Question

Consider the Patty Hearst case. She was kidnapped and brainwashed, and as a result came to “support” the cause of her captors and helped them rob a bank. Eventually, once deprogrammed, she denounced her captors and their cause. Hearst was captured in 1975 and was charged with the bank robbery and firearm charges. She was sentenced to the maximum sentence of 25 years for robbery and an additional 10 years for the use of a firearm in the commission of the robbery; however, she only served 22 months after President Carter commuted her sentence. In 2001, she was granted a presidential pardon by President Clinton. Please discuss your initial thoughts. Was Patty Hearst a victim of brainwashing (Stockholm syndrome) or a criminal? What are your thoughts of Patty Hearst only serving 22 months? Should she have served a longer sentence? Should she have escaped? If not why didn't she?

Answer 1

As we know, the Patty Hearst was not a criminal and not accused before foe any crime activity, she experienced brainwashing and occurred criminal activity but she also helped the justice system to find criminals.

I think president saw her intention rather than criminal activity this cause led him to pardon her. Any crime which occurred unintentionally give the space to perpetrator in justice system. Patty Hearst was accused as well as victim so that president provide her the chance to begin a new life.

According to me this incident is rare as the case was rarest too, If I were the president I would do as president did for her.