Joel Steinberg Murder Trial - Paper Example

The examination of the 1966 article, Case Study of the Joel Steinberg Murder Trial, in which a young lawyer with a promising career opportunity, Steinberg, was accused of murdering a child he adopted at their home. The New York City television broadcasted the trial live. Consequently, Americans had a chance to view all the court proceedings, thus, making the case famous. To elaborate, the six-year-old Lisa Steinberg died of brain injuries, and a group of activists accused her adoptive father of beating her resulting to her suffering and subsequent death. As a judge, Steinberg can be convicted and jailed for life imprisonment or murder.

Is your time best spent reading someone else’s essay? Get a 100% original essay FROM A CERTIFIED WRITER!

Order now

Analysis of the Case Study

While the accused and the complainant were arguing in the courtroom, defendant stated that the couple may have suffered from the effect of cocaine, thus, overdosing their adoptive daughter. Notably, lawyer, Joel B. Steinberg argued that the judges should understand that the cause of the death of the young Lisa resulted from smoking cocaine. However, Ms. Nussbaum, during her testimony at the court, reported that she and Mr. Steinberg were cocaine freebasers, thus, causing addiction and overdosing of their young daughter (Conforti, 2015). Defendant argued that in a family in which all the parents smoke cocaine, the rate of addiction is high and consuming the drugs becomes more important than taking food. Moreover, the children in the affected family are likely to consume the excess amount of the drug resulting in damage to the brain (Conforti, 2015). However, according to drug experts, the behaviors of the cocaine addict are more chilling and destructive.

Notably, the addicted parents can exhibit bad behaviors which can cause domestic violence, the attraction bad activities, loss of values, and neglect and abuse of children. Therefore, according to judges, the smoking of cocaine must not be used an excuse for abuse or neglect for children (Conforti, 2015). As a matter of fact, parents must all the times work to improve the life of their children and protect them from harm. Notably, New York television executive managers said that Steinberg trial was compelling and had attracted the attention of the public and other media broadcast to educate citizens about the important of protecting children (Conforti, 2015).

According to the prosecutor, Steinberg struck Lisa more than three times on the head, making her unconscious, and then escaped to a friends place for dinner. On coming back, they smoked cocaine together with Nussbaum before calling for an emergency help. Lisa dies after three days while lying helplessly on the floor. As a judge, the accused can be jailed under US laws that provide different options for sentencing people who are found guilty of murder and child abuse (Conforti, 2015). After conviction, the judge can decide which option of penalty to give the accused. First, the judge can sentence the convict to death. Notably, federal law requires parents to take care of their children and offer them adequate care. Second, the accused can be sentenced to life imprisonment without parole. As a matter of fact, the jury can send the accused to prison with a minimal amount of years depending on his life expectancy that would enable him to stay in jail the rest of the years.

However, the latest national opinion indicates that most Americans are against death penalty and prefer alternative forms of sentencing that would guarantee punishment and protection. The public opinion is, however, contrary to the convention of wisdom that Americans wholeheartedly support the death penalty (Tonry, 2014). Therefore, the best form of punishment apart from murder is sentencing the convict without parole. Furthermore, the sentencing option for child abuse and murder are common among different states in America (Tonry, 2014). As a result, judges can not conduct themselves in a wrongful manner by giving incorrect or a bias sentence.

Although the sentencing guidelines varies by jurisdictions, the United Constitution, the supreme law of the land, states that all the sentences delivered in United States courts must conform to the requirement of the constitution. Moreover, the Constitution sets the mandates, then, delegates the majority of the policy-making role to the states (Tonry, 2014). Therefore, the sentence granted to Steinberg must follow New York State policy. Furthermore, before pronouncing the judgment, the jury must issue findings of the facts and guilty verdict. In addition, the presiding judge must allow the probation department to conduct pre-sentence investigation which will give more support for the court to deliver fair sentence (Tonry, 2014).

To avoid discretion, the jury must widely consult from states sentencing guidelines which incorporate various factors into a single formula. Consequently, the judge would be able to give uniform and fair sentencing within a jurisdiction against the accused. Moreover, Judges can jail Steinberg under the mandatory sentencing statutes that remove the judges discretion in most cases (Tonry, 2014). Importantly, the mandatory sentencing statutes spell out the automatic requirement for minimum period of incarceration for serious crimes such as murder.

The two options for sentencing individuals involved in child murder include indeterminate and determinate sentences. Notably, the indeterminate sentence is whereby a judge sends the murderer into prison for the unknown period (Woetzel, 2017). On the short end, the sentencing period lasts for one to three years while the longer time of an indeterminate sentence can last between five to fifty years. Notably, the minimum period is determined by the presiding judge. Conversely, the determinate form of sentencing involves serving of the full time pronounce by the judge. However, the accused can be granted the time off by the presiding jury depending on his or her behavior (Woetzel, 2017). For instance, if the accused has reformed her character during the sentencing period, and the states rules and regulations allow the authority to grant him time off based on changed behaviors; the administration can inform the judge to release the accused (Woetzel, 2017).

Conclusion

Because Steinberg was found guilty of murder and child abuse, and the United States does not have a specific guideline to sentencing murderers, the judge can give the accused life imprisonment instead of death penalty. First, death penalty would be too harsh owing to the fact that the public opinion do not supports it. Second, the evidence presented in the court of law was based in scientific analysis and not physical witnesses who testified what they actual observed. Furthermore, the federal law and states regulations recommend different forms of punishments ranging from a death sentence, life sentence or determinate and indeterminate sentence. Lastly, life sentence would give the accused time to reform his character and serve as an example to the society. The convict can engage in education purposes on public forum which aim at informing Americans the important of protecting children.

References

Conforti, J. A. (2015). Lizzie Borden on Trial. University Press of Kansas.

Tonry, M. (2014). Remodeling American Sentencing: A TenStep Blueprint for Moving Past Mass Incarceration. Criminology & Public Policy, 13(4), 503-533.

Woetzel, R. K. (2017). Comments on the Nuremberg Principles and Conscientious Objection with Special Reference to War Crimes. The Catholic Lawyer, 16(3), 7