What do you think?

Directions:Consider each of the following (true) situations. Then, answer the questions

after each one. Use your answers to take part in the online discussion.

Case #1A woman methodically drowns her five

children in the family bathtub. She laid three

of the five children carefully on her bed after

she finished. The last two – the youngest and

the oldest – were left in the tub; she had run

out of energy to carry them into the bedroom.

After she finished, she made two calls: one to

the police and one to her husband, telling

them what she had done.

(continued)

Case #1 (continued)During her trial, experts testified that she

suffered from a severe case of postpartum

psychosis, a mental illness which can lead to

severe behavioral disruptions. Nearly every

psychiatric expert who was called to testify

agreed: she believed that she was saving the

children from eternal damnation by killing

them before they could become evil.

Questions1. What crime was committed?

2. Who committed it?

3. What evidence do we have that this person

committed it?

4. What do you think is the appropriate punishment

for the person who committed it? Explain why you

think that punishment is appropriate.

Case #2A woman is murdered in her Cape Cod home. Her two-year-old daughter is found clinging to her corpse. Tiny bloody footprints showed that the toddler had tried to care for her mother by giving her food and water.

The horrible crime upset many people in the small town. For a long time, police had no leads. What they did have, however, was genetic evidence: the victim had been raped prior to her murder. But with no suspects to provide DNA samples for comparison, the evidence was useless.

Continued…

Case #2 (continued)The police launched an effort to encourage men in

the small town to “voluntarily” give DNA samples for

comparison. While no one was required to give such

a sample, it was clear that police would be very

suspicious about men who refused to do so.

Questions1. Why did the police adopt this strategy of

taking DNA samples?

2. Do you think there is any problem with a person being asked to give DNA samples to show that he or she did not commit a crime? Explain.

3. Ultimately, the murderer was found using this strategy. Does the fact that this was a successful method mean that it should be adopted in other cases where police do not have any other leads?

Case #3A 34-year-old college professor with two small

children had just started a new child-care

routine. First he dropped off the three-year-

old at preschool. Next stop should have been

dropping off the 5-month- old girl with a

daycare provider. But the professor forgot.

His baby spent the next eight hours slowly

dying in a hot car where temperatures soared

to over 100 degrees. When the baby was

discovered, her temperature was 110 degrees.

Questions:1. Was a crime committed?

2. If you said yes, explain what crime was committed.

3. If you said no, explain how the death of a child

was not due to a criminal act.

Case #4A twenty-two-old mother left her three-month-

old daughter in the car on a sweltering July

afternoon while she dropped in to the Dew

Drop Inn to have a few drinks. Six hours later,

she returned to the car and found the baby

dead.

Questions:1. Was a crime committed?

2. If you said yes, explain what crime was committed.

3. If you said no, explain how the death of a child

was not due to a criminal act.

4. Was your answer in Case #4 different from your

answer in Case #3?

Case #5A man was tried on charges that he had killed his

girlfriend. The trial included extensive testimony from

an eyewitness – the defendant’s other girlfriend who

had been present at the time of the killing and who

had taken pictures (which couldn’t be found and so

weren’t shown at the trial).

The jury apparently didn’t find her eyewitness

testimony convincing; the man was found not guilty.

Continued…

Case #5 (continued)After the trial, the pictures turned up, showing in

graphic detail how the man had tortured and killed

the victim. Because of the 5th Amendment

protection against double jeopardy, the man could

not be tried again for murder. He continued his life as

a free man.

Questions:1. Why do you think that the Constitution provides

protection against “double jeopardy”? (Double

jeopardy refers to the legal restriction which means

that the government may not try a person more

than once for the same crime.)

2. Do you think justice was served in this case?

Explain.

Use your answersTo participate in the online discussion.