It's official Texas death law changed!

  • Thread starter Thread starter beckers
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
"Texas has some of the nation’s most stringent requirements for the use of the insanity defense. The defense must prove not only that an individual has a serious mental illness, but also that the individual did not know that his or her conduct was wrong in the eyes of the law.

The Texas statute is based on a 19th century English law call the McNaughton Rule, which requires the jury to focus not on whether a person is delusional, but on whether the defendant from knew right from wrong at the time of the crime. In Texas, it is not enough for a judge or jury to believe that a defendant had a severe mental illness that included strong delusions - there also has to be a finding that the defendant was unable to know the difference between right and wrong.

In the past, the Texas insanity defense allowed acquittal for defendants, whose illnesses prevented them from stopping themselves from committing a crime, even when they knew their actions were wrong. However, Texas, like many states, revised its insanity statute after John Hinkley was found not guilty by reason of insanity for attempting to kill President Reagan in 1981. Following Hinkley’s trial, many states toughened or abolished their statutes governing the insanity defense. Currently about 25 states, including Texas, enforce some variation of the McNaughton law. Five states have abolished the insanity defense completely. The resulting changes have made the insanity defense extremely difficult to employ, even in the cases of severely ill individuals. As a result, despite popular belief, the insanity defense is used in less that 1 percent of criminal cases."

http://www.mhatexas.org/InsanityDefense

Basically it boils down to at the moment you committed the crime did you or did you not know that it was right or wrong? If you knew that it was wrong then you are legally sane if not then you can be considered insane. Now I understand that people do have mentally problems that can lead to the actions but it still boils down to you being responsible for your own behavior.

As for Texas being ugly It just shows that you have never been in the state.There is a reason people consider Texas it’s own country. We have all the different types of land. In the east you have the beautiful trees and forest, in the west the desert, around Austin you have the rolling hill country (if you every get a chance to hit the hill country the sunrises and sunsets are breathtaking), along the coast you have the beaches, in the middle you have farming and ranching land. Don’t knock Texas till you’ve been here. It’s wonderful!

GOD BLESS!
Beckers
 
I live in Texas, and I’m glad to see that there is now a “Life with no parole” option in the sentencing phase.
 
40.png
Richardols:
If you can call it a reform. The denial of any chance of rehabilitation is absolutely unchristian and certainly uncatholic. And, yes, the Texas legal system is a disgrace to American jurisprudence.

Why Catholics who live there can abide that state’s sytem is beyond me.
Who has claimed capital punishment denies any chance of rehabilitation whatsoever? The greatest form of rehabilitation is a conversion and change of heart. Capital punishment may deny the criminal of rehabilitation within society, but life sentences without parole do exactly the same.

When I hear someone died in a car crash on the news, I feel more sorry for that person, than when a criminal is executed. Not because I hate the criminal, but because the criminal is given a chance to make peace with God. Whoever dies quickly from an accident is not really able to consider if he or she is prepared for the next life and if you are coming for a night of debauchery and die suddenly, I have more sympathy for you.

Section 2266 of CCC: “Legitimate public authority has the right and duty to inflict punishment proportionate to the gravity of the offense. Punishment has the primary aim of redressing the disorder introduced by the offense. When it is willingly accepted by the guilty party, it assumes the value of expiation [this is the rehabilitation of the criminal]. Punishment then, in addition to defending public order and protecting people’s safety [this is the first of the three purposes listed above], has a medicinal purpose: as far as possible, it must contribute to the correction of the guilty party [back to rehabilitation].”
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top