top of page

Criminal Podcast

  • Writer: haruhiambernoaki
    haruhiambernoaki
  • Feb 21, 2016
  • 2 min read

Episode One: Animal Instincts Before I listened to the podcast, I read the small excerpt that gave a brief summary of it. It read that a women was dead laying in her blood at the bottom of her stairs and that her husband was convicted of the murder. Just by this I was intrigued to continue into the podcast. As I listened, I learned about the case against Michael Peterson. There were many factors that pointed to a guilty verdict. But then Larry Pollard, a friendly neighbor and lawyer, was just as intrigued in the case and began an investigation. His investigation led to the theory that an owl had attacked Kathleen Peterson outside and as she walked inside she feel at the foot of the stairs and died. He continued by backing up his theory with the fact that there were owl feathers and how owls are known to attack the head in the right rear corner, similar to where Kathleen Peterson was attacked. I thought this theory was possible but not quite sure if it was the actual story. In all honestly I do not know really happened because the "evidence" for both are valid. Then they introduce the fact that in the 1500s animals we're given the same ramifications as humans when regarding crimes. I was quite skeptical about this information knowing that animals do not think and act like us humans therefore treating them like humans is somewhat unconventional.

Episode Nine: That Crime of the Month This started out to be a ridiculous theory. Can Premenstrual Symptoms really attribute to criminal and heinous acts? The podcast opened with a case about a women that murdered her coworker. Her defense what that she was having severe Premenstrual Syndrome and got off with probation. Then the podcast introduces Barbara Newman, a prosecution attorney, who believes PMS being admitted as a defense would be more hurtful and helpful to women. She believes it would question women's rights to have and raise children and provoke assault on women. I agree with Newman to think that PMS as a psychiatric diagnosis is dangerous. This could lead to undermining and questioning women's capability entirely. I also strongly believe that PMS does not and cannot be the reason or factor to commit murder. Anything can be considered “PMSing”, even I among friends jokingly saying things like “I’m not in the mood, I’m PMSing.” This monthly occurrence can lead to numerous fake defenses. How can this defense be proven to be “severe”? Unless there is a sure way to prove that someone was out of the right mind during their premenstrual period, I do not think it is a valid defense nor should it be considered one. I believe that this could result is severe prejudice against women. Can this lead to questioning whether or not women can hold important jobs like machine operators and piloting. The podcast states the science has backed it up, putting PMS in the "big book of mental disorders" the DSM5 but whether or not the public opinion will side with it is unsure.


 
 
 

Comentarios


Featured Posts
Check back soon
Once posts are published, you’ll see them here.
Recent Posts
Archive
Search By Tags
Follow Us
  • Facebook Basic Square
  • Twitter Basic Square
  • Google+ Basic Square
bottom of page