Sign Up Now
Get instant access to over 1 million+ study documents
OR
Already registered? click here to login
By creating your account, you agree to our terms of service, privacy policy and student honor code.
The Dutch East India Company and the British East India Company are perfect examples of how economics, politics, and military intervention are all interconnected. Easily referred to as “company-states,” and “the world’s first multi-national” corporations,” these companies effectively served as multifaceted arms of their respective regimes, allowing both the British and the Dutch to expand their trading options abroad, secure new markets and gain market dominance, and also to establish fierce colonial presence in areas where they needed access to resources (“The Amboyna Conspiracy Trial”). While they were motivated by competition between each other, the British and Dutch East India Companies also served as extensions of European geo-political conflicts. This website on the Amboyna Conspiracy Trial shows the extent of oligarchic, capitalist power as it spread from Europe to Asia.
The Amboyna Conspiracy Trial also shows how both the Dutch and the British used their political and judicial authority as business strategies. The Dutch accused the British, in collusion with the Japanese, of conspiring to seize a Dutch-controlled castle in Indonesia. A video embedded on the website shows primary source imagery from European painting...
In the video, the narrators point out that the Amboyna trial is not something that would have occurred even a century prior. Torture was certainly used to intimidate suspects, but the level of interest in merchants and traders never would have been taken to this level were it not for the flourishing of world trade. Visitors to the website can take part as a mock jury, weighing the evidence and deciding whether the Dutch were correct in their accusations or whether the trial was fair.
The trial also had major reverberations, affecting the balance of power in Europe and also impacting public opinion. Additionally, incidents like these showed how the power of commerce had certainly replaced the power of the church in deciding European history. The website also does a good job of showcasing the often-underplayed role of the Japanese merchants, who were actually right there on trial with the English. It was in fact the Japanese merchant ship and the mercenary Shichizo who started the conspiracy in the first place. Central to the trial and its outcome was the issue of rule of law, and whether there could be…
References
“The Amboyna Conspiracy Trial.” https://amboyna.org/
The logic is simple: the judges here are fakes but the judges in the afterlife are real; and moreover, the one truth he asks the jury to keep in mind is that "…a good man cannot be harmed either in life or in death" (41-c). After all, Socrates will find joy in questioning and having discussions with iconic persons like Homer or Orpheus: "I could spend my time testing
[footnoteRef:24] the act required, according to Hausner, detached, painstaking planning and the cooperation of thousands in order to destroy six million Jews and an untold number of others. Over 1,500 Jewish centers and thousands of communities had been erased. Of the 9.8 million Jews that were living in areas of Europe that would later be annexed by the Nazis, over half were dead by the end of the war.[footnoteRef:25] for
Trial by Jury One of the most controversial issues today in the area of criminal justice is that of the right of all defendants to a trial by jury their peers. While most arguments are for or against this right, careful consideration of specific issues and kinds of cases suggests that trial by jury should not be abolished entirely, but should not be an absolute right. The idea of trial by
Trial by Jury -- a right that must be upheld, in part One of the most controversial issues today in the area of criminal justice is that of the right of all defendants to a trial by jury of his or her peers. Often, as seen in the pairing of the essays of the noted defense attorney, media personality, and Harvard Legal scholar Alan Dershowitz against the words of Christie Davies,
Trial Preparation The Best Evidence Rule and Why it Was Implemented into the Court System The best evidence rule in basic terms is an ancient legal rule that requires the originals, rather than copies, of documents to be presented as evidence during trial. Nevertheless, copies can in this case be accepted as evidence if the originals are not available, and the concerned party gives a conclusive excuse for their absence. For instance,
Trial Brief: NLV v. Eco NLV Laboratories, Inc. v. Eco Compliance Corporation Whether an existing dispute over an agreement should have precluded summary judgment. SUBSTANTIVE FACTS: NLV appealed the summary judgment, claiming that no accord and satisfaction could have existed unless full payment was received. NLV argued that the mere existence of a dispute should have precluded a summary judgment. PROCEDURAL FACTS: NLV Laboratories billed Eco Compliance $42,754.50 for services rendered Eco Compliance sent a check for $13,531.19,