By reading the article presented, the reader will develop an understanding of why, in most criminal cases, so much effort is exerted to provide charater profiles for juries. It sets out, through scientific and empirical data, to show how important it is to understand and consider what triggered a criminal to act. Even though extensive effort is used for such phenomena, the authors conclude through the articles that such evidence is rarely allowed to offset sentencing. The reader should develop a strong consciousness of why this is such a debatable issue, but will have the opportunity to understand both sides of the contentions. It is important for people understand the importance of the specific points, but it is equally important to get a full grasp of why the state and prosecution are against presenting such evidence to the jury. 

Through these article, the reader will understand that even though such evidence is not always allowed, it is very important for defense attorneys to uncover such information and put every effort into convincingly conveying it to the jury. If admitted, such information can be very powerfu and resourceful. Therefore, it is import for researchers to continue striving to have its bases understood. People are afraid of what they donÕt know and understand and clarity of theses issue may be detrimental for those being sentenced using these circumstances. For these reasons, I chose to research readings on this topic, and I implore others who reads this bibliography to continue my endeavors. 

The Cry of a Child Left Unanswered: PennsylvaniaÕs Treatment of Battered Children who Kill their Parents, 98 Dick. L. Rev. 85 (1993). 

Human Biology and Criminal Responsibility: Free Will or Free Ride?, 137 U. Pa. L. Rev. 615 (1988). 

Hypnotic memories and civil sexual abuse trials, 45 Vand. L. Rev. 1185 (1992). 

Cognitive Dissonance: Have insanity defenses and civil commitment reforms made a difference?, 39 Vill. L. Rev. 71 (1994). 

Black Rage and the Criminal Law: A Principle Approach to a Polarized Debate, 143 U. Pa. L. Rev. 2251 (1995). 

Black Rage: The Illegitimacy of a Criminal Defense, 29 J. Marshall L. Rev. 205 (1995). 

Lies Damned Lies, and Statistics'? Psychological Syndrome Evidence in the courtroom after Daubert, 71 Ind. L.J. 753 (1996). 

Nonconfrontational Killings and the Appropriate Use of Battered Child Syndrome Testimony: The Hazards of Subjective Self-Defense and the Merits of Partial Excuse, 45 Case W. Res. L. Rev. 185 (1994). 

Harmless error in the penalty phase of a capital cases: A Doctrine misunderstood and misapplied, 28 Ga. L. Rev. 125 (1993). 

Novel Theories of Criminal Defense based upon the Toxicity of the Social Environment: Urban Psychosis, Television Intoxication, and Black Rage, 74 N.C. L. Rev. 731 (1996). 

Affirmative Action and the Criminal Law, 68 U. Colo. L. Rev. 841 (1997). 

Inflicting Payne on Oklahoma: The use of Victim Impact evidence during the Sentencing Phase of capital cases, 45 Okla. L. Rev. 589 (1992). 

Empirical Research on the Insanity Defense and Attempted Reforms: Evidence Toward Informed Policy, Department of Psychology, Sinclair College, Dayton, Ohio. Unpublished manuscript present to the Criminal Law class at the University of Dayton School of Law. 

Sentencing, Other Dispositions & Treatment, 21 Mental & Physical Disability L. Rep. 34 (1997). 

Women's Annotated Legal Bibliography, 3 Cardozo Women's L.J. 135 (1996).

This article explores the legitimacy of childhood circumstances through the eyes of a Criminal Defense attorney. Abbe Smith examines several cases tried while she was a protector and deliberated on the manner and method through which she was able to keep evidence out that offered a legitimate reason for why the defendant reacted in such a manner. Through these recollections she struggled with the fact that had the evidence been introduced to the jury they most likely would have agreed to a lesser sentence. Now that she is a defense attorney she understands the need for such evidence and attempts, through this article, to portray that need through the eyes of both the prosecution and the defense. 

Attorney Smith looked at this issue through such criminal charges as: crimes of passion, despair, and self-defense. She also acknowledged how both prosecutors and defense attorneys combine the events of a circumstance in order to present their case most favorable to their client. This was portrayed by giving an account of each of the cases presented from both sides evaluating in which instances the childhood circumstances should be admitted. In her conclusion Attorney Smith left this vital question of admissibility to the "Social Responsibility" that we are all accountable to. Those who commit crimes are accountable to society and society is accountable to criminals who react as a result of mistreatment. 

Attorney Smith does a good job setting the scenario for the circumstances that may occur, but I feel that she had trouble taking a real stance. I can only imagine how difficult it would be to take a stance on such an issue, but I don"t believe a solution can ever be drawn if authors such as this one simply "ride the fence". However, it was very helpful to feel her struggle through her attempt to show how she was affected by being on both the prosecution and defense. Overall the attempt was well needed and the outcome was innovating. 

This article examines the proÕs and conÕs of the use of the battered child syndrome defense in Pennsylvania. The article explores the increasing rate at which child abuse is occurring and why it is necessary to claim that a retaliation against parents for such abuse should be classified as self-defense. Recently, parricide, the killing of oneÕs mother or father, has become a come result of child abuse and Pennsylvania is skeptical about whether child abuse can be classified as a defense similar to that of self-defense. The author attempts to answer this question by emphasizing the need for expert testimony to explain to courts and juries in Pennsylvania, that when a battered child kills his abuser it is, in fact, self-defense. 

This article is, in essence, the authors plea to the Pennsylvania court system to reconsider its view on admitting expert testimony to explain how a child killing his abuser should be self-defense. Therefore, the ultimate argument is that if parricide is a result of childhood abuse and classified as a self-defense then the child is not guilty of murder. 

This author does an excellent job of setting up the issue with regards to the need of the battered child syndrome to be considered as a type of self-defense. He highlights the present laws in Pennsylvania and compares them to the injustices that are created by leaving the law as it stands. His writing style was powerful and his position was clearly stated and appreciated. 

This is an interesting article discussing the need to consider human genetics and biology when examining why a person behaves in a certain manner. The article concentrates on the fact that most defenses are grounded in the presumption that a personÕs behavior is a product of free will. However, this author indicates that there are other considerations, such as human development and traits that can also explain why a person performed a particular act. 

The article examines how hormonal imbalances and genetic abornomalities are just a few biologically based circumstances that could be attributed to crime. In addition, the author provides strong evidence to support the utilization of theses factors in criminal sentencing. However, her suggestions for introducing these factors would be to a defense attorneyÕs detriment because it would create a higher standard for insanity, and thereby would hold those people not classified as totally insane, to the same criminal responsibility as their peers. 

The author did a good job expressing her passion for and belief in hwe idea of using biologically based research to explain how abnormalities effect criminal behavior. However, it seemed apparent that she intended to discredit the phenomena of psychologically based reasons in the process. This would have negative affect on those who support the latter. 

This article introduces the phenomena of hypnotic memories through case studies. The author describes situations where people have been so traumatized by their sexual abuse that they block the entire incident out of their memories. However, when memories are restored through hypnotic measures the trustworthiness of the recreated event is challenged. 

The circumstances presented in the case studies reveal strong support for the introduction of hypnosis as such evidence. They allow the reader to learn first hand how these procedures take place and what can be uncovered in the process. However, the overriding debate of the admissibility of this information is the underlying theme. 

This approach to conveying this topic stimulates thought in favor of its use. This was very effective because the subject is viewed negatively and downplays the intended use of psychotherapy. 

Over the several decades the law related to mental health law has drastically changed. This article examines those changes with respect to reforms as an attempt to evaluate their effectiveness. The author explores the legal changes that have taken place and concerns as to how they effect the criminal law reforms and what changes can be made to make those effects more positive. 

The insanity defense has taken many positive and negative turns as it relates to both mental health and criminal law. The main issue addressed in this article is how will the mentally ill be required to satisfy their criminal responsibility for their harmful conduct. Several suggestions were made and reviewed in the article regarding the civil and criminal commitment and how they should be implemented based on the severity of the illness. These suggestions were critiqued for their successes and failures as an attempt to combat associated problems. 

The author made very sound conclusions that were directly related to research presented in the article. He effectively concealed any biases that may have been present and gave a through synopsis of the relative research. This was well appreciated because the issues was clearly presented and I was able to form my own opinion about its relevance. 

This article extensively explores the concept of Black Rage and its use as a criminal defense. The author defines black rage as a mental disturbance caused by long-term exposure to societal racism. He explains that racial stresses occur from subtle racism which leads to feelings of inferiority and resentment. These emotions can ultimately push a black person into a state of depression, grief, and rage. This article explores the utilitarian and retributivist view of Black Rage. It also explores whether black rage should be classified as a justification or an excuse for behaviors that are arguably out of the control of the accused. 

The author compares black rage to an Insanity Defense as an attempt to have it considered as a similar defense under the criminal law. He examines how black rage can satisfy all the tests required to prove an insanity defense. Bringing this to the required level of satisfaction reveals that black rage may, at least in some instances, past the strictest of insanity test and should be regarded in the same manner. However, there are still arguments against such a defense and also an unresolved issue of social responsibility for reactions to racial stress. 

This author did an impressive analysis of the black rage defense and how it represents similar attributes to an insanity defense. He established its relevancy in an objective fashion while still acknowledging that it has social flaws. 

This article explores how the Black Rage defense should be compared to the battered child syndrome and the battered women syndrome. The article seeks to establish a rational psychological basis for black rage in general while attempting to invalidate the defense by showing that the difference between it and other self-defenses is that it seeks to excuse an entire race for oppression and racism that may not have a resulted on the victim. The author also argues that black rage would create self-help, vigilantism and conflicts between other races if it is accepted as a defense. 

The author goes into extensive detail with regard to how the traditional defenses, such as self-defense, insanity, post traumatic stress disorder, battered women syndrome and battered child syndrome are all defenses to particular instances that are the direct result of actions caused by the victim. Black rage, on the other hand, results when a black person reaches a certain point and his victim may be oblivious to his circumstances. Therefore, the augment is that the person claiming the black rage defense is not defending himself from his victim, but from the society that put him in the situation. 

This author portrayed a very opinionated view and took an obvious stance against the black rage defense. It was clear from her writing that she had no personal experience as it relates to what the defense intends to correct. It is fortunate that there are other articles that give a more objective stance to this defense. 

This article examines how the standard of admissibility for scientific evidence has changed as a result of the Daubert decision. Previously, the standard for admitting such evidence was grounded in a standard that survived the Federal Rules of Evidence. These changes have significantly effected the use of evidence from the social sciences, including those which form a social framework. 

This allows defense attorneys to introduce testimony from expert witnesses regarding psychologically based defenses. These defenses include the traditional defenses associated with syndromes such as battered women syndrome and rape trauma syndrome. Since this is a new standard, the article attempts to project its effectiveness in relation to these defenses.

This article explores how self-defense can legitimately be pleaded in a situation where the killing occurred in a nonconfrontational setting. Such an incident occurs when the battered child defense introduced and supported by expert testimony explains the childÕs perception at the time of the killing. However, The article argues that the battered child syndrome should not be used to establish self-defense because it creates a subjective standard and that it undermines the important societal polices served by the defense. 

The author does an extensive analysis of the self-defense doctrine and how that doctrine has been manipulated to apply to situations where someone kills another when they are sleeping or in any situation where there is not a belief of imminent danger to the defendant. The author acknowledges the fact that such crimes should have a defense but disagrees with it falling under the doctrine of self-defense. 

This was an enjoyable article to read. The author, however did seem to take a stance in favor of his opinion, but still presented the facts for the reader to make their own determination. This was well appreciated because I did not feel like I had to decipher through his opinionated view to uncover the real issue. 

This article addresses various issues related to the harmless error doctrine. The specific question raised is whether a juryÕs refusal to admit the defense"s mitigating evidence resulting in a constitutional error, should be considered a harmless error. In analyzing these issue, the author specifically considered a number of factors. Some of those factors included: the history of applying the harmless error doctrine to constitutional errors; the meaning of the terminology that an error does not "contribute" to a verdict; when an error should be considered reversible as opposed to harmless error; and how the harmless error doctrine effects the penalty phase. 

The harmless error doctrine was created to avoid reversals for all errors made during a trial. The doctrine made errors reversible only if there was some substantial wrong or miscarriage that would substantially effect the outcome of the trial. This effects the penalty phase since the error that resulted had to create a reasonable possibility that it might have contributed to the conviction set forth. The author agues that such an approach is not 

appropriate for the penalty phase and should be used sparingly. He makes this argument based on the fact that the framework effected by the errors is too invasive of the entire process to be effective. 

The author did an excellent job presenting the research concerning this topic. However, I feel he didn't take a strong personal stance on why harmless error should not be used. The article would have been more convincing if he would have actually analyzed the results of the Supreme Court decisions and projected it toward real situations. This would have strengthened his position on the inappropriate use of harmless error in the penalty phase. 

This author did an impressive job interpreting how such a standard of admissibility could enhance the utilization of psychological evidence. He established relevancy in an objective manner without overlooking the fact that such evidence is not highly favored. 

This article explores, through case studies, the legitimacy of criminal defenses such as urban psychosis, television intoxication and black rage. The article allows the reader to understand the significance of the defenses through actual occurrences. It first examines the traditional defense theories and does a comparative analysis on differences between them and these so called  "novel" theories. Then it explains why it is important to understand why defendants try to make claims based on these theories. Even though these theories are quiet different from the traditional defenses, the author believes that the court system should consider the realities of society that may be responsible for the defendantÕs criminal behavior. 

The article goes on to explore the policy implications that challenge the exceptability of these defenses. Finally, the article distinguishes between when such a defense should be justified to mitigate punishment and when that defendant should be required to pay a debt to society. However, according to the author, it is very rare for the court system to entertain the introduction of such defenses. 

Through this article, the author attempts to show that there is a strong need for the courts to allow for the introduction of societal circumstances. However, he seems to struggle with which instances should be relevant to the defense. This is an understandable struggle, but it makes the article seem like there is no consistency with the theories he has introduced and when they should be implemented. 

This article presents arguments in favor of implementing the same objective of affirmative action that are used in employment and education, into criminal law. The author defines what affirmative action is and discusses how its implementation in criminal law would positively effect African Americans. The author believes that this approach will help preserve the future of African Americans by keeping them in society and out of incarceration. 

The arguments presented indicate that the purpose for the creation of affirmative action is almost more prevalent in criminal law than any other area. However, these arguments present constitutional issues. The author admits that the Supreme Court would never favor such a proposition regardless to its projected results. 

This author displays a very opinionated biased approach to the implantation of affirmative action in criminal law. It was clear that he felt very strongly about his suggestions but such a stance is probably to powerful for such a controversial issue. 

This article takes an extensive look at cases that support the idea that victims have as much right to introduce evidence reflecting their harm, as defendants have rights to introduce evidence mitigating their moral guilt. These cases were a result of the victim rights which was aimed at enhancing the role of crime victims in the criminal justice process. The author critical evaluates the pro and cons of using the now admissible 'victim impact evidence"nd how they affect the death sentencing. 

He also effectively analyzed how prosecutors can abuse the use of such evidence by preying on reluctant family members to testify in favor of death sentences. In addition, he indicated ways the defense could use the evidence to strengthen its argument for mitigating the defendant's moral guilt. While keeping these components in mind, the author concluded the article by addressing the constitutional issues that are involved in introducing the victim impact evidence. 

The author did a very good job of being objective in this controversial matter. He provided information and analyzed there effects for both the prosecution and the defense. He even attempted to show that the implementation of such evidence would likely increase the amount of death sentences granted by juries because their attention would be diverted by considering the victim's family members. This was an appropriate tactic to deliver information since there was a strong overtone suggesting that the author favored the admission of the evidence. 

The authors of this article present a complete review of the concepts presented by the insanity defense through empirical research. They accomplish this by defining the insanity defense, attempting to expel negative myths related to its function and by explaining how the ÒGuilty But Mentally IllÓ plea could be a method by which the insanity defense would help and not simply set people free. This was supported by statistical findings, some of which were used in past reforms and some of which were used as recommendations for future reforms. 

The article also addresses the effects caused by changing the burden of persuasion of an insanity defense from the state to the defendant. This change was highly supported by the mental health field and did not seem to affect the results provided by jurors when the defense is introduced. In fact, it resulted in fewer cases introducing the defense. 

This article examines several cases and circumstances addressing very controversial issues arising from the passage of the Sexually Dangerous Person Act by the Minnesota supreme court. The act bases commitment of sexual assailants on clear and convincing evidence that there is a high probability the defendant will engage in harmful sexual conduct in the future. The court also limited the scope of evidence that may be considered. 

This issue is controversial because it attempts to classify sex offenders. The article addresses these concerns as well as constitutional concerns that arise when dealing with this issue. It also explores the history of sex offenders as an attempt to establish detrimental effects by this act and acts similar in nature. 

The author provided effective case summaries attributed to this issue, but failed to conclude whether the courtÕs approach was effective or detrimental to society. He effectively considers alternative methods to approach this issue and even addresses life situations which would be substantially effected as a result. In light of this, the article would have been more persuasive if the aforementioned considerations were given. 

This bibliography contained numerous case summaries that directly relate to criminal defenses. The article discusses relative issues that make women susceptible to carrying out a criminal act and therefore, needing a criminal defense. The cases involve incidents related to battery, rape, child abuse etc. 

The bibliography serves as an excellent reference tool for information to build or support a defense involving the aforementioned areas. The cases included reflect a board spectrum of opinions and establishes positive reinforcement supported by legal findings. They also address many issues related to constitutional rights that may inadvertently affect a criminal charge.