The Right Stuff
As one advances in their educational process it
becomes apparent that some of their instructors were a
significant cut above the rest. These few individuals are
inevitably viewed as master craftsmen. But why is it that
some instructor’s posses the “right stuff” for being
effective with their students while others do not? When
one analyzes their educational experience, those
instructors that were extremely effective appear to them as
makers of fine wine, turning grapes into a drink which is
pleasurable to the pallet. All instructors’ careers starts out
in much the same manner as a trade’s apprentice. First, they
must go to school themselves. Then, they must observe experts
in action. And finally, they have to exercise their newly
acquired skills. The instructors that eventually become
effective quickly realize there is much more to the
fermentation process than this. They realize that to be
effective with a student there are additional requirements
that must be adhered to. To make a fine wine they must
learn to delicately blend the right ingredients of
personality, motivation, and above all patients.
The initial ingredient required to becoming an
effective instructor is of personality. The personality of
the instructor affects each and every student they are in
contact with. An effective instructor will develop a
personality that conveys humor into the learning process.
It is only natural that what one finds humorous, one tends
to remember longer. Additionally, if an instructor to be a
cut above the rest, their personality must be of fairness
and equality for each student. Students feel that, if
their instructor really doesn’t like them much anyway,
there isn’t much use in trying as hard as they would
otherwise. As the apprentices of the instructor trade
begin to integrate a warm, humorous, and friendly
personality into their instructional style, the first
process in fine wine making is achieved.
Secondly, the instructor then adds motivation to their
students’ behavior. When an instructor motivates a student
to do well, the student usually tries to succeed beyond
that point. This can most easily be done by the positive
reinforcement of the students’ abilities and through
constructive criticism. When an instructor portrays to their
students that they believe in their abilities, the student
unknowingly starts believing that they do posses the same
abilities. Through applying the second ingredient to becoming
an effective instructor, motivation, the grapes start to ferment
and the apprentice now becomes a journeymen of the wine making
trade.
Facts: Rex Marshall testified that the deceased came into his store intoxicated, and started whispering things to his wife. The defendant stated that he ordered the deceased out of the store immediately, however the deceased refused to leave and started acting in an aggressive manner; by slamming his hate down on the counter. He then reached for the hammer, the defendant states he had reason to believe the deceased was going to hit him with the hammer attempting to kill him. Once the deceased reached for the hammer the defendant shot him almost immediately.
The case of Ford V. Wainwright is a Supreme court case of the United Stated argued in 1986. Alvin Bernard Ford is the plaintiff in this case, In 1974 he was convicted of murder in Florida and sentenced to death. In 1982 Ford began to show signs of a serious mental disorder. The Governor of Florida then appointed a panel of three psychiatrist to determine if Ford was component to understand the nature of the death penalty and the crime he had committed. All three psychiatrist disagreed on his exact diagnosis but agreed that he was sane and knew the nature of the death penalty. Ford’s attorney unsuccessfully sought a hearing in the state court for determination of his competency and then filed a hebeas corpus petition, which is a writ requiring a person to be brought before a judge or court especially for investigation of a restraint of the person’s liberty. The Florida courts denied his petition and signed a death warrant for Ford in 1984. Ford then sued Louie L. Wainwright, the defendant, who at the time of the case was the Secretary of the Florida Division of Correction.
Donald H. Rumsfeld was the petitioner, while Jose Padilla was the respondent. Jose Padilla returned from Pakistan in 2002; he arrived in Chicago’s O’Hare International Airport. It was there that Padilla was detained by the Department of Defense until determined if he was an “enemy combatant” in terms with al Qaeda. It was said by the FBI that Padilla’s presence in the US was to create terroristic attacks. Padilla was moved to a military brig located in South Carolina where he was kept for the time being.
Clear and Danger was evaluated in the First Amendment and guarantees the right of Freedom of Speech. I have two scenarios regarding clear and danger, the first scenario is Debs v United States. In this case Debs v United States, Debs felt that socialism is the answer; however, Deb’s was prosecuted for the remarks that he made. In addition, the speech that Deb gave wasn’t as harsh as made by others, for example, George McGovern made a remark about the Viet Nam War during his 1972 presidential bid which was very harsh. This process was done by using its weak form of the clear-and-present-danger test and Deb’s ended up being sentenced to a ten year sentence. In this case Deb’s couldn’t speak everything on his mind that he wanted which was a violation
One landmark case in regards to competency to stand trial (CST) is the Supreme Court case of Dusky v. U.S. (1960). This case established the minimum standard for competency. Milton Dusky was a man charged with assisting in a kidnapping and rape of an underage female. Even though he suffered from schizophrenia he was found competent to stand trial and was convicted and sentenced to 45 years. There was a petition to reverse his conviction on the grounds that he was not, in fact, competent to stand trial. The courts granted a retrial which resulted in his sentenced being reduced to 20 years.
15) Grinfeld, M. J. "Executing the Mentally Ill: Who is Really Insane?" Psychiatric Times. Vol. XV, Issue 5. May, 1998. , Discussion of the legal aspects of criminal insanity and violence research.
The defense in this case will argue that the government was required to acquire a valid search warrant before obtaining their personal business records pursuant to the Fourth Amendment of the Constitution. The government will argue that they did not violate any of the individual’s Fourth Amendment rights by obtaining the defendant’s business records without a search warrant because the business records gathered was not protected under the Constitution.
Kain did not disclose details of the alleged assault by Miss Pearce. Miss Pearce did, however, give consent for a child protection medical to be completed but refused to allow him to be accommodated. A child protection medical was undertaken. Kain had scratches on his head and the explanation that Miss Pearce gave was that the cat had scratched Kain’s head. A Police Protection Order was issued and Kain was placed in foster
Vaknin, Sam. "Many People with Mental Illness Should Not Be Exempt from the Death Penalty." The Death Penalty. Ed. Jenny Cromie and Lynn M. Zott. Detroit: Greenhaven Press, 2013. Opposing Viewpoints. Opposing Viewpoints in Context. Web. 12 Dec. 2013.
The most common and successful due process challenge is procedural due process. This challenge has occurred mainly in states that classify offenders according to the level of risk they pose to communities. This argument centers on whether an offender is allowed a hearing to challenge a risk classification. The Massachusetts Supreme Court recently found that provisions of the state’s community notification law violated constitutional due process Doe v. Sex Offender Registry Board, Mass. SJC-07608 (July 24,1998).
The issue of executing mentally ill criminals has been widely debated among the public. They debate on whether it is right or wrong to execute a person who does not possess the capacity to think correctly. The mental illness is a disease that destroys a person’s memory, emotion, and prevent one or more function of the mind running properly. The disease affects the way a person thinks, feels, behaves and relates to others.When a person is severely mentally ill, his/ her ability to appreciate reality lack so they aspire to do stuff that is meaningless. The sickness is triggered by an amalgamation of genetic, and environmental factors not a personal imperfection. On the death penalty website, Scott Panetti who killed his mother in-law and father-in-law reports that since 1983, over 60 people with mental illness or retardation have been executed in the United States (Panetti). The American Civil Liberties Union says that it is unconstitutional to execute someone who suffered from an earnest mental illness (ACLU).Some people apply the term crazy or mad to describe a person who suffers from astringent psychological disorders because a mad person look different than a mundane human being. The time has come for us to accept the fact that executing mentally ill offenders is not beneficial to society for many reasons. Although some mentally ill criminals have violated the law, we need to sustain a federal law that mentally ill criminals should not be put to death.
Stuart v. Nappi was class lawsuit Stuart’s mother filed against school personnel and the Danbury Board of Education because she claimed that her daughter was not receiving the rights granted in the Individuals with Disabilities Act (IDEA). Kathy Stuart was a student at Danbury High School in Connecticut with serious emotional, behavior, and academic difficulties. She was suppose to be in special education classes, but for some reason she hardly ever attended them. Kathy was involved in a school-wide disturbance. As a result of her complicity in these disturbances, she received a ten-day disciplinary suspension and was scheduled to appear at a disciplinary hearing. The Superintendent of Danbury Schools recommended to the Danbury Board of Education
John Hinckley Jr., Jeffery Dahmer, James Holmes, and Andrea Yates: all are perpetrators of violent crimes, and all claim insanity as the reason. In recent years, it seems that the verdicts of many major violent crimes have come down to whether the defendant is accountable for their actions or if they should be held Not Guilty by Reason of Insanity (NGRI). This verdict more commonly known as the Insanity Defense is often seen as a way for criminals to ‘get out’ of punishment for their crimes. For a criminal to be declared NGRI, they have to undergo extensive psychiatric evaluation to determine that, at the time of their crimes, they were not of sound mind and unable to realize the wrongfulness of their actions. If a jury decides that they are not guilty—which occurs in around 25% of cases where the insanity plea is accepted—they will receive mental care and rehabilitation but remain imprisoned for the remainder of their lives. The controversy arises from many facets of this issue. One is whether the legal system should allow this defense, as many states have banned it. Another question is whether insanity can be proven in a manner that is acceptable in a trial. Another question is whether juries are educated enough about the nature of insanity and how it is proven to make an informed decision. There is little agreement between the psychological and legal communities and the public on the correct policy regarding the insanity defense. This defense is a necessary part of the legal system in order to protect those who are unaware of their actions. One thing, however, is clear: if this defense is to continue to be a legal option, state lawmakers need to modify it. The evaluation of defendants, administr...
Throughout the course of time issues have arose in lawsuits regarding the mentally ill. How one should be handled in a situation has become controversial. With the growing number of ill inmates entering long sentencings or execution, finding a way to accommodate such a matter is difficult. As an effort to serve these persons, officials typically consider a guilty state of mind resulting in placement to mental health facilities in exchange for execution or sentences. Protected under the 8th amendment "Excessive bail shall not be required, nor excessive fines imposed, nor cruel and unusual punishments inflicted". If such a notation is present the debate of weather the unbalanced should receive such penalties is contradicting. Persons may be found
A significant and controversial issue within the legal system is the ‘insanity defense’ in which during a criminal trial, the defendant will make a claim that they are not guilty by reason of insanity, or in other words, they have deficient and impaired cognitive and mental capabilities. These mental health problems associated with insanity are caused by psychopathological disorders, which may have led to their dysfunction. What separates this from a regular plead of ‘diminished capacity’ is that a plea of insanity is a full defense rather than just a partial defense (Legal information institute, n.d.). With the diminished capacity defense, the defendant’s mental competence is still the focus, although they are pleading to a lesser crime instead of insisting that they are innocent. Thus, it becomes a mitigating factor. Under section 16 of the ‘Criminal Code of Canada’, for a plea of insanity to be realized, the accused, as a result of their mental disorder, must not have been able to recognize the wrongfulness of their actions during the time of the crime (Pilon, 2002).If the defendant suffers from a mental disorder and was unable to distinguish between right or wrong during the crime, then they are not criminally responsible by reason of mental disorder. This law involving mental illnesses mirrors the McNaughton rule which is adopted in almost half of the states in the United States and in the United Kingdom. The McNaughton rule presumes the sanity of the accused, unless proven that they were unable to appreciate the nature and quality of their criminal act (Legal information institute, n.d.). Although the Criminal Code with respect to mental illnesses appears straightforward enough, there are noteworthy disorders that have spawn...