Part A - Scenario:

You are part of a fact finding panel for your state court system. The court has a concern over the methods used to handle persons that are mentally ill violent offenders. You are charged with selecting a modern court case (past 30 years) in which an insanity issue arose regarding a violent offender. The case may involve a Not Guilty by Reason of Insanity Plea, or it may involve a directive by the court for a sanity hearing. You may also select a case with a court consideration of idiot status was determined.

You must prepare a briefing report on the methods that were used to assess the defendant by the court in the case you selected. Discuss the outcome of the case and the mechanism that resulted in the defendant's evaluation for sanity.

In a 3-5 page position paper, respond to the following:

• Articulate the mental disorder(s) and symptoms being considered by the court in the case that you selected.
• Explain the relationship between the actions and behavior that would cause the court to remand the defendant for a mental evaluation.
• Evaluate the outcome of the case you selected in terms of the defendant, the victim, and the community.
• Critique the court's decision in the case you selected. Either:
• Support the court's correct decision, or
• Challenge the court's decision with your supported reasons.

It is critical that, when you make a statement of fact in your presentation, you cite the reference that you used to obtain the information from. Do this in the text of the paper, and then include the reference in your References page. As always, your paper will be submitted in the current edition of APA format. No abstract is required because this is a short-position paper, but a title page, reference page, and appropriate running header with page numbers are necessary.

Part B -

You are part of a citizen's watchdog committee on the circuit court in your region of the state. Recently, the state has started a mental health court, in which defendants may voluntarily enter into a treatment program instead of being prosecuted and sentenced to a prison term.

Mr. John Snodgrass was recently arrested at a local park playground while attempting to look up the skirts of little girls about 5 or 6 years old playing on the park's monkey bars. His lawyer explained that Snodgrass has pedophilic disorder or is suffering from voyeurism, but it only results in him looking at little girls-he has never touched one. The judge allowed Snodgrass to voluntarily enter a diversion program for the new mental health court.

Please respond to the following questions. You must provide meaningful feedback to the main postings of at least two of your classmates.

• What is the intent of the mental health court in general?
• Did the judge make an appropriate decision in this case, and why?
• What other alternatives would have been more appropriate for this defendant?