Collaborative Post

Samantha Culbertson, Alana de Klerk, Ali Robertson

Yes, Thomas’ character was justly punished. He should have been punished, but more importantly, he should have been punished for preventative reasons, not retributive reasons. He is not blameworthy because of his mental state, and thus could not justifiably been punished by the desert theory. The desert theory would have given him the death penalty, for he killed 4 people. BUT, this punishment would not be just because his state of being was compromised by syphilis. The consequentialist theory provides accurate justification for the punishment that Richard’s character received because it was preventing harm for others including his family and the public. The man needed to be contained and watched because his actions were impulsive and aggressive, and the effects of the disease are irreversible. There is no way to undo the brain damage he has already suffered, and thus there was no way to make his moral judgment and impulse control return. Because he couldn’t control his actions, he can’t be blamed, and thus does not deserve a punishment equivalent to the crimes he committed, but for general safety and prevention, putting him in a mental hospitable is appropriate.

Richard Thomas' character was rightfully punished according to Bentham because he was being punished according the consequentialist theory. Putting Mr. Thomas in a mental institution was preventing further negative consequences so it was justified. He is potentially harmful to his family and society in general, and thus needs to be restrained in a mental institution. The death penalty would be too extreme according to Bentham because although it would prevent further harm, it would fall under the retributive theory. Thomas was not completely blameworthy since he had mental issues, so punishing him by death would be excessive and cause a lot of harm to his family as well. One of Bentham's criteria is that the punishment should not cost more than the good it is doing and the death penalty would be exactly this. Killing Mr. Thomas would cost a lot in the sense of emotional damage to his family, yet it would prevent the same consequences as simply keeping him in an institute. Ultimately though, Thomas' punishment would be justified according to Bentham because it is preventing further harm and detrimental consequences.

In agreement with Bentham, according to Beccaria’s claims about punishment, Richard Thomas’s character should have been punished.  Beccaria claims that punishment should only serve to protect a society and maintain its progress.  Therefore it should encourage public security.  Beccaria would agree that sending Mr. Thomas to a mental institution would be best.  This punishment would protect the society from the harm of Mr. Thomas’ actions while also trying to help him. 

On the other hand, Primoratz would disagree with Bentham and Beccaria.  Primoratz claims that Bentham’s theories for punishment are too harsh, don’t allow for mercy, and can wrongly punish innocent people.  Primoratz also claims that a punishment should reflect what a person deserves – the desert theory – not necessarily just what form will best benefit or protect society.  For this reason, Primoratz might disagree and say that Mr. Thomas should not have been punished because, due to mental illness, he should not be held accountable for killing those people and does not deserve to be sent to a mental institution, an often horrible place to be sent.

Although Aristotle is a supporter of desert theory and holds that it must be required that wrongful acts are punished, and although there is not a single doubt that Thomas's character's actions were wrongful, Aristotle states that there must be justice in the punishment. Abstaining from punishing a man who suffers from brain injury and thus mental illness is "decent," as Aristotle would put it, and he says that "the decent is just and better than a certain way of being just." Aristotle, then, would say that this man did not deserve to be punished.

In a perfect world, Richard Thomas’ character should have been sent to a institution, but mental hospitals would be able to provide help to men suffering from such crippling and severe cases of syphilis.  Thomas would be able to have his insanity quelled while also being able to visit with his family until he dies.  A perfect world would allow for a more just punishment.

In the real world, we believe he should be sent to a mental hospital.  We do not believe this man could go free, due to the severity of his illness and the danger he poses to society, but also do not believe he belongs in prison.  And he cannot be executed according to Ford v. Wainwright, which states that prosecutors cannot seek the death penalty for mentally ill defendants.  While mental institutions are not ideal, within practical limitation, this would be the best, most just punishment for Thomas.