Well that ain't the way it's 'posed to be!
Seriously, is the fault:
DA's reacting to perceived public opinion?
Vengeful jurors?
Reprehensible Judges>
(We'll give incompetent defense a pass, for now).
der Brucer
Actually you can't give incompetent defense a pass. Being a defense lawyer, nothing bothers me more. We are the ones who stand between the government and the citizens accused of crime. If you don't want to do it right, get another job.
I don't know the case. I can tell you that the mood in the country and in most prosecution offices - well at least federal - is to get everyone you can with them most serious offense you can and give them the most time you can.
There are very good prosecutors out there who use reason and common sense and understand that although someone can be techincally guilty of an offense, their circumstances make that particular case different from other cases. But, that sensibility is becoming the exception rather than the rule, which it seemed to be when I started doing this 20 years ago. This is important because there has been a shift away from giving the discretion at sentencing to a judge and toward giving that power to prosecutors through the way the charge an offense. If an offense is charged that has a minimum of some sort and a person is technically guilty of it - there is nothing a judge can do, and absent winning an acquittal, nothing a defense lawyer can do either.
Now - I know I am generalizing, but this is my view. Many prosecutors today are young. They have never had a real person as a client, (a victim isn't a client, it's a witness, so they don't have the same relationship and often only see them maybe once or twice - not at all like TV) so they tend to not make the human connection between the names on the paper and the person they have the power to give another chance to or send away for essentially the rest of his or her life and the family members, community members etc who will be effected by whatever happens to that person. Many view it more as a game of wits between lawyers. I can't tell you how many times I've heard "You got me this time, but I'll win the next one"
As far as the insanity issue, in many jurisdictions, you can be very mentally ill and not be considered insane. To be insane you have to not know the difference between right and wrong and not be able to conform your behavior to those standards. And if you know what a judge does, what a prosecutor does, what a defense lawyer does and what you are accused of - you are considered competent. Many who probably are insane are medicated by the time of trial and jurors don't believe it because the person seems quite normal sitting in the court room.
The problem with the insane label or the incompetent label is that you can end up being locked in a mental health facility for a much longer period of time than you would be if you simply went to prison on the charge.
I don't know if that answers your question. I guess the short answer is in my opinion the criminal justice system has lost a lot of humanity and in cases, such as the one you pointed out, may be causing more harm than doing good.
Of course there are people who do truly reprehensible things on purpose etc but those are easy cases to understand the penalties imposed, I'm not talking about those.
