Testifying toward the Insanity Defense
In my debate elective, we had to write and give a speech on anything we want as long as it is persuasive. I decided I wanted to persuade to my audience, the class, that a psychiatrist/psychologist should always testify in both legal and psychological terms the mental health of the defendant when the "not guilty by reason of insanity" defense is used.
Here are some important parts of my speech:
The insanity defense is one of the most well known forms of defense used in entertainment. In actuality,"Not guilty by reason of insanity" is a special verdict of acquittal in a criminal trial. The verdict grants that, although the accused committed the act in question, he cannot be held legally responsible because he was not sane at the time of the crime. Defendants thus acquitted are then usually committed to a mental institution for an indeterminate period and released upon the recommendation of institution psychiatrists at such time the psychiatrists consider the person "sane." Since the insanity defense originated almost 200 years ago, definitions used to describe insanity have broadened, and new variations of the defense have been developed, giving criminals ever-increasing chances of escaping the legal consequences of their acts.
The "not guilty by reason of insanity" (NGRI) verdict rests in part on two assumptions: that some mentally ill people cannot be deterred by the threat of punishment, and that treatment for the defendant is more likely to protect society than a jail term without treatment. It is important to note that "insanity" is a legal term, not a psychological one, and experts disagree whether it has valid psychological meaning.
Tuesday, March 31, 2015
Wednesday, March 11, 2015
Blog 18: Interview 4 Questions
1.) What strategies do you use when dealing with a client?
2.) What strategies do you find to be most helpful and why?
3.) How often do you speak directly with clients?
4.) What are some of the major concerns that occur when having client meetings?
5.) Do you try to use plea bargains as an efficient form of resolving a case? Why or why not?
6.) What are the top skills necessary to successfully work with a client? and why?
7.) Effective communication is something I found to be important, do you agree and how do you practice that skill?
8.) Looking back in time, what is one thing you wish you had done to prepare yourself for this job?
9.) How do you deal with problem clients?
10.) In trial cases how do you prepare yourself for speaking your case?
11.) What are some tactics you use while picking jurors?
12.) How do you know if a case is worth going to trial?
13.) In a scenario where a client wants to go to trial, and it seems unnecessary, do you still have to proceed regardless?
14.) Can u tell me about a situation where a case was handled successfully due to communication and why?
15.) What aspect of Criminal law do you use the most, and why?
16.) What do you think I should look into more for my research as it relates to my EQ?
17.) Do you have any ideas of activities that might explain/entertain a classroom about my topic?
18.) Currently, my most important form of research are my CalCrim and Penal Code books, do you have any others to suggest and why?
19.) If you had to answer my EQ what would your answer be and why?
20.) Moving on towards my 2 hour presentation, what are some key parts of Criminal Law that I need to make sure I cover?
2.) What strategies do you find to be most helpful and why?
3.) How often do you speak directly with clients?
4.) What are some of the major concerns that occur when having client meetings?
5.) Do you try to use plea bargains as an efficient form of resolving a case? Why or why not?
6.) What are the top skills necessary to successfully work with a client? and why?
7.) Effective communication is something I found to be important, do you agree and how do you practice that skill?
8.) Looking back in time, what is one thing you wish you had done to prepare yourself for this job?
9.) How do you deal with problem clients?
10.) In trial cases how do you prepare yourself for speaking your case?
11.) What are some tactics you use while picking jurors?
12.) How do you know if a case is worth going to trial?
13.) In a scenario where a client wants to go to trial, and it seems unnecessary, do you still have to proceed regardless?
14.) Can u tell me about a situation where a case was handled successfully due to communication and why?
15.) What aspect of Criminal law do you use the most, and why?
16.) What do you think I should look into more for my research as it relates to my EQ?
17.) Do you have any ideas of activities that might explain/entertain a classroom about my topic?
18.) Currently, my most important form of research are my CalCrim and Penal Code books, do you have any others to suggest and why?
19.) If you had to answer my EQ what would your answer be and why?
20.) Moving on towards my 2 hour presentation, what are some key parts of Criminal Law that I need to make sure I cover?
Wednesday, March 4, 2015
Blog 17: Answer 3
Content:
- EQ: What strategy is most beneficial to defend a client in a misdemeanor case?
- Answer #3 (Write in a complete sentence like a thesis statement)*
The strategy that is most beneficial to defend a client in a misdemeanor case is to have confidence and a commanding presence while communicating.
- 3 details to support the answer (a detail is a fact and an example)
In trials, a defense attorney has to convince a jury that the client is not guilty of the charges brought up by the prosecution. If the attorney is unable to speak with confidence and communicate his/her case then they will significantly lose the jurors.
This also happens during arraignments, a defense lawyer must speak with each of the clients and speak with the judge. They must communicate to the judge that the client understands the charges as well as represent their client.
Lawyers spend almost the entirety of the day speaking with witnesses, translators, judges, and other people who work in the courthouse. In order to successfully defend a client, especially through the trial process, they must be able to take command of the courtroom and present the information necessary.
- The research source (s) to support your details and answer
Alot of my "research" for this came through being at my mentorship and witnessing what each lawyer had to do throughout the day. So I would cite my mentorship, the Public Defender's Office at the West Covina Courthouse.
- Concluding Sentence
In summation, my third and final strategy I to be found beneficial to defend a client in a misdemeanor case is to be able to communicate with a clear and commanding presence. I found this by spending time at my mentorship and witnessing what the lawyers had to do the most, which was communicate.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)