RUNNING HEAD: How the judicial system

How the Judicial system should treat criminals going forward

Kristen Francis
University of Cincinnati
CJ3001: Kids who Kill
October 8, 2015

How the judicial system

After reviewing the three articles, all of the authors seem to have a bold interpretation and
opinion about the writings and ideas of Adrian Raines Anatomy of Violence book. One article,
The Brain on Trial, by David Eagleman is really a continuation of Raines ideas in my opinion.
Eagleman talks about the mass murder at the University of Texas by Charles Whitman in 1966.
In addition, Eagleman portrays a story about a man named Alex who readers can see is very
similar to Mr. Oft was Raines book. It is also worth noting that Eagleman used the same title for
his article that Raine used for the chapter in his book in which he talks about the happenings of
Mr. Oft. Oft was an average man with a wife and stepdaughter who one day turned to child
pornography. It was later determined that he had a tumor on his prefrontal cortex and after
removal, his sexual urges went away. Similarly, Charles Whitman was found to a have a tumor of
substantial size compressing his amygdala. In this case, Raine and Eagleman present the idea that
these medical factors could play a role in the impulsive decision making of these two men.
Another article entitled Dont Put the Brain on Trial, by Jennifer Gruenke, was written in
response to the article by Eagleman, as well as Rains Anatomy of Violence. Gruenke spends time
expressing how Eagleman used details about Charles Whitman that did not support his idea that
Whitman was bound by his neuro-abnormality. Gruenke claims that Eagleman, as well as Raine,
spent time on detailing that made the reader feel for the murderer rather than presenting the facts
that linked their neuro-abnormality to the resulting crime. The final article is entitled Are
Criminals Born or Made?, by Daniel Dennett. This was the most recently written article. In this
article, Dennett takes the time to recall a few notable mass murderers from over the years. In
addition, he spends most of the article discussing the idea of free will and where or not the
judicial system should be trying to treat and rehabilitate criminals with medical factors or if they
should just be locked up like any other criminal who does not have a major medical factor.

How the judicial system

Dennett seems to portray an idea that all criminals have some form of brain damage or lack of
brain function, as seem by results of scans and tests so he questions why one is more applicable
to the criminals outcome.
After reading each article, more and more conflicting opinions formed in my own mind.
It was after each article that I found reason to agree with that author and disagree with the last
author. It is an interesting time reading these differing opinions and trying to formulate my own.
The given scenario about how I would advise treating someone who I cared for that murdered
another loved one of mine versus if they killed a stranger is hard. I personally believe that
murder is murder and regardless of how much I care for the criminal or the victim, the resulting
judicial decisions should be the same. I understand that there are extreme circumstances where a
criminal has medical implications that need treatment, but regardless, the action is done. While it
may constitute a shorter sentence on the terms that treatment can be proven effective, it should
still be a punishment. Punishment is a resultant of wrongdoing whether conscious or not. I do
believe that medical factors may play in to crime, but much more research and analysis needs to
be completed in order to determine to what extent it plays a role, how it can be detected, and how
judicial officials should take these into consideration, if at all. At the end of the day, this is all
still too blurry of a topic to make rigid decisions for the judicial system. My final opinion on the
topic today is that, most importantly, as this process is broken down and researched more, we
need to always remain reactive rather than proactive. Risk factors and signs are simply predictors
and not concrete decision makers. If we start to accuse and treat before the matter is done, it will
not be effective and we will start to dehumanize the population. We must always act in response
to an issue, rather than before the issue has taken place.