March 6. 2012Dan White “The Twinkie Defense” Nov.
27. 1978LINDSEY. ROBERT. “DAN WHITE.
KILLER OF SAN FRANCISCO MAYOR. A SUICIDE. ” The New York Times. The New York Times. 22 Oct.
1985. Web. 06 White was a Conservative supervisor in San Francisco CA. convicted of the slayings of George Moscone and homosexual Supervisor Harvey Milk 25 old ages ago. The jury stated how Dan White was drugged up on Twinkies. which made sugar travel through his arterias and drove him into a homicidal craze.
Peoples who did non believe this “Twinkie defense” held marks stating “Eat a Twinkie. perpetrate a slaying. ” Most believed thatWhite killed these two because he could non acquire his occupation back felt as if he was betrayed. Common folks thought it was a premeditated slaying since he put an excess 10 slugs into his pockets. White was merely convicted of manslaughter 8 old ages and prison.
When he got out he moved off from San Francisco merely to come back a few old ages subsequently and kill himself ; Many say he could non populate with the guilt. Valentine. Carol A. “The Insanity of the Insanity Defense. ” The Insanity of the Insanity Defense ( 1996 ) .
Print Valentine writes about the defence and how psychiatrics diagnosed it one stated that “Diminished capacity” defence. where psychiatric testimony is used to reason that the accused. although clearly sane. still should non be held responsible for his Acts of the Apostless because a “mental condition” diminished his capacity to harbour the condemnable purpose required for strong belief.
Meaning that at the clip because of all the debris nutrient he had consumed his head frame was non that of a world province. So because he had consumed so much debris nutrient taking up to the slayings so the truly could non state. University of Wisconsin Professor of Criminal Law Frank says that “”In general. it is non at all evident that head-shrinkers know any more than does the layperson about whether the suspect had purpose to kill when the act doing decease was committed. ” All that they truly knew was that he was hyped up on debris nutrient. they couldn’t province whether they knew he had purpose to kill or non.
A Remington It went on to oppugn whether psychopathology can find a defendant’s purpose at the clip the offense was committed. and concluded it could non. Douglas Schmidt “Behind “the Twinkie Defense” [ by Paul Krassner ] . Statement from Chief Defense Attorney Douglas Schmidt “I don’t think Twinkies were of all time mentioned in testimony.
” He believes that he got of merely because he had a power of authorization over most. “Dr. Martin Blinder. ” . MD. Web.
06 Mar. 2012. Former city manager of San Anselmo Scallen. Eileen A. “The Ethos of Expert Witnesses. ” The Ethos of Expert Witnesses: Confusing the Admissibility.
Sufficiency and Credibility of Expert Testimony. 1998. Web. Blinder who was white’s head-shrinkers says. “It’s absurd to believe that 12 in-between category householder jurymans would give a slayer even a partial base on balls on the footing of what he ate the dark before.
”Blinder is angry at the fact that what you “claim” you have eaten can even but put in forepart of a jury. He was seeking to unclutter his name through all the slander they put him through merely by him stating that it’s a possibility that what you eat can do alterations in your organic structure. He did stat nevertheless that White was incapable of forethought slaying. The chief focal point was diminished capacity. He besides stated that Dan White “wanted to hold some apprehension as to what was traveling on. but because of his mental province.
he could non treat this information in a constructive manner with deadly effects. Another Doctor. Dr. Solomon invoked footings of “uni-polar depressive reaction”-to define Dan White’s mental province. every bit good as explicating analogously “in laymen’s footings “during cross-examination that the suspect “was kind of on automatic pilot” during the shots.
Dr. Solomon testified that Dan White “did non hold a mental capacity. to maturely and meaningfully premeditate and deliberate. ”Co-Counsel Stephen Scherr “Against the Twinkie Defense” Interview “The Dan White ( Harvey Milk Murder ) Trial ( 1979 ) “It thrusts me brainsick. ” said co-counsel Scherr. who suspects the simplistic account provides screen for those who want to minimise and trivialise what happened.
If he of all time strangles one of the people who says “Twinkie Defense” to him. Scherr said. it won’t be because he’s merely eaten a Twinkie. Defense Attorney Schmidt “Closing statement on the case”He stated how White was guilty stating that the lone issue was the grade ofduty. Stating how White was “a good adult male.
a adult male of duty. but there was something atrocious incorrect with that man” . He claimed that “White had suffered from “diminished capacity” and in that province had acted in “the heat of passion which can obscure judgment” While on test. Schmidt turned the jury’s attending off from the offense itself and onto the emotional injury stating that “White had undergone since releasing his place as metropolis supervisor. “Good people. all right people.
with all right backgrounds. merely don’t putting to death people in cold blood. ” said Schmidt. “it merely doesn’t happen. and evidently some portion of him has non been presented this far.
” Schmidt says that White’s offenses had been the merchandise of frenzied depression. “a despicable biochemical change” over which white had no control Dan White was the lone individual to utilize the Twinkie defence. Defense: “The Twinkie Defense” as it became known. is synonymous with the test of Dan White. White’s legal squad took the place that Dan was enduring from a long-standing and untreated depression that diminished his capacity to separate right from incorrect.
Adept testimony by head-shrinker Dr. Martin Blinder noted White had changed his usually wellness witting diet to a diet that consisted of debris nutrient. Dr. Blinder pointed out that this alteration in diet was grounds of White’s depression. non a cause of it. This province of depression was used to set up evidences for a successful lessened capacity supplication convicting White of the lesser charge of voluntary manslaughter.
Research“Myth of the ‘Twinkie Defense’” Www. SFGate. com. Carol Pogash. 24 June 2011.
Web. 06 Mar. 2012. .
