AU Blogspot

 
              Thanks to lucianvenutian for permission to use this Photo.

It’s true that controversy is often manufactured by “the media” to create “news,” but I find the the issue of sex offenders’ rights, particularly those convicted of crimes against children, to only be controversial if seen through a filter more theoretical than pragmatic. In legal theory, the general question of whether a mandated process of full disclosure violates the rights of these offenders is a legitimate one.  However; there is no moral equivalency between the rights afforded say someone convicted of a felony property crime in the past vs. someone convicted of a felony sex offense.  Yes, I would like to know if the guy next store to me was convicted a burglary 10 years ago, but I can ultimately accept living in the dark to preserve this individual’s right to live freely in society after paying his debt.  On the contrary, I would not accept living in the dark when it comes to compromising the safety of a defenseless child to protect the rights of a pedophile.   

There’s also a disturbing element of political correctness influencing how communities see their role in protecting their own children.  If, because of the law, there is no way to prevent a sex offender from moving into your neighborhood, it’s apparent that the instrument used to enforce the law (the police) can not be turned to for help unless it’s “after the fact.”  What does a community do under these circumstances?  

The media often characterizes communities who make it known that such offenders are not welcome as some type of vigilante mob.  This is absurd.  Yes, there are extreme cases where community members violently assault an offender to get the point across, but these are few and far between, which is why they make “the news.”  The communities that have succeeded in removing these offenders from their neighborhoods have done so through organized protests, house eggings, and tactical use of the media to apply pressure.   Although politically incorrect and offensive to legal scholars, I find these resourceful methods of forced exclusion to be perfectly reasonable.

What do you think?     

Ryan Rode
Interactive Services Manager
Ashworth School Of Legal Studies

In my opinion, it’s a combination of many factors. Defining the cause of deviant behaviour as being purely caused by one factor can open a huge can of worms.

If you follow the biological theory, the conclusion could result in defining areas where the higher crime rates are comprised of people with “faulty” genes. In that same school, genetic testing could be administered and the results of the findings could be used to label people as being predisposed to the possibilities of committing a crime. Therefore, the profiling of a group of people leads to the possibility of infringements on their rights–just to be safe.

Another theory may deal with the socio-economic reasons for crimes committed.  Some people may feel that it’s out of necessity to do illegal acts. Granted, the harsher crimes of rape and murder are possibly out of the scope of comparison of a mugging because someone needed money. Still, a crime is a crime when discussing the generalities of “why?”  

This same ideal could also be used to support the concept of people committing crimes because of the better living arrangements provided while incarcerated relative to the options they may have in the free world.

In any case, this is a topic that can be discussed and debated until the second coming. Again, this is all opinion with no references cited. Just my limited knowledge and ideas based on what I’ve read, heard, and seen. 

*If you’re interested in participating in open discussions with your classmates on a variety of fascincating subjects. please visit the Ashworth Student Discussion Forum today!

John
Student
Ashworth Business Administration Program

 
             Thanks to suite100gallery for permission to use this Photo.

A recent U.S. Court case and new research are focusing attention on “workplace bullying,” prompting some employers to take steps to curb aggressive behavior.

There has been a lot of news articles lately regarding bullies in the work place. There was a time in the not-too-distant past that the word bully conjured up memories of the school yard bully, or the neighborhood bully. Not so anymore. According to a recent 2007 survey of 1,000 U.S. Workers, 44% said they had worked for a boss they considered abusive. The survey was sponsored by the Employment Law Alliance, an association of 3,000 employment lawyers.

This year, two Canadian professors concluded bullying can take a more severe emotional and physical toll than sexual harassment, perhaps because companies provide greater support for victims of the latter. In a review of 110 studies spanning two decades, the researchers found that bullied employees were more likely than sexually harassed employees to quit, report physical and mental health problems, and be dissatisfied with their jobs.

Garry Mathiason, a senior partner at Littler Mendelson, a leading employment-law firm, says more corporate clients are raising the issue, motivated by legal questions, as well as concerns about the impact on productivity. Littler Mendelson featured bullying among its “breaking trends” in labor law at a conference for U.S. Employers this year.

Dr. Ruth and Dr. Gary Namie equate workplace bullying with Psychological Violence in work.  Their site Workplace Bullying Institute is an in-depth resource for anyone who feels they are a victim of workplace bullying.

Roger Mezger reported in the Cleveland Plain Dealer on July 26, 2004 that, “Some of the most common bullying tactics, according to a 2000 survey, include making unreasonable demands, yelling and screaming, insulting or putting down a worker, taking credit for someone else’s work, blaming others for mistakes, casting doubt on the quality of another’s work, creating arbitrary rules and isolating a worker. You can read his entire article by clicking here.

Betty Ray Mydland
Student
Ashworth Criminal Justice Program

     
              Thanks to celinecelines for permission to use this Photo.

This is a very hot topic within the criminal justice field.  As such, there is a lot of misconception about this defense.  One of the most recent cases that has affected legislation is that of Andrea Yates.

For full trial coverage, you can go here.

What this case did for the state of Texas, known for its TOUGH ON CRIME and zero tolerance for murder, ESPECIALLY of children, was sign into legislation a bill concerning Postpartum Depression. 

For a history of the insanity defense check out this terrific resource.

The major misconception about the insanity defense is that many people believe that just because a defendent has chosen this defense, they are going to get off.  Actually this isn’t the case.  According to the following statistics reported by FOX news in February 2002, the insanity defense works in less than 1% of all cases.

Given the insanity rules of McNaughton, Durham, should this be a defense at all in criminal prosecution?

Betty Ray Mydland
Student
Ashworth Criminal Justice Program

It seems to be common knowledge that the United States has the highest rate of her population imprisoned. In fact, according to the U.S. Department of Justice, Bureau of Justice Statistics, one out of every 100 American’s are incarcerated.  According to these same statistics, as of June 30, 2007, 2,299,116 prisoners were held in federal or state prisons or in local jails – an increase of 1.8% from year-end 2006, less than the average annual growth of 2.6% from 2000-2006. USDJ-BJS. 

With the introduction of community programs, such as Restorative Justice on the scene, one would think that the transition back into one’s community would be a little less stressful. In spite of the fact that courts are working with communities to ease this transition, and thus reduce recidivism, through education, compensation, and building trust, why is recidivism on the rise?  

In considering these communities, we realize that they are made up of individuals like you and me. Perhaps they have been a victim. Perhaps a family member or other close relative or dear friend was a victim. This would explain some of the reasons why a community is not willing to give offenders the benefit of the doubt. If an offender cannot get decent housing, or a decent paying job, he/she has a far greater chance of re-offending.  

According to the Restorative Justice Organization, some of the outcomes are: (more…)

I have been employed in the field of forensics for over twenty-five years.  When introduced to the field and opinion testimony, it was stressed to me during my training and subsequent contacts within the field that all scientists must not be biased while performing analyses or on the witness stand.  As a forensic scientist, one is not working for the prosecution or the defense.  His only obligation is to disclose the knowledge gained through his examinations.  

During one of the last few episodes of one of the CSI programs this past season, the statement was made by one analyst to another “we will get him”.   Even more appalling than this to me, I watched as a well known pathologist exited the courtroom after giving his testimony. He seemed to take more pleasure in front of the camera for the media than giving his opinion as to the findings in the case. 

Analysts would like to be treated professionally by all parties.  If one seeks the respect of individuals within his profession and those he testifies before, it goes a long way to treat them with the same respect you desire.  This can be obtained by sharing your knowledge to both sides without any bias. 

Steve Byrd
Instructor
Ashworth University Forensic Science Program

The creation of the Criminal Justice “Study Hall” forum was inspired by one of your fellow students: Betty Ray Mydland.  The general concept behind this particular forum or “Study Hall” is to provide students in our various Criminal Justice programs with a dedicated “space” to openly discuss criminal justice program issues, lessons, topics, careers, questions, news, ideas, etc.

Thanks to Betty for this excellent recommendation. Well, the forum has been created. It’s up to our forum community to spread the word and get as many of your peers engaged as possible. I’m really looking forward to watching this Study Hall evolve. 

If you haven’t registered for the Ashworth University Student Forum yet, take a minute to do so.  It literally only takes a minute before you’re ready to join the discussion. 

We encourage all of our Criminal Justice/Legal Studies students to begin participating in this new Study Hall today!  Get involved with your student community!

Here’s the link:

Criminal Justice Study Hall Forum

Ryan Rode
Interactive Services Manager
Ashworth University

 
              Thanks to Hulagway for permission to use this Photo.

Various issues arise as the concept of surrogacy comes before the legislatures of the country.  One case that I handled for the Attorney General’s Office dealt with a surrogate mother, and is an example of how crazy surrogacy issues can become.  This lady had been hired to have a baby for a multi-millionaire.  He was not married and seemed to be tiring of his fortunes when he decided that he would like to have an heir.  The surrogate mother gave birth to a healthy little girl and the man accepted the child, made payment, and went on his merry way.  Then two months later, the man had one of his “assistants” drop the baby back off at the surrogate mother’s home with a note stating that he simply could not emotionally handle the responsibilities of being a parent. 

We received the case because the surrogate mother was now going after the biological father for child-support payments.  This was one case where our heads were spinning every time we dealt with it.  The surrogate mother never wanted to have a child of her own and was simply interested in making some money when she agreed to the surrogacy contract.  After receiving the baby back, however, she did not have the heart to give the child up for adoption, and developed an appreciation for motherhood.  The court held that the biological father DID have a duty to support the child and awarded the mother $1700 a week in support, due to the biological father’s extreme wealth. 

That case has definitely been recorded in the storybook of child support and surrogacy, as well.  It is a fun story to tell, while at the same time it illuminates how obscure the issues can become in the area of surrogacy contracts. 

Wendy Webb
Family Law Instructor
Ashworth University School of Legal Studies

    
                         Image courtesy of Missoulian.

I’m not a CJ major, but I thought all of you would find this interesting.

I am an advocate for someone that has been wrongfully incarcerated. Dateline actually made a special on his case.

Here’s a link to the MySpace page that I created for him. There are links as you scroll down that will lead you to the Dateline website to view the videos on his story.

I would encourage all of you to view the videos and decide for yourself!

Click here to check out this video.  (the page is flash for those of you with slower computers…)

Melanie
Associate Program in Paralegal Studies Student
Ashworth University School of Legal Studies

Most crimes are defined by state statutes and are prosecuted in state courts.  The others are federal crimes, prosecuted only in federal court.  Certain key items that the government must prove to show that a crime occurred are called elements.  For example, generally, a crime has been committed when two elements can be proven.  That is, a crime has been committed when a person both:       

1)  engages in a prohibited act, and       

2)  has criminal intent, or state of mind, that prompted the act.

Suppose that Jimmy Bob really doesn’t like Sammy and thinks constantly about an elaborate plan to run over Sammy with his motor scooter.  However, Jimmy Bob gets grounded, and his father sells his motor scooter.  Jimmy Bob does not forget about his plan; in fact, for months he regrets that he did not carry it out.  Although his negative emotions are strong, Jimmy Bob never acts on his hatred for Sammy.  A year later, Sammy moves to a different town.  Gradually, Jimmy Bob gets over his obsession with Sammy.  Since there was no act, no crime can be proven. 

On the other hand, suppose that Jimmy Bob and Sammy are best friends.  They do everything together and have never even spoken a harsh word to each other.  One day, while driving with extreme caution, Jimmy Bob’s motor scooter goes out of control due to a lodged gas pedal and in a cruel irony, he runs over Sammy, killing him.  Since the accident occurred without any intent, no crime occurred. 

Both the act and the intent must be present for an accused to be charged with a crime.

Karl Freedman, Esq., J.D.
Paralegal Program Instructor
Ashworth University School Of Legal Studies