As scientists make new discoveries and learn more about human genetics a multitude of new arguments will arise As is in the case of the MAO A gene this gene is frequently utilized in our court system and associated to antisocial behavior In this paper I will give my opinion on why I believe this gene should not be the sole factor when reaching a verdict In my opinion allowing genetic evidence should not consider generic evidence cannot justify the crime but on the individuals acting to break the law and cause pain and suffering to those who choose to abide by it Some believe certain people are born with a gene that makes them aggressive and are more likely to have criminal tendencies On the other hand others argue that individuals that experience hard environment and social experiences are more likely to have criminal behavior A case of nature against nurture Data suggest that average citizens do not share the belief that genetic data can help identify defendants whose behavior is sufficiently beyond their voluntary control to warrant findings of diminished responsibility e g conviction of manslaughter rather than murder or to mitigate sentences Appelbaum and Scurich 2014 p 96 I believe that the individual committing the crime has the control over their actions and behavior Everyone has different motives on why they commit crimes whether necessity or is simply a matter of wanting something so badly they are willing to withstand the consequences
There are sometimes circumstances where a person s judgement can be affected by the use of drugs and alcohol this type of criminal charge can have a different outcome since the genetic evidence is not necessary to determine the result In a bail hearing a judge s decision to deny bail to someone that has certain genetic feature is unfair Primary it is unethical and it goes against their constitution of the United States and against the individual human rights Decisions should be based on culpability past behaviors motive and the aftermath of the crime Genetic evidence is slowly making its way to the courtroom but because of its inconclusive finding it shouldn t take into consideration when a criminal case takes place The defendant has the right to present evidence that can prove his innocence or his guilt The sixth amendment guarantees the defendant to rights that cannot be taken away It would not be right to deny someone that opportunity especially in their own trial Now that being said showing genetic evidence would neither help or hurt them in their trial For example if someone was trying to use the excuse that he or she has the MAO A gene and that is the reason why he or she committed a crime This would only give the jury one factor to take into account when it comes time to deliberate The MAO A gene only tells you that he or she has the potential to be aggressive and they might be a bigger threat in the future On the other side if the person is trying to prove that he or she does not have the MAO A gene therefore is less of a threat to society
The jury can t base their decision on just genetic evidence all the evidence and criminal facts in the case needs to be reviewed Only then can a jury come to an appropriate conclusion When presenting genetic evidence in a case there could be aggravating and mitigating elements that could be presented This doesn t guarantee the defendant argument will hold up and the sentence reduced In fact the evidence presented could hurt the defendant There is a wide definition of what these factors are each state has its own interpretation of what that will be Aggravating factors that might be presented by the prosecutors could be prior criminal history types of crimes and repeated offences can show the individuals thirst for violence Prior criminal history alone can be an aggravating factor in the defendant's case since one way to determine criminal behavior is to look into the past crimes If the defendant is constantly getting into trouble they might determine that genetic evidence is not necessary If the defendant has repeated arrest it could also be a reason to dismiss the genetic evidence Regardless of genetics the individual is demonstrating an un wiliness to follow the law Another aggravating factor is the way that the victim was abused or murder
The more gruesome the crime the more severe the sentence should be for the defendant In this case the defendant s actions could be enough evidence to base the case on without the use of genetic evidence On the other hand mitigating factors that could be in the defendant s favor could be a certain gene their mental stability the type of involvement in the crime If the defense party proves that the MAO A gene somehow inspire the defendant into committing the crime it could be a reason to mitigate the sentence Mental stability can also be a lessening factor if the defendant was diagnosed with mental illness before and after the crime occurred In my opinion in capital punishment cases this approach rarely works because the type of case The members of the court also take in consideration the role that the defendant took while committing the crime Someone that is coincident of what there are doing knows what exactly is taking place In conclusion data that proves the connection between the criminal behavior and genetics is inconclusive Genetic evidence should not be a consider in criminal There are theories on how a person becomes killer Nature versus nurture explains how the theory of someone becoming genetically made to have criminal tendencies or life experiences and the environment Individuals that choose to break the law can t be determine by genetics
CALCULATE YOUR ORDER
Save on your first order!