Jump to content

Should criminals with severe brain damage/amnesia still be charged for a crime? [read post]


BlaqkAudio

  

12 members have voted

  1. 1. Should they be charged?



Recommended Posts

So I was watching the show Criminal Minds today (very good show btw, watch it if you haven't before) and this episode that was playing was about a man that committed a number of murders. However, when the fbi finally caught up with him, he tried to escape but ended up falling off the edge of a building and hitting the ground pretty hard resulting in a coma.

 

Four years later, he wakes up from that coma but has no memory whatsoever about what he did, who he was, and how he got there in the first place.

 

The episode then goes on about the fbi team trying to make this guy remember by showing him pictures of the crime scenes. He remembers nothing at all. The activity in his brain did not change at all when looking at these pictures.

 

Then one of the fbi agents comments about whether is it right to charge a man that knows nothing about why he's being charged for. He mentions a philosopher that talks about personality and how the current state of mind defines you as a person.

 

As in, the criminal doesn't have the mind of a criminal. Just a very confused person that doesn't know anything about himself or what he has done in the past. An innocent man?

 

So my question here to you guys is: Do you think that a person should still be charged if they've committed a crime in the past but that person has suffered with some kind of brain damage or amnesia? And why? I'm asking this question as if the criminal has suffered permanent memory loss. No way of ever recovering his past thoughts. All of his thoughts.

 

Key words in this scenario: WILL NEVER EVER REMEMBER HIS PAST

Link to comment
Share on other sites

So I was watching the show Criminal Minds today (very good show btw, watch it if you haven't before) and this episode that was playing was about a man that committed a number of murders. However, when the fbi finally caught up with him, he tried to escape but ended up falling off the edge of a building and hitting the ground pretty hard resulting in a coma.

 

Four years later, he wakes up from that coma but has no memory whatsoever about what he did, who he was, and how he got there in the first place.

 

The episode then goes on about the fbi team trying to make this guy remember by showing him pictures of the crime scenes. He remembers nothing at all. The activity in his brain did not change at all when looking at these pictures.

 

Then one of the fbi agents comments about whether is it right to charge a man that knows nothing about why he's being charged for. He mentions a philosopher that talks about personality and how the current state of mind defines you as a person.

 

As in, the criminal doesn't have the mind of a criminal. Just a very confused person that doesn't know anything about himself or what he has done in the past. An innocent man?

 

So my question here to you guys is: Do you think that a person should still be charged if they've committed a crime in the past but that person has suffered with some kind of brain damage or amnesia? And why? I'm asking this question as if the criminal has suffered permanent memory loss. No way of ever recovering his past thoughts. All of his thoughts.

Criminal Minds is a good show and I will have to say yes.

He still committed the crime. He has to pay for his actions even if he doesn't remember them.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

They shouldnt receive punishment. Jail is suppose to teach and tell you that what you did is bad. If the person didnt (think) he did anything, why should he suffer?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

They shouldnt receive punishment. Jail is suppose to teach and tell you that what you did is bad. If the person didnt (think) he did anything, why should he suffer?

Because he killed innocent people.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Because he killed innocent people.

The USA are actually developing a drug that replicates the experience of going to prison for 1 year-40 years, but in reality the person has only been under influence of the drug for a much smaller amount of time. They plan on using this instead of jail in the future(still in early stages).

 

My question is, if it is really not the thought that counts, why would they develop such a drug?

For all you know, the person might have suffered from memory loss/amnesia, which could also change their personality.

 

Imagine you wake up tomorrow, but in a hospital, and can't recall what happened yesterday? last week? last month? last year? you can't remember anything. Now, a tall man in a black suit approaches you and says you are going to jail for the rest of your life. How would you feel? You don't remember any joys of your past life, you don't know things you have done with your life, you don't know what horrible things you might have done, and now, someone tells you that you will live your "whole"* life behind bars?

 

*because you can't remember anything from before, so what you are living as of now is the only life you got.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

So I was watching the show Criminal Minds today (very good show btw, watch it if you haven't before) and this episode that was playing was about a man that committed a number of murders. However, when the fbi finally caught up with him, he tried to escape but ended up falling off the edge of a building and hitting the ground pretty hard resulting in a coma.

 

Four years later, he wakes up from that coma but has no memory whatsoever about what he did, who he was, and how he got there in the first place.

 

The episode then goes on about the fbi team trying to make this guy remember by showing him pictures of the crime scenes. He remembers nothing at all. The activity in his brain did not change at all when looking at these pictures.

 

Then one of the fbi agents comments about whether is it right to charge a man that knows nothing about why he's being charged for. He mentions a philosopher that talks about personality and how the current state of mind defines you as a person.

 

As in, the criminal doesn't have the mind of a criminal. Just a very confused person that doesn't know anything about himself or what he has done in the past. An innocent man?

 

So my question here to you guys is: Do you think that a person should still be charged if they've committed a crime in the past but that person has suffered with some kind of brain damage or amnesia? And why? I'm asking this question as if the criminal has suffered permanent memory loss. No way of ever recovering his past thoughts. All of his thoughts.

Oh I don't know, should a child predator get off the hook because he has amnesia?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Oh I don't know, should a child predator get off the hook because he has amnesia?

 

The USA are actually developing a drug that replicates the experience of going to prison for 1 year-40 years, but in reality the person has only been under influence of the drug for a much smaller amount of time. They plan on using this instead of jail in the future(still in early stages).

 

My question is, if it is really not the thought that counts, why would they develop such a drug?

For all you know, the person might have suffered from memory loss/amnesia, which could also change their personality.

 

Imagine you wake up tomorrow, but in a hospital, and can't recall what happened yesterday? last week? last month? last year? you can't remember anything. Now, a tall man in a black suit approaches you and says you are going to jail for the rest of your life. How would you feel? You don't remember any joys of your past life, you don't know things you have done with your life, you don't know what horrible things you might have done, and now, someone tells you that you will live your "whole"* life behind bars?

 

*because you can't remember anything from before, so what you are living as of now is the only life you got.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Even so, people with amnesia can remember their past bit by bit.  

 

If he was released and remembered everything after a few months he can easily go back to his criminal life. 

 

If the government was to arrest him, they should help him remember his past. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Even so, people with amnesia can remember their past bit by bit.  

 

If he was released and remembered everything after a few months he can easily go back to his criminal life. 

 

If the government was to arrest him, they should help him remember his past. 

In this scenario, the criminal will never, ever remember his past. Let's say it's not amnesia but severe brain damage instead.

 

 

@Banana - Thanks. I was actually going to come back and use that exact same example about any of us waking up from a hospital and being charged for murder not knowing what or when we did it.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

It's an interesting question because it raises more questions.  What makes you who you are?  Are your memories part of your identity?  If you lose them, are you still the same person?  Is it reasonable to feel guilt for actions you have no memory of committing?

 

If a criminal loses his memories, will he still be drawn to crime?  How much of criminal behavior is genetic predisposition as opposed to mental conditioning?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

It's an interesting question because it raises more questions.  What makes you who you are?  Are your memories part of your identity?  If you lose them, are you still the same person?  Is it reasonable to feel guilt for actions you have no memory of committing?

 

If a criminal loses his memories, will he still be drawn to crime?  How much of criminal behavior is genetic predisposition as opposed to mental conditioning?

In the show, he eventually remembers everything bit by bit and feels really bad about what he did and that he couldn't believe that he'd ever do such a thing. A criminal doesn't usually show remorse like that. Maybe your memories are a part of your identity/personality.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

As far as the any other convicted criminal is concerned, well, he should definitely face his punishment. Everyone else in prison is sitting there because of his past actions, so how would you justify to them that his past doesn't matter, while theirs is keeping them locked up.

 

On top of that, the victims of either crime (an un-remembered one and a "regular" one) would still suffer the same as well.

 

As far as actual legal concern goes, normally the intent at the time matters and it's what seperates an accident from a crime. Basically, even a clinical retard who has a lucid interval would be liable for his actions, as long as you can prove that he knew what he did at the time.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

In ancient Roman Law if a person was found "non compos mentis" (no power of mind), they were humanely treated if they commit a crime.  In the U.S. the rate of insanity pleas that actually win are less than 3% and they receive medical treatment to help with their problems.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Thing is, he will eventually remember. By then, he'll disappear and commit even more murders. Say what you will, bring up any tv show bullcrap or movie bullcrap. He will eventually remember and go on continuing what he did. But as long as he doesn't remember, they should let him free, but keep a close eye on him.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Yes.

 

For all we know, he could be a pure psychopath who is an excellent liar aswell.

You can monitor brain activity. So the criminal can't lie his/her way out of it.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I like how the key words were "never ever remember" for the hypothetical situation yet people keep saying "you'll remember bit by bit."

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I like how the key words were "never ever remember" for the hypothetical situation yet people keep saying "you'll remember bit by bit."

 

They came to the thread with a pre-conceived notion and refused to change it after reading [or not reading] the original post.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

The USA are actually developing a drug that replicates the experience of going to prison for 1 year-40 years, but in reality the person has only been under influence of the drug for a much smaller amount of time. They plan on using this instead of jail in the future(still in early stages).

 

My question is, if it is really not the thought that counts, why would they develop such a drug?

For all you know, the person might have suffered from memory loss/amnesia, which could also change their personality.

 

Imagine you wake up tomorrow, but in a hospital, and can't recall what happened yesterday? last week? last month? last year? you can't remember anything. Now, a tall man in a black suit approaches you and says you are going to jail for the rest of your life. How would you feel? You don't remember any joys of your past life, you don't know things you have done with your life, you don't know what horrible things you might have done, and now, someone tells you that you will live your "whole"* life behind bars?

 

*because you can't remember anything from before, so what you are living as of now is the only life you got.

Imagine if drug dealers got a hold of that drug...

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Imagine if drug dealers got a hold of that drug...

I'm imagining someone using that just to let their mind go for a very, very long time.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.
×
×
  • Create New...