1. While I do believe that mitigating circumstances should be taken into account when examining possible responses to a crime, I do not believe that it should be used to undermine the severity of the actual crime committed. Komsarvjesky seemed completely competent in killing the family and if he was competent enough to do that then he should be held responsible for his crimes and face his punishment, a crimes a crime and therefore he should have to deal with the consequences, mitigating factors or not.
2. The prosecutors choose to not simply allow the accused party to get a life sentence because they wanted to seek a death sentence for the two men. I believe the public unrest for the death of these two men was too hard to pass up allowing for sentence that would greatly satisfy the public. The benefits of allowing a guilty plea and avoiding a trial and death penalty which would save the state a lot of money in order to carry out the appellate process and the use of the death sentencing.
3. I believe that mental health should be better understood by society in order to handle individuals who have the ability/instability in order to commit these crimes and if said crimes do occur our society should have the proper examinations in place for the individuals to find a strong motive for the crimes and be able to better understand what can trigger these crimes in the future.
No comments:
Post a Comment