Criminal Law

Murder and Mental Illness: “Dr. Gilmer and Mr. Hyde”

/ Matthew Clemente / Leave a comment

Murder and Mental Illness: “Dr. Gilmer and Mr. Hyde”

This American Life recently ran a riveting story about a beloved family doctor who bruttally murdered his father. Here is an introduction to the story: 

Dr. Benjamin Gilmer . . . gets a job at a rural clinic. He finds out he’s replaced someone — also named Dr. Gilmer . . .  — who went to prison after killing his own father. But the more Benjamin’s patients talk about the other Dr. Gilmer, the more confused he becomes. Everyone loved the old Dr. Gilmer. So Benjamin starts digging around, trying to understand how a good man can seemingly turn bad.

“Will Accused Boston Marathon Bomber Dzhokhar Tsarnaev Get the Death Penalty?”

/ Matthew Clemente / Leave a comment

“Will Accused Boston Marathon Bomber Dzhokhar Tsarnaev Get the Death Penalty?”

This was the question being investigated on the Lawyer 2 Lawyer podcast.  Here is a description of the show: 

Dzhokhar Tsarnaev, the surviving brother of the accused for the Boston marathon bombings, has become a face of the media lately. His prosecution and potential sentence raises many questions for both the public and the legal world. Attorneys and co-hosts J. Craig Williams and Bob Ambrogi joinAttorney Jack Cunha and Professor Douglas Berman to discuss the prosecution and trial of the suspect.

  • Jack Cunha, of Cunha & Holcomb, is a practicing criminal attorney based in Boston, Massachusetts. A former instructor at Suffolk and Harvard Law Schools, Cunha lectures nationally for various associations and schools such as The National Association of Criminal Defense Attorneys, Harvard Law, and CLE Programs mainly on criminal defense.
  • Douglas Berman, Professor of Law at The Ohio State University’s Moritz College of Law, has taught a myriad of courses at Ohio State including criminal law, criminal punishment and sentencing, and the death penalty. He is co-author of a casebook, Sentencing Law and Policy: Cases, Statutes, and Guidelines. He also writes a popular blog titled Sentencing Law and Policy.

Tune in to hear what these experienced professionals have to say as they answer questions such as: Although Massachusetts outlawed the death penalty in 1984, will prosecutors use federal law to seek the death penalty for Tsarnaev? Will the fact that the suspect is only 19 call for mitigation? and more.

 

Counterinsurgency in Springfield?

/ Matthew Clemente / Leave a comment

Last night, 60 Minutes ran a fascinating story about an innovative approach to policing being implemented in Springfield, Massachusetts.  Here is how the story gets started: 

In the wars in Iraq and Afghanistan, our soldiers have been waging what’s known as counterinsurgency. They’re supposed to be both warriors and community builders, going village to village driving out insurgents while winning the hearts and minds of the population. But counterinsurgency has had mixed results – at best.

 We met a Green Beret who is finding out — in his job as a police officer — that the strategy might actually have a better chance of working, right here at home, in the USA.

 Call him and his fellow officers counterinsurgency cops! They’re not fighting al Qaeda or the Taliban, but street gangs and drug dealers in one of the most crime ridden cities in New England.

The measures which Springfield is taking to reduce gun/gang violence is similar to those of Syracuse Truce.

 

“Death By Fire”

/ Matthew Clemente / Leave a comment

“Death By Fire”

Frontline tells the chilling tale of Cameron Todd Willingham, a man put to death in Texas in 2004. 

Did Texas execute an innocent man?

Several controversial death penalty cases are currently under examination in Texas and in other states, but it’s the 2004 execution of Cameron Todd Willingham — convicted for the arson deaths of his three young children — that’s now at the center of the national debate.

 

More on Rape and Victims’ Rights

/ Matthew Clemente / Leave a comment

More on Rape and Victims’ Rights

After yesterday’s post about the emotional Radio Lab segment, “Rape and Reasonable Doubt”,  I was reminded of a Moral Maze episode that debated victims’ rights and how victims are/should be treated in the criminal justice system.  This Moral Maze debate provides an intellectual take on an issue that is emotionally charged and has high moral stakes.

Here is a part of Moral Maze‘s description of the episode:

The death of Frances Andrade, who killed herself days after testifying against Michael Brewer, the choirmaster who indecently assaulted her, has prompted a debate on how courts handle such cases. Could her suicide have been prevented? Did the defence counsel who cross-examined her, calling her a liar and a fantasist, bear some responsibility for her death? Or is it always important for the defence to challenge prosecution witnesses as robustly as the judge will allow? If so, the duty to protect vulnerable witnesses must rest with the police and the Crown Prosecution Service – and yet their overriding aim is to obtain a conviction. Frances Andrade was persuaded to give evidence (she did not herself initiate the investigation); perhaps she would have been better advised not to?