This isn't exactly new, considering the murder was committed in 2000, but 2 weeks ago a new development occurred. What essentially happened was this man hired an accomplice to kill his adoptive parents for his inheritance. The parents' other relatives were just awarded the remains of their estate.

http://www.smh.com.au/news/national/son-confessed-after-killing-parents-for-800000/2006/07/13/1152637795242.html

http://www.news.com.au/story/0,10117,20682581-2,00.html?from=public_rss

What I would like to know is general opinion on the matter, particularly in regards to the sentencing and the rejection of the defense concerning schizophrenia and drugs. This is for a Legal Studies class and any input would be appreciated.

Thank you.

Bram...make you a deal.

I'll comment here, if you will look at a post of mine in another thread and comment also, from your youthful perspective ..k ?

Here is the article ref. (reflections on multi culturalism thread.)
http://forum.onlineopinion.com.au/thread.asp?article=5153#61946

Ok.. on your point:

The case seems to me to hinge legally on the fact that the adoptive son PLANNED the murders and obtained assistance from an accomplice.

This shows:

1/ Premeditation.
2/ Rational thinking.

Neither of which are suggestive of his being under the influence of drugs or Schizophrenia.
End :)

P.S. why not exercise that mind of your by grappling with many other issues here and putting your tuppence worth in? tell your friends also.
cheers.