Ibn-thamas Vs. United States Criminal Law Case Study
Business Finance
Landmark Case Review
I will be providing a example on how the case that I provided should be done. thank you!!!
Example:
U.S. v. Pohlot, 827 F.2d 889 (1987) Eddy Monduy, BS
February 14th, 2019
Questioned Posed: May evidence of a defendant’s mental abnormality be admissible to prove the defendant’s lack of specific intent to commit an offense?
Holding: The United States Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit held that concepts in the nature of affirmative defenses are precluded by the 1984 Federal Insanity Defense Reform Act. It included diminished capacity, partially diminished capacity, diminished capacity defense, diminished responsibility (or also known as partial responsibility), and the diminished responsibility defense. The Third Circuit Court also added to this list the use of psychiatric evidence regarding the defendant’s subconscious motivation.
History: In 1985, Stephen Pohlot, a successful pharmacist and private investor, was indicted on five counts of using interstate commerce facilities, such as a telephone, in the commission of murder for hire and one count of conspiring to commit the offense. Pohlot’s wife had previously obtained a court order removing Pohlot from their home, filing for divorce and freezing Pohlot’s assets. Pohlot proceeded to hire a hitman arranging the murder of his wife. Pohlot contacts George Neustadt, a friend and business associate of Pohlot, and asked if he knew of anyone that could arrange a murder. Neustadt then called Michael Selkow, who at the time had become a government informant, explained what Pohlot wanted to arrange and Selkow informs him that he would bring a killer from Italy. These conversations and proceeding meetings among all parties were tape-recorded by the FBI. In order to slow down the process of the investigation due to personal matters, Selkow meets with Pohlot making up a story that he had doubts about the Italian hitman and that he though his telephone might be bugged. The FBI agents working this case suspected Selkow of planning on throwing authorities off track by creating a phone call tape where Pohlot expressed his desire to cancel the murder. This was all planned out previously by Selkow and Pohlot. The FBI arrested Pohlot and Neustadt the next day and eventually arrested Selkow on charges of obstruction of justice.
At trial, Pohlot’s defense based primarily on the affirmative defense of insanity. These claims were concentrated on the entire experience being a fantasy and an unrealistic attempt to overcome an inability to deal with his wife’s abuse. Pohlot brought forth many examples of the abuse by his wife. Pohlot testified that his wife had broken his thumb by crashing a coffee pot down on it, threatened him with a hunting knife and shot him in the stomach. Pohlot claimed that his psychological inability to respond after his wife shot him, led him to the murder plot. The court permitted Pohlot’s counsel to argue to the jury that Pohlot’s mental abnormality indicated a lack of mens rea. The Third Circuit Court held that the statutory provision preventing the defense of mental disease or defect other than the affirmative defense of insanity, do not prevent the use of mental disease or defect evidence in proving lack of mens rea. The Third Circuit said that the use of mental disease or defect evidence to disprove mens
rea, is therefore not a defense at all but merely a rule of evidence. The Court did agree with Pohlot’s defense that the 1984 Federal Insanity Defense Reform Act did not preclude the defendant from introducing evidence of mental abnormality to disprove an element of the crime under the mens rea model.
