Final thought of the Class

This class has been quite an insight to the American law for me; I am someone who hasn’t really paid attention to any laws, whether I’m in South Africa or America. I feel that the American law is strong and necessary when it needs to be, but sometimes they just waste everyone’s time with stupid little incidences! I’m still not completely sure exactly what’s what when it comes to the law, because I find it becomes a little confusing and it requires more time spent on the subject for me to actually be able to talk about it and know what I’m talking about! I completed all of the quizzes, well before the due date and I finished everyone one of them. The EOC’s I found some to be very interesting and some to be difficult to understand and therefore I couldn’t express myself properly because I wasn’t quite sure what I was talking about! The midterms, I found to be very appropriate and logical! I think that on the questions I got wrong, I might have been confused with the other multiple choice answers because it may have seemed like 2 or 3 of the options could have been the answers. I thought that the way technology was used to hand in work and complete the class was very clever, but I personally can’t stand blogs and they can be just as much rubbish as face book or twitter! The whole being on time thing at first kind of annoyed me, but then I came to understand that that is what will be expected of me in the real world, just for the record, I never come late to any of my classes unless I have a particular problem. When it came to the final project, I felt worried because I understand the basics of the case and what was going on, but I didn’t know how to put it in my own words exactly and using particular words and phrases from the book. Therefore that made writing quotes difficult because I didn’t know what exactly I was looking for!! As for my grade I’m sitting on 90% at the moment and, I really think I disserve at least a B, because, I was present all the time, I did the work, I completed the quizzes, and yes I may have a had a bit of trouble with the final project, but I think you can expect that from someone who really doesn’t know much about the law and all the technical ins and outs, I found it quite confusing and complex. Overall I think that the class was conducted extremely well and that it’ll help me in the future from an employee rating point of view, but I think I still have a lot to learn and understand when it comes to the law. I guess it was alot to take it, while doing 8 other classes! Thank you Frank!

Justices ruled for the majority!!

For such a young offender, the deterrence rationale is equally unacceptable. The Department of Justice Statistics indicates that about 98% of the arrests for willful homicide involved persons who were over 16 at the time of the offense. Therefore the justices who ruled against the majority thought that the exclusion of younger persons from the class that is eligible for the death penalty will not diminish the deterrent value of capital punishment for the vast majority of potential offenders. And even with respect to those under 16 years of age, it is obvious that the potential deterrent value of the death sentence is insignificant for two reasons. The likelihood that the teenage offender has made the kind of cost-benefit analysis that attaches any weight to the possibility of execution is so remote as to be virtually nonexistent. And, even if one posits such a cold-blooded calculation by a 15-year-old, it is fanciful to believe that he would be deterred by the knowledge that a small number of persons his age have been executed during the 20th century. In short, we are not persuaded that the imposition of the death penalty for offenses committed by persons less than 16 years of age has made, or can be expected to make, any measurable contribution to the goals that capital punishment is intended to achieve. It is, therefore, "nothing more than the purposeless and needless imposition of pain and suffering," Coker v. Georgia, and thus an unconstitutional punishment.

My Opinion

I agree with the argument, as from my own experiences, when you’re a youngster, you can easily influenced by anything and anyone. As they discussed in the case, many juveniles that perform these crimes and acts of violence, are often affected by their family or social life where they could be victims of society’s neglect or are severely impaired cognitively and emotionally. These kids have no one to go to, to talk to, to ask and even to love; therefore they turn to others who may be in the same situation, except they are older and smarter! These older and smarter kids, over power and bribe the younger members of society into doing things that they don’t want to do because they know the consequences of those particular actions, therefore they have someone to do it for them! In this Court case, I think it was only fair to let William Wayne Thompson off the hook, as he was most probably convinced to come along and help them as he was the brother of the victim’s wife! However I think after seeing that Thompson had " a history of juvenile offenses, and witnesses from the juvenile justice system testified that he was not amenable to rehabilitation"(Flaherty, Lois T, Adolescent Psychiatry, 2002) I think that it would only serve him right, to be given the death sentence if he ever committed an act of violence similar to this one, as it just wouldn’t make sense to keep letting him off and finally after prison, back into society where he could possible do it again as he might think that he can get away with murder whenever he likes!

Rule of Law

The amid curiae brief is a forceful statement of why the death penalty should not be imposed on persons who commit crimes as juveniles. ASAP has reaffirmed its stand in an updated position statement, which also appears in this section. Questioning of capital punishment appears to be increasing among the general public and other professional organizations. In 2000, the American Academy of Child and Adolescent Psychiatry issued a position paper condemning the death penalty for adolescents and the American Psychiatric Association followed suit in 2001. ASAP will continue to campaign that the death penalty for juveniles violates "the evolving standards of decency that mark the progress of a maturing society" (findarticles.com/p/articles/mi_qa3882/is.../ai_n9032640)

Reasoning of the court

The two briefs argued that, because of their immature development and severe psychopathology, juvenile offenders should not be subject to the death penalty. The briefs pointed out that, relative to adults, teenagers are impulsive and lacking in judgment. They are thus unlikely to carefully consider the consequences of their behavior, and the death penalty has no value as a deterrent for them. According to the court, "the likelihood that the teenage offender has made the kind of coldblooded, cost-benefit analysis that attaches any weight to the possibility of execution is virtually nonexistent"; the court added, "It is fanciful to believe that a 15 year old would be deterred by the knowledge that a small number of persons his age have been executed during the 20th century". The second argument is that violent juvenile offenders are even more impaired than normal adolescents-having as a rule been the victims of abuse and other noxious influences. As a consequence, they suffer from neurologic and mental illnesses that impair their judgment and thinking even beyond the immature functioning of normal adolescents. As stated in the brief, "Adolescents who commit murder suffer from serious psychological and family disturbances which exacerbate the already existing vulnerabilities of youth"(http://caselaw.lp.findlaw.com/cgi-bin/getcase.pl?court=US&vol=487&invol=815)

Decision of the court

The case was argued on November 9, 1987, and was decided on June 29, 1988, by a 5-3 vote, which overturned the death sentence and moved the case to the lower court. In its ruling, the Supreme Court stated "The Eighth and Fourteenth Amendments prohibit the execution of a person who was under 16 years of age at the time of his or her offense."(http://www.enotes.com/supreme-court-drama/thompson-v-oklahoma) However, only four of the justices fully agreed with this ruling. Justice John P. Stevens announced the judgment of the court and delivered an opinion in which Justices William J. Brennan, Thurgood Marshall, and Harry A. Blackmun joined. These four judges found that the execution of a 15 year old offender would be cruel and unusual in all cases. Justice Sandra Day O'Connor agreed with their decision to overturn Thompson's death sentence, but not because she agreed that the death penalty was a cruel and unusual punishment for a juvenile. Rather, she objected to it because Oklahoma's death penalty statute set no minimum age limit at which the death penalty could be imposed. She found that the sentencing of a 15-year-old to death under this type of statute failed to meet the standard for special care and deliberation required in all capital cases. This set the stage for the court's later decision that, if a state set a specific minimum age, the death penalty was allowable for anyone over that age.

ILLICIT

After watching Illicit, I have realized just how corrupt the world we live in really is. This is not something which happened years ago or has gotten better, it is happening now, TODAY, and it seems to have gotten even worse. Politicians becoming criminals and criminals be coming politicians, what on earth is the world coming to. Everyone has bought a knock off a couple times and think it’s no big deal. I have bought a few minor things which I have eventually said to myself, “next time, I’m going to buy the real deal!” But I guess it’s just a really good feeling getting something which you know would cost a lot more, for a lot less. But then seeing that the knock offs are not only being shipped all over the world, but also that drugs are being smuggled into the shipment, because no one would suspect a bunch of fancy, expensive Chanel handbags to contains a couple kilos of cocaine and what not. Thinking about when I could be buying a knock off, someone else could be dying or getting killed, kind of makes you feel responsible for the life of that person. In the movie and from my personal experience, these things happen in either third world countries or in bad parts of certain cities and it really sucks to think that drug dealers and shops with knock offs are also giving these places a reputation which could ruin the city or country. I would never go to Columbia, just from seeing it in the movie, but it’s probably got a really beautiful side to it, which I don’t know about!