Criminal Justice

CASE STUDY ANALYSIS ACCORDING TO CRIMINOLOGY SCHOOL OF THOUGHTIntroductionCriminology schoolings of archetypes symbolize to exempt the rea give-and-takes behind localizement of a abhorrence . They render to explicate different factors which could lead a person to endue a aversion considering individual personality and their environment . Greco-Roman and positivistic school of thought reach dominated criminology studies (Brown , 2004 . In this see , we will analyze the port of Dr . Harris and opposite characters recitation of Dr . Clara styleBehavior of Dr . Clara and other charactersIn this case study , it is clear there is no cardinal who is refuting that Dr Clara killed her save . However her in-laws are her defendants . They seem to agnise that their son had gone surface of marriage which is bad and their f emale barbarian in law had resulted to running over their son , which is every bit bad . When Ms . Magness argues that Clara carriage before she killed her married man was somehow unreasonable is refuted by David Harris which means that despite understanding how her junior lady in law behaved and that she was responsible for her hatred , he could unflustered defend herExplaining their behaviorPositivist school of though assert that individuals tilt to commit crime out of their will . This is based on the Darwin s and Lambroso s former premiss that individual don t have a lax will and wherefore they cannot take responsibility for their crime (Brown , 2004 . This school of thought tends to diminish individual responsibility for the crime they have committedThis model can be used to explain the behavior of Dr . Clara and that of her in-laws . The first facts that we get from this case study is that Dr . Clara clearly mute that her husband was in affair with another w oman . judgment that their family needed th! eir father , it is very unlikely that the beat out natural selection she would have done in to throw in the building similitude was to kill her husband .

This is the assumption that her in-laws are takingFrom their interpretation , Harris understands that their daughter in law had committed a crime by killing their son . However from the explanation of Mildred Harris that sometimes I think she loved him too much shows us that her assumption is that it was unlikely that she would have resulted from killing her husband . David agrees that Dr . Clara had committed a tragic mistake and his son had besides commit ted a tragic mistake but since they were mint whom he healthy understood and their characters , to him this was not a crime but preferably a mistake which was committed out of their will (Quinney , 2001However Ms . Magness an assistant district attorney thinks that Dr . Clara behavior before she killed her husband was unreasonable . She seems to point out that Dr . Clara was awar of her actions . therefore unlike the alleviation who takes that Dr . Clara commited the crime out of her will , Ms Magness interpretation of Dr . Clara behavior can be explained by the undefiled school of thought . However Gerald...If you want to get a full essay, smart set it on our website: OrderCustomPaper.com

If you want to get a full essay, visit our page: write my paper