De la caricia al puñal. Dos casos de parricidios en Rosario (1874/1898)
Fecha
2006-12
Autores
Título de la revista
ISSN de la revista
Título del volumen
Editor
Universidad Nacional de Rosario. Facultad de Humanidades y Artes. Centro de Estudios Sobre Diversidad Cultural
Resumen
Descripción
Los casos judiciales analizados permiten observar diversas estrategias utilizadas en el espacio penal y en el ámbito de la medicina legal a la hora de evaluar casos de locos/delincuentes. Se examina el problema de la responsabilidad, donde se repasa el tratamiento dado a la locura por la legislación, la competencia de peritos/médicos en el examen del procesado y el fundamento de las sentencias judiciales. Se analizan los discursos implicado en los casos, distinguiendo entre voces inteligentes -discursos que emanan de funcionario poseedores de una palabra “autorizada” (jueces, fiscales) o que ejercen una profesión reconocida (abogados, médicos) -y voces especialistas -la figura del “peirto”como intérprete indiscutido en virtud de la posesión de un saber especializado -que emiten juicio sobre el loco/delincuente. Se analiza el castigo que le correspondió a cada cual: por “peligroso”-según el paradigma positivista que mide la responsabilidad por el grado de saludo de que gozaba la persona al momento del crimen- Bustos, sufrió el internamiento; por “culpable”-según el paradigma clásico para el cual la responsabilidad depende del grado de conocimiento y libertad- Boyer mereció la pena última.
The judicial cases analyzed allow to consider diverse strategies used in the criminal space and the medicine-legal space to evaluate cases of mads/criminals. Examined the problem of responsibility, revising: the treatment given that madness by legislation; the competence of experts/doctors to evaluate accusers; and the foundation of sentences. Analyze speeches involved in the cases, differencing between “intelligent” voices -speeches come from officials with an “authorized” word (judges, prosecutors) or with a recognized profession (lawyers, doctors)- and “specialists” voices -the figure of “experts” like the unquestionable interpreter because of the possession of an specific knowledge- who emit judgment about the mads/criminals. Consider the punishment which correspond to each other: by “dangerous” -according to the positive paradigm which measures the responsibility by the grade of health to enjoy the person at the moment of the crime- Bustos suffered the internment; by “guilty” -according to the classic paradigm which measures the responsibility by the degree of knowledge and freedom- Boyer deserved the maxim punishment.
The judicial cases analyzed allow to consider diverse strategies used in the criminal space and the medicine-legal space to evaluate cases of mads/criminals. Examined the problem of responsibility, revising: the treatment given that madness by legislation; the competence of experts/doctors to evaluate accusers; and the foundation of sentences. Analyze speeches involved in the cases, differencing between “intelligent” voices -speeches come from officials with an “authorized” word (judges, prosecutors) or with a recognized profession (lawyers, doctors)- and “specialists” voices -the figure of “experts” like the unquestionable interpreter because of the possession of an specific knowledge- who emit judgment about the mads/criminals. Consider the punishment which correspond to each other: by “dangerous” -according to the positive paradigm which measures the responsibility by the grade of health to enjoy the person at the moment of the crime- Bustos suffered the internment; by “guilty” -according to the classic paradigm which measures the responsibility by the degree of knowledge and freedom- Boyer deserved the maxim punishment.
Palabras clave
Crimen, Locura, Pena de muerte, Degeneración, Locos/delincuentes, Crime, Madness