January 13, 2006
-
Topic: Crime & Punishment….Behavior in society
Just finished reading an interesting article in the NYT about a Minnesota judge, Judge Amundson, who was convicted of misusing $400,000 worth of funds from a trust that was for a handicapped woman, to fill his house with marble, pianos, scultures, and more. He was sentenced to 69mos. in prison.
There was no doubt about Amundon’s guilt…what was in doubt was how to punish him. The judge tried to argue that he suffered from bi-polar disorder, but that argument was shot down based on Amundson’s own rulings that severely restricted psychological factors as mitigating factors in sentencing. The prosecution also used another argument that Amundson had once used, arguing that the punishment should be longer if the victim was someone vulnerable, which in this case, it was.
It’s interesting to see here how subjective and arbitrary law can be. The standard by which Amundson was judged, was in part the standard by which he ruled. It turned out that his previously harsh sentencing’s were a factor in his receiving a harsher sentence…which begs the question, if Amundson had been more sympathetic in his sentencings while a judge, would the prosecution have been more sympathetic to him? Is that how the law is supposed to work?
The judge in Amundon’s case said that Amundson had been drunk on power, that he was not acting out of depression, but out of a sense of entitlement. We see again how human the legal system is. One person making a decision about a person’s intent. What was the True intent, or the True psychological motivations for Amundson to steal? Can anyone ever know the true psychological state of another person…an expert or the individual themselves?
As I’ve been writing recently, I believe that what makes each person unique is how they imagine and perceive the world to be, which is based on each individual’s life experiences. When it comes to right and wrong, legal and illegal, everyone brings a slightly different set of eyes to the issue. I don’t believe that any individual can be described as “good,” or “bad,” nor do I believe that any individual is capable of making that sort of moral judgement upon another individual. I do believe, however, that we, as a society, can judge a person’s actions to be right or wrong, but the person committing those actions I still believe to be neutral throughout their lifetimes.
The reason, I believe, that neutral individuals think, say, and act in ways that can be generally accepted as “good, ” or “bad,” has to do with the internal logic and perceptions of the individual. In the case of Amundson, as for most people, I believe their misdeeds stem purely from their life experiences, and I believe that they are just as capable of acting good or bad in the future, depending on how society, in this case being the criminial justice system, is able to affect their perceptions of reality.
Was the judge right in saying that Amundson was drunk on power, not depressed or bi-polar, and acting out of a sense of entitlement? Was the prosecution right in saying that Amundson was simply greedy and needed the money to afford an extravagant lifestyle? Maybe. If they were right, then do we show no sympathy to the guilty, or do we attempt to understand why a person might come to be that way, in an effort to rehabilitate them so that they may contribute positively to society in the fugure? Or maybe the judge and prosecution were wrong, and Amundson was actually acting out of a sense, as he put it, that his public life as a judge was getting to be too much, and he was looking to get caught and have it all come crashing down. If that’s the case, should we feel sympathetic to Amundson, or should we once again remain neutral in judging the individual, and instead try to get to the root of understanding of why he thought and acted as he did? Shouldn’t the primary goal of the criminal justice system be to best help the accused to find their unique way to live positively within society?
While in jail, Amundson realized how cruel the penal system can be. How little focus there is on rehab. How an 18yr. old can spend the next 18yrs. of their life being essentially raised and influenced by the other inmates and corrections officers, without the support of any family or friends.
So…what are your thoughts on any of this? On the penal system, and on how we judge those who commit “wrongs,” “misdeeds” or “illegal acts?” What are your thoughts on being sympathetic, unsympathetic, or neutral towards “criminals,” or those who have failed in the eyes of society?
