Murder, nowadays, is not at all rare. However, some of the classic criminological perspectives regarding these crimes are unusual. Does it make sense to consider a murder case from the point of view of the classical school and that of the positivist school? If it's an unsolved crime, for example, could this help solve it? These are the questions we will explore as we examine the brutal murder of two children in October 2012. Say no to plagiarism. Get a tailor-made essay on "Why Violent Video Games Shouldn't Be Banned"? Get Original Essay Late one Thursday in 2012, the mother of two came home to find her 6-year-old daughter and 2-year-old daughter. -old son dead in the bathtub. According to a New York Times article, "The family's nanny, Yoselyn Ortega, was [also] standing over them, cutting herself with a knife." It's been years now and the case is finally ready to go to trial with the main defense being Ortega pleading not guilty by reason of insanity. Some say that the madness is just a pretense, since Ortega was very jealous of what his boss had. Ortega had worked several jobs for a living and lived in a small apartment with his family. “In statements made to prosecutors after the murders, Ms. Ortega, now 55, said she was angry at the Krims, that they asked her to work too much and that her skin had been damaged by cleaning products which she was forced to use. usage. Did he act out of revenge or delusion?" asks the New York Times. Yet, the funny thing is that the parents of these poor children had never noticed anything wrong with Ortega, on a mental level – until that day. This it eventually became one of the main points of defense in the trial against her. So let's start with what the classical school of criminology is. The classical school has its own way of thinking and that is that human beings act by free will and are driven by the pursuit of pleasure. Cesare Beccaria was one of the founding fathers of the classical school and argued that people give up liberty and freedom in exchange for society providing them with security and that laws place restrictions on freedoms presumption of innocence should be primary and a criminal code should be written in advance. Retributive reasoning should guide the punishments that accompany a crime because the offender has harmed the rights of another person and the severity of that punishment should be limited and adapted to the seriousness of the crime. It must be certain and inflicted immediately. However, the offender must be seen as a rational thinker who weighs the crime against the benefits. It is the task of legislation to prevent crime because, for Beccaria, it is better to prevent crimes before they happen rather than punish those who commit them after the crimes have happened. How does this crime relate to classical school? Well, one of Beccaria's arguments is that the presumption of innocence should be primary, but in this situation there is no reason for a presumption of innocence. Ortega was in the bathroom with the children and was found with the children's bodies. The article does not say that he confessed, but under the guise of insanity, it is obvious that he admitted to killing them and that he did so due to his "incapacitated" state. Regarding Ortega's insanity charge, another of Beccaria's arguments was that the offender was seen as a rational thinker who weighed the consequences of the crime against the benefits. What were the benefits of this crime? What were the benefits.