criminal psychology chapters 15 & 16 death penalty influencing public policy talbot kellogg...

7
Criminal Criminal Psychology Psychology Chapters 15 & 16 Chapters 15 & 16 Death Penalty Death Penalty Influencing Public Policy Influencing Public Policy Talbot Talbot Kellogg Community College Kellogg Community College

Upload: dwayne-welch

Post on 03-Jan-2016

218 views

Category:

Documents


5 download

TRANSCRIPT

Page 1: Criminal Psychology Chapters 15 & 16 Death Penalty Influencing Public Policy Talbot Kellogg Community College

Criminal PsychologyCriminal PsychologyChapters 15 & 16Chapters 15 & 16

Death PenaltyDeath PenaltyInfluencing Public PolicyInfluencing Public Policy

TalbotTalbotKellogg Community CollegeKellogg Community College

Page 2: Criminal Psychology Chapters 15 & 16 Death Penalty Influencing Public Policy Talbot Kellogg Community College

Do they understand?Do they understand? 1992 – Scott Panetti.1992 – Scott Panetti.

Killed his mother-in-law and father-in-law.Killed his mother-in-law and father-in-law. Kept his wife and daughter hostage for the night.Kept his wife and daughter hostage for the night. Diagnosed with Schizoaffective disorder.Diagnosed with Schizoaffective disorder. Belief that the devil possessed their home.Belief that the devil possessed their home. Had stopped taking his medications.Had stopped taking his medications.

1992 - Ricky Ray Rector1992 - Ricky Ray Rector Killed a police officer.Killed a police officer. Turned gun on self, shooting himself in the head.Turned gun on self, shooting himself in the head. Functional level of a 5 year old. Functional level of a 5 year old.

Page 3: Criminal Psychology Chapters 15 & 16 Death Penalty Influencing Public Policy Talbot Kellogg Community College

Key Issues in This Case:Key Issues in This Case:

• • Hospitalized 14 times inHospitalized 14 times in

11 years due to the11 years due to the

symptoms of hissymptoms of his

paranoid schizophreniaparanoid schizophrenia

• • Allowed to representAllowed to represent

himself at trial, dressedhimself at trial, dressed

in a purple cowboy outfitin a purple cowboy outfit

• • Believes the state seeksBelieves the state seeks

to execute him in orderto execute him in order

to prevent him fromto prevent him from

preaching the gospel inpreaching the gospel in

prisonprison

• • U.S. Supreme CourtU.S. Supreme Court

blocked his executionblocked his execution

and orderedand ordered

reconsideration of hisreconsideration of his

competency to becompetency to be

executedexecuted

Page 4: Criminal Psychology Chapters 15 & 16 Death Penalty Influencing Public Policy Talbot Kellogg Community College

Why get involved?Why get involved?

Professional Bias Societal norms Personal Bias Competency & Competency for Execution Advise on the Theory of the Case

Death Qualified Juries Aggravating factors – elevate the punishment Mitigating factors – temper the punishment

Page 5: Criminal Psychology Chapters 15 & 16 Death Penalty Influencing Public Policy Talbot Kellogg Community College

Courts and the Death Penalty

Appellate Courts Inadequate representation Exculpatory evidence Typically unsympathetic

U.S. Supreme Court 1972 – outlawed the death penalty as it

qualified it as “cruel and unusual punishment”

Reinstated it four years later, satisfied that state inequities had been corrected.

Page 6: Criminal Psychology Chapters 15 & 16 Death Penalty Influencing Public Policy Talbot Kellogg Community College

Specific IssuesSpecific Issues ChildrenChildren Mentally retardedMentally retarded

Terry Washington – Texas, 1997Terry Washington – Texas, 1997

Issues of self control, judgment and Issues of self control, judgment and perspective are lacking in these perspective are lacking in these individuals.individuals.

Page 7: Criminal Psychology Chapters 15 & 16 Death Penalty Influencing Public Policy Talbot Kellogg Community College

Does the Death Penalty work?Does the Death Penalty work?

Decrease in crime or capital offenses?Decrease in crime or capital offenses? Conflicting dataConflicting data

Cost effective?Cost effective? Imprisonment for life?Imprisonment for life? Carrying out the death penalty?Carrying out the death penalty? $2,000,000 difference per case$2,000,000 difference per case