| Page 4 of 5 < > |
Giving Evil the Eye
Forensic pyschiatrist Michael Welner with his Depravity Scale, which he believes would help juries label as either sadistic or sick the actions of criminals.
(Helayne Seidman - For The Washington Post)
TOOLBOX
   Resize
COMMENT
 Discussion Policy
 CLOSE
Comments that include profanity or personal attacks or other inappropriate comments or material will be removed from the site. Additionally, entries that are unsigned or contain "signatures" by someone other than the actual author will be removed. Finally, we will take steps to block users who violate any of our posting standards, terms of use or privacy policies or any other policies governing this site. Please review the full rules governing commentaries and discussions. You are fully responsible for the content that you post.
Who's Blogging  |
(You can take the survey at http:/
Over the years, he consulted on vicious crimes cases that expose how tricky this can be.
Andrea Yates, who drowned her five children, he rates as not depraved, because she "did not intend to emotionally traumatize, to terrorize, to show off, to maximize damage, there was no criminal indulgence or grotesque quality to the suffering, no prolonged agony. She did not desecrate the bodies." John Allen Muhammed, the lead D.C. sniper, charts as depraved because he "intended to maximize destruction, intended to traumatize, targeted because of prejudice, exploited the trust of [Lee Boyd] Malvo to enlist him in crime, enlisted Malvo in order to have a juvenile to take responsibility, and enlisted and trained Malvo in order to maximize his destructive potential."
What about, say, the O.J. Simpson case? The murder of Nicole Brown Simpson and Ronald Goldman, whether O.J. did it or not? Was that depraved?
No.
"The available evidence from the crime, and the available information about the person believed to have committed it [O.J.], doesn't distinguish it from other domestic homicides," Welner says. "What distinguishes it are dramatic pictures shown to the public and a tragic case of a beautiful woman losing her life, along with a person trying to do her a favor, and a celebrity defendant."
More than 25,000 people (most from the United States but others from a total of more than 50 countries) have taken the online survey. Welner thinks the Depravity Scale, if adopted by legislatures or by court systems, could lead to a standardized definition of the most serious terms, eliminating the dangers of jurors being unreasonably swayed, one way or another, by a particular crime.
The scale "is a very important clinical tool to evaluate a crime," says Vernon J. Geberth, author of "Practical Homicide Investigation," a standard reference book in the field, and a retired commander in the New York City police department. "Most psychologists testify for the defense and come up with some sort of apology for some of most outrageous conduct. But some of these people can't be handled like that. Some people, some things, are just evil."
It turns out people agree in staggering numbers.
Regardless of race, age, gender, religious belief or political party, 99 percent of all respondents who have taken the survey agree that "actions that cause grotesque suffering," "intent to emotionally traumatize" and "actions that prolong suffering," are depraved and, therefore, worthy of the most severe legal punishment available.
Red state, blue state, rich, poor, black, white, all agreed. Victims of violent crime agree with people who haven't been victimized. Death penalty advocates agree with abolitionists.
But wait a minute -- here's where things get bizarre.
