[Stoat]

This particular assessment is squarely in the hands of the jury. It is not fit subject matter for expert testimony.

I would suggest that this is merely an additional tool being given to jurors, a mechanism by which levels of depravity can be measured.

Prosecutors are taking a cheap shot by bringing in phony science to intimidate jurors from exercising their independent judgment.

No one is suggesting that the jury be taken out of the picture and replaced with this scale.  It shouldn't intimidate anybody, rather it may help them to understand the reasons why a truly evil person deserves an exceptional sentence. 
 

[BenLurkin]

We are in disagreement on each of these points. In my opinion it is an invasion into the jury process.

I understand that this would be a "tool" offered to the jury. However what is or isn't egregiously 'evil' should be found by the jurors based not upon some "expert" formulation, but solely upon their personal experiences, socialization, religious and family training and internalized beliefs.

Just my opinion of course.

[mabelkitty]

Understanding why someone committed a crime is not a requirement for determining one's innocence or guilt, but rather a fanciful way of satisfying the rubber-neckers in our society.

Nobody knows why Scott Peterson killed his wife - would knowing the reason why change the fact that he would get at least the minimum of a life sentence? According to this little game, he could please a 2 and get off with minimum damamge. Dead people don't talk, so he could claim the child belonged to another man.

This is jury tampering plain and simple.