Christopher Leuchter A Deviant

In an everyday perspective a deviant is known as an individual who strays from the accepted norms an expectations of a particular society or social group. In many cases, the act of deviance can be either, positively rewarded or negatively rewarded, or receive no sanction at all. Another form of deviance refers to a deviant who strays not only from the norms and expectations of a given society, but also the societies values; particularly, the values societies place on human life. Lastly, a third form of deviance can refer to deviant acts that depart from the norms and expectations of a particular society, but generally they are accepted within that society. In this case, individuals would just identify these deviant acts as ‘strange’ but harmless, …show more content…
Looking back at Leuchter’s life, he shouldn’t be considered an “execution expert.” Leuchter’s first encounter with the execution process was due to the fact that his father was a correctional officer; Leuchter was able to witness his first electrical chair execution. After that day, he made it his goal to modify the device because he believed that the electrical chairs used by the American prison system were unsafe and ineffective. His career was based on modifying the device; as time progressed, many of the states in the U.S. adopted his modifications In the film, Leuchter stated that his modification were popular and that he had been invited to some American prisons, in order to inspect and design modifications to their electrical chairs. Leuchter specified that he had no formal training or education on the topic. Most of his modifications were tried at home where he not only put himself at risk, but also his families. According to Leuchter, he designed these chairs in his own time and at his own expense. He also stated that the equipment was standardized and met the requirements for execution. As well, as the pricing was lower than if the prisons would have used a technician. Lastly, Leuchter claimed that possessing no formal training or education allowed him to provide better advice about the death penalty, because there would be no bias, or fear or reprisal. …show more content…
In the case of Fred Leuchter, there were some individuals that would have considered him a deviant, while others may have not. The U.S. law system established that Leuchter’s work was deviant and needed to be punished; meanwhile, the individuals from the Neo-Nazi group didn’t consider him a deviant. In other words, it is the way the society perceives the acts that make it deviant. To the Neo-Nazi group Leuchter was considered a ‘hero’ because he was able to ‘prove’ that the holocaust didn’t take place. He was well recognized for the “Leuchter Report,” and that was sued to deny the existence of the holocaust. Meanwhile, the evidence that Leuchter brought back to the U.S. demonstrated that there were flaws in his research and thus society realized that his actions were deviant. In addition, based on the perception of Leuchter’s actions, is the way that they established him as