 13 and younger are judicially transferred to adult court.

These are absolutely shocking statistics. The book, "From Time Out to Hard Time: Young Children in the Adult Criminal Justice System," tells of how the nation treats pre-adolescent children (age 12 and under) who commit serious crimes.

This report recommends a few things to keep children out of the harsh conditions in prisons. The first is that we should work to keep our children in the juvenile justice system. The second is that parole opportunities should be given to young children regardless of the length of the sentence. The article says that in Florida and Pennsylvania, children as young as 7 can serve life in prison without parole.

The final recommendation is that children in the adult system should not be housed with adult criminals, but instead in a juvenile facility. This I would absolutely agree with. Most seven year olds are raised by their parents in a cozy and safe environment. I can only imagine the psychological impact that growing up in a prison amongst adult criminals would have on a seven year old.

Here is a news article about a 12 year old boy being charged as an adult for the murder of his father's pregnant girlfriend:

 http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2009/02/21/jordan-brown-killed-fathe_n_168862.html

My view on this is that I think our system takes it too far when trying children as adults. I understand that they do some very adult things, but I can't help but feel that we aren't realizing they are children. If we simply look at how they are developed emotionally we can see that they by no means act in adult ways. It scares me to think of my little brothers, who are around the age of 12, going to prison. Not only that, but spending their life there around the other people in prison. I believe our law system needs to get a better grip on children and charging them as adults. Any one of us can think back to the stupid things we used to do when we were kids. I even read old diaries and think, "Wow, that isn't even like me! I was so stupid!" Children at age 12 are still being molded, and I think by placing them into a prison, with adult criminals, is going to mold them in a very negative way.

While looking for things to post concerning juries, I found this article discussing how important the role of the juror is in deciding whether someone is sentenced the death penalty. The authors, Raoul Cantero and Robert Kline, discussed how there are two phases the jury goes for: the trial phase and the penalty phase. The trial phase is when the jury decides if the defendant is guilty or innocent of a capital crime. If the defendant is found guilty, the jury must go through the penalty phase to decide if the defendant deserves the death penalty. Thinking about the reality of this situation, the jury must carefully be selected. It would be a very hard task to decide that someone does not deserve the right to live. Psychologically, the jury must be strong mentally and emotionally to be able to handle this. For the defendant, it would be hard to handle that they will be dying. Both sides are affected greatly which is why the death penalty is not legal in all states. The article I was looking at mostly focused on Florida because they're the only state that only requires a simple majority to rule in favor of the death penalty. Below are the links where I found this information at.


Full article
 Introduction to article

http://www.npr.org/templates/story/story.php?storyId=124357844

"Newspapers are full of apologies these days, from Toyota to Tiger Woods. But papers in the Boston area are also running a growing number of "mea culpas" that are ordered by the courts.

Increasingly, companies that plead guilty to crimes that harm the community -- polluting, for example -- are being required to publish an apology as part of their punishment."

While looking for good things to make my post about, I found an article talking about a man who interviewed and wrote a book on executioners. Ivan Solotaroff was interested in knowing why these men choose this job. He discovered that there were a few motives. Some said that they liked the machinery of death. Some felt that they just need to do what society wants - get rid of the unwanted. Some executioners are distanced from the process, suggesting that they are denying the reality of the situation and rationalizing it to make it sound better. Solotaroff found only one man who quit his job of an executioner after it took an inmate 15 minutes to die of lethal injection. I thought this article was interesting because you never really think about the personality of an executioner. Their job suggest that they would most likely be authoritarian and like to have power (Solotaroff points out). I think it would be useful in the field of psychology to research more into this. Below is the article where I read about this information.

http://college.cengage.com/psychology/resources/students/shelves/shelves_20020504.html

We've all heard the stories of the girl who reported she was raped- when she wasn't, or those who were kidnapped, but weren't really. False reports happen everyday in the United States and now the law is cracking down.

I called 9-1-1 once when I was little, to see if it worked. It did and I ended up getting a visit from a very nice police officer who sat me down and explained to me how calling for no reason was wrong. Followed by a capital punishment made by the judge/ jury/ executioner: my mom. Being six or seven though- i was merely curious- and the things i learned that day have stuck with me since.

But is there really a differance between a harmless 7 year old calling to see if 9-1-1 was real and a maliscious woman who just wanted to ruin the lives of others? Either way we both took precious time that could be used really saving someone in danger, we both made the choice to call, and we both got punished in the end.

https://secure.missingkids.com/en_US/documents/FalseReporting.pdf

this website shows in minor detail the punishment for all the states where false crimes are reported.