The jury system in inefficient because it relies on compulsory civil service that most people wish to avoid. Since long deliberations add to the length of jury service, jurors serving compulsory terms have a natural incentive to reach a verdict as soon as possible, which often influences the decision of minority opinion holders to join the majority irrespective of their beliefs and wholly apart from the separate issue of social pressure and coercion by dominant group members during deliberations.
The often-repeated phrase that "juries are composed of the only people who are too stupid to get out of jury duty" may be an exaggeration, but there is some truth to it, simply because people with greater knowledge and awareness of laws and government administration do tend to justify excusals from jury service more often than those with less sophisticated understanding and awareness of governmental procedures and laws.
The juror system…… [Read More]
The constitutionality of the need for a unanimous jury verdict has been determined by the U.S. Supreme Court and the Court has ruled that, in state cases, such verdicts are constitutionally acceptable (Coughlan, 2000). The Court ruled that justice could still be served with less than a unanimous jury verdict as long as the jury was composed of a group of individuals representative of a cross section of the community who have been free to deliberate and to do so free from outside intimidation.
In my opinion, the Supreme Court's decision in Apodaca v. Oregon (Apodaca v. Oregon, 1972) was decided with an eye toward expediency than justice. The logic behind the unanimous verdict is based on the sanctity of reasonable doubt and protecting the innocent and should be a sacred element of our judicial system. The decision in Apodaca was a compromise that violates our system's principles.
Mistrial/New Trial…… [Read More]
nstead, intent can be shown in one of three ways: facial discrimination, discriminatory application or discriminatory motive. Facial discrimination is simply that the law is discriminatory on its face as it makes explicit distinctions between classes of persons. Discriminatory application occurs where the law is neutral on its face but is applied in a different manner to different classes of persons.
f a person can show that government officials applying the law have a discriminatory purpose, the law will be invalidated. Discriminatory motive occurs when the law is neutral on its face and in its application but will have a disproportionate impact on a particular class of persons. Although statistical studies alone are not enough to prove discriminatory motive, when combined with other evidence it can suffice. McCleskey v. Kemp, 481 U.S. 279 (1987).
n the case at hand, the argument should focus on both discriminatory application and discriminatory motive.…… [Read More]
Wright to snap and take violent action. The sequence of events does not point to murder. The most she can be guilty of is "voluntary manslaughter" not murder. Recommendation: A suspended sentence.
Breaking the Law in Order to Do "Right"
Sometimes, it is difficult to know what to do in a certain situation. The law may say one thing, but circumstances make what is legal wrong from a moral point-of-view. I have never been personally faced with making a decision to do something illegal, but a close friend of my cousin did about three years ago. His mother had terminal cancer. She had had chemotherapy, but it didn't stop the tumor from metastasis. She was suffering horribly. I only visited her once with my cousin. Her tumor was huge and oozing at that time. I couldn't stand seeing her that way, and the smell was awful, like rotting flesh. Anyhow,…… [Read More]
jury system currently in the United States in terms of fairness and justice.
In the world of excellence and valid legality, the legal system would donate a genuine and wide procedure via which a defendant's inherent and conscious deliberation towards crime in the breaching of criminal laws would be pinpointed in an impartial way. Anyhow, theoretical proof provides suggestion that this genuine and impartial pattern of working is non-reaping. The U.S. legal system has been in a tumult of peaking censure currently. Any criminal legal pattern is an instrument society applies to implement the patterns of behavior required to save people and the community. It functions by intercepting, punishing, accusing, and putting to trial those individuals of the community who breach the basic guidelines of group life. The perpetration against law breaching individuals is patterned to be servile to three reasons beyond the urgent disciplinary one. It curtails intimidating individuals…… [Read More]
The women recognize they have let Mrs. Wright down by not visiting her or supporting her, and so, they do the right thing by hiding the evidence and "saving" Mrs. Wright. The governor recognizes he will be remembered only as the puppet of Francis, and so signs the contracts in his final act as governor to do the right thing and allow the new governor an equal chance to prove himself. The senator does the right thing and calls for another vote because he knows Alfred deserves a chance to live a real life and gain trust in the goodness of people. Each of these characters understands what they need to do, and do it, even though it may have ongoing ramifications for them. Therefore, the common theme is goodness in the hearts of people, even if there is evil all around them.
Glaspell's work seems to connect this theme…… [Read More]
Jury of Her Peers" is the place of women in society and especially the isolation this results in. We see this through the character, Minnie Foster and her isolation from love, happiness, companionship and from society as a whole. Not only does the story describe this isolation but it allows the reader to feel the impact of this isolation and recognize the tragedy of the situation.
The story is set in a rural community in turn-of -- the century Iowa. This time-frame is one where women did not have the freedom they have today, but were instead seen as wives, cooks and housekeepers. This is the basis for Minnie's isolation, her place in the society of the day. This is also compounded by Minnie's husband, John Wright, who makes her more isolated than many other women of the time. We see that Minnie is isolated from love. Her husband is…… [Read More]
It is also quite clear the men do not think the women are intelligent enough to know a clue if they saw it. Glaspell writes, "But would the women know a clue if they did come upon it?' he said; and, having delivered himself of this, he followed the others through the stair door" (Glaspell). Clearly, if they did share the evidence they find with the men, they would simply laugh it off and discount it. They do not respect the women or their intuition, and so, they would simply ignore or discount the evidence if the women gave it to them. The men think they are superior to the women, but in this story, the women prove they have much more common sense and intuitiveness than the men do. They understand the inner workings of the female mind, and what would drive a woman to murder her husband.…… [Read More]
Another difference between the American juror system and the Venuzuela escabino system is the number of participants. In the American juror system there are 12 jurors seated with several alternatives on the ready. This means if one of the chosen jurors cannot serve completely through to the end then one of the alternatives will step in and take that jurors place. As an alternative the juror is expected to listen as attentively as if he or she were an actual juror and not an alternate. This way, if the alternate has to step in then he or she is already apprised of the same evidence and testimony that the regular jury has received thus far.
The escabino system and the jury system have a commonality when it comes to confidentiality. Both system instruct the participants to not discuss the cases that they are hearing outside of the courtroom or jury…… [Read More]
Today we do not have the reassurance that injustice as a result of jury nullifications are behind us. acism is still a prevalent issue in our society and it is concentrated at times within communities, making it possible to have a majority within the jury carrying prejudices into the courtroom. Shamefully our courts have had to let rapists walk because "Juries have acquitted & #8230; after concluding that the victims deserved to be raped because of the way they dressed or acted" (King, 1999, p. 4). It is evident that "jurors are not in any better position than judges or prosecutors to decide which defendants should be exempted from a law's reach" (King, 1999, p. 5).
Because juries are comprised of people who may or may not be familiar with the details of the law - and are largely not lawmakers themselves - we run the risk of nullifications being…… [Read More]
Dwyer, W. 2014. In the hands of the people: The trial jury’s origins, triumphs, troubles, and future in American democracy. New York, NY: Thomas Dunne Books.
In this book, Dwyer makes the case that juries are just as fundamental and necessary an institution to democracy as voting itself. Dwyer acknowledges that the greater complexity of court cases today have generated calls in some quarters for juries to be eliminated. High-profile acquittals of celebrities have similarly shaken faith in the jury system. Dwyer attempts to show why such incidents have occurred while still demonstrating that the Founding Fathers viewed jury trials as vital to American democracy. He begins with a history of how trials were decided throughout history, including the trial-by-ordeal of the Middle Ages to the jury system today. The jury has become more democratic than ever before—for many centuries, juries were solely made up of males—and this may be…… [Read More]
Reform from within the EU does not seem possible, either. It is so structured as to prevent changes in member states' minority status and other modifications from becoming attainable. Attempts by any government to amend the Community laws are considered doomed to failure, because Parliament has almost no part in European law-making (Andrews).
Common and civil law systems are inherently opposed, although their shared goal is to conduct a just, speedy and most inexpensive settling of conflicts (Messitte 1999). American courts have increasingly acknowledged the need to continuously evaluate and modify their processes and altogether improve the quality of justice. Efforts cover many other aspects of court activity, ranging from dispute resolution mechanisms, such as arbitration and mediation, to procedures, such as default and summary judgment used I the early stage of a trial without needing to proceed to a formal trial (Messitte).
Jury trial has disappeared in the…… [Read More]
United tates Jury ystem
In United tates courts, the jury is a system by which, in theory, defendants are given a trial that is fair and unbiased. The ideal is that twelve persons from the same peer group as the defendant will be able to deliberate without prejudice the position of the defense, and the outcome of the trial. In reality however it is often the case that jury members are unable to arrive at a logical and fair conclusion due to several factors beyond their control, including interference from court systems and the law.
The jury system originated in England on June15, 1215 (Arnet). The jury system at this time took the form of a Magna Carta signed by King John. The liberties and rights of the population of England were thus established, among which was the rights pertaining to a jury trial. Individuals were granted to such a…… [Read More]
Runaway Jury -- a 2003 legal thriller based on a John Grisham novel -- does not necessarily enhance the viewer's knowledge of the law, but it certainly offers an expansive view of one way of breaking the law. The film is concerned with the rise of the contemporary "jury consultant," most often used in large-scale consumer liability lawsuits such as the one depicted in the film. The legal case in Runaway Jury concerns the liability of gun manufacturers for deaths caused by their products: intriguingly Grisham's original novel dealt with similar liability cases regarding tobacco, common in the U.S.A. In the 1990s, but was altered for the screenplay. To a certain extent, this change indicates that Grisham's, and the film's, focus was never on the legal issue at stake in the actual trial. The real legal focus regards the thin line between "jury consultancy" and "jury tampering" that is demonstrated…… [Read More]
Federal Grand Jury
The Fifth Amendment to the U.S. Constitution provides that charges for all capital and "infamous" crimes be brought through an indictment by a grand jury. Although the founding fathers had envisaged the primary function of the federal grand jury as protection of the citizens against tyranny by the government, its protective role has eroded over the years -- making its current function in the criminal system highly controversial. This paper outlines the basic duties of a federal grand jury and discusses some of the controversial issues facing it.
The provision of the Fifth Amendment regarding grand juries has been interpreted to mean that an indictment by a federal grand jury is required for charging federal felonies. The Supreme Court has held that this part of the Fifth Amendment is not binding on the States; hence the use of grand juries is not binding on the…… [Read More]
" The right to trial was created to protect the individual citizen from the strength and power of the government and to prevent potential influence upon the judiciary by special interests. In protecting individuals, the right to jury trial protects all of the citizenry.
The Sixth Amendment of the U.S. Constitution reads: "In all criminal prosecutions, the accused shall enjoy the right to a speedy and public trial, by an impartial jury of the State and district wherein the crime shall have been committed, which district shall have been previously ascertained by law, and to be informed of the nature and cause of the accusation; to be confronted with the witnesses against him; to have compulsory process for obtaining witnesses in his favor, and to have the Assistance of Counsel for his defense ." While the right to a jury trial is guaranteed by the United States Constitution in criminal…… [Read More]
Grand Jury: Needed or Not?
The United States is the only common law jurisdiction in the world that still uses the grand jury for purposes of screening criminal indictments. The grand jury issues an indictment for crime only if based on the evidence that has been presented it finds that there is a probable cause for one to believe that a crime has been committed by the suspect .this is unlike a petit jury that only resolves a specific type of criminal or civil cases, a grand jury serves as a group for a particular period of time in all or many cases that come up in the jurisdiction which is under the supervision of the federal; state attorney, a court district attorney or even a state general attorney and listens to the evidence without having suspect or person of interest being involved in the proceedings (Leipold, 2005).
The question…… [Read More]
The jury in Twelve Angry Men is not diverse in terms of ethnicity and gender, because it consists of twelve white males. The only diversity evident is with Juror 5, who has a social class-consciousness that is different from the other men due to his having grown up poor. This little "in" to the theme of prejudice is what helps Juror 8 eventually persuade the others that their hasty "guilty" verdict is based on prejudices rather than on the facts of the case. Moreover,, Juror 11 is also first generation immigrant, and this comes up later in as the jury deliberates.
Twelve Angry Men is squarely about personal bias. With the possible exception of Juror 8 (who might have personal biases of his own that did not surface in the trial), many men, especially Juror 10 but others too, have biases against people who live in slums and…… [Read More]
Rational for Selecting Juries
Page 3 Generalizations about juries
Page 4 General comments: jury service
Page 4 General comments: summoning juries
Page 5 General comments: Simpson jury
Page 6 Jurors errors and DNA analysis
Role of Juries
Close Scrutiny of Juries and Jury Selection
Role of Juries
There is rarely any debate when it comes to the pivotal role of juries in the United States' system of justice. It is the "foundation of the American justice system" and is "Vital to our democracy and our system of checks and balances," according to the American Judicature Society (AJS). The AJS goes on to call the jury system " ... the fundamental safeguard of our constitutional liberties." Certainly it is not perfect and it can be manipulated by shrew lawyers in some cases, but true, fair, outcomes are possible and those outcomes depend on the quality of the jurors who are chosen…… [Read More]
Moreover, because of the secrecy surrounding the grand jury system, there is a very real concern that a defendant may not have the opportunity to actually confront his accusers. While improper evidence may not come in at trial, it is a fallacy to assume that simply protecting someone from conviction is protecting him or her from all of the possible negative effects of an improper indictment. The very real time, expense, and risk of trial means that even an actually innocent person who is indicted may consider a plea bargain rather than face the risk of trial.
While there is some merit to the idea that grand juries listen to prosecutors, individual grand juries behave in different manners. Some of them simply act as rubber stamps for prosecutors, while other grand juries more carefully consider the charges before them. However, the secrecy surrounding the proceedings makes it difficult to know…… [Read More]
There were more serious instances: Easter managed to get one woman removed from the jury, and another woman took an overdose of pills after realizing that her personal secret might be revealed. Finch's team had no compunctions about breaking laws in the process of their jury tampering: they broke into Easter's apartment twice, stealing computer data the first time, and the second time stealing more information and then setting the apartment on fire.
Viewers might want to see some of the characters as individuals taking important moral stances and fighting corruption, but by the end of the movie all the major characters have been corrupted in some way. It could be argued that the defense attorney was not corrupted because he ultimately decides to not pay the price to purchase the jury decision he wants. However, he goes so far as to discuss the situation with others in his firm…… [Read More]
ight to a Jury Trial
A legal proceeding whereby a jury makes decisions or findings that are factual that are then applied by a judge is known as a jury trial. It is different from a bench trial where the sole decision maker is a panel of judges or a judge. Jury trials are applied in serious criminal cases in legal systems. Juries or lay judges have now been incorporated into the legal system of civil law countries for their criminal cases.
Among the several amendments, this is one of the most important amendments associated to the individual's benefit. It is under the seventh amendment in the constitution of the U.S.A. And it is preserved to the parties in violate (Cornel University Law School, 2013). The right to a jury states that in criminal prosecutions an accused person has the right to trial by a jury that is impartial, found…… [Read More]
The purpose of these impeachment techniques is to verify to the best of one's purpose that the jury members are objective and competent as well as reliable enough to officiate in the trial.
Limitations placed are that a party may only impeach his own witness if the witness were an adverse party (i.e. called to stand; if the witness was hostile; if law as witness required the witness; and if the witness surprised the party by offering damaging testimony. It seems to me that the technique of 'bias' is the most important specifically so since witnesses have to be above bias, and one biased witness can potentially corrode jury decision-making.
Defendant's decision to testify / not testify
A defendant may want to testify at his own trial due to not having the resources to employ the lawyer he most wants to represent him, or due to feeling that the lawyer…… [Read More]
Toxins Cause Autism?
The Jury is Still Out
Nicholas Kristoff's writes about the issue of environmental toxins and autism, and the link between exposure to these toxins and the rise in autism spectrum disorders. Autism comprises a clinically heterogeneous group of disorders -- collectively referred to as "autism spectrum disorders" (ASD) -- that share common features of impaired social relationships, impaired language and communication, and repetitive behaviors or a narrow range of interests. Autism has a current prevalence of 1% in children.
Kristoff explores the relationship between toxins and autism by referring to expert opinion; that is, public health officials who have found epidemiological links between exposure to such harmful substances as mercury, lead, and thalidomide and neurodevelopmental disorders. Kristoff cites studies in which researchers "have found that disproportionate shares of children develop autism after they are exposed in the womb to medications such as thalidomide (a sedative), misoprostol (ulcer…… [Read More]
As the negotiations became aggressive, Marlee countered Fitch's aggressiveness by unilaterally raising the price, setting deadlines ('the deal should be finalized the next time I call'), and threatening to sway the verdict against Fitch.
Marlee also proved to be an adept negotiator when dealing with ohr. She skillfully defined the value set by digging into ohr's true motivation, and then appealed to his sense of greater achievement by offering him a scenario of 'Greater gun control'. She, however, underestimates ohr's sense of righteousness, as he refuses to go through with the deal, based on his conscience. The difference between the Marlee-Fitch negotiation and the Marlee-ohr negotiation is starkly evident, as the former is conducted in an aggressive environment with plenty of hidden motives, withholding of information, and threats, while the former, despite the initial threat of mistrial by ohr, is conducted in a much more open and honest environment.
As…… [Read More]
ethnicity influences courtroom proceedings and judicial practices.
The law making against racial discrimination has reduced the intensity of ethnical influences on courtroom proceedings yet the judicial practices are not free from the impurities of racist impact. Some ethnic backgrounds offer less educational facilities due to poverty that leads to criminal activities. Thus these ethnic groups are more involved in criminal judicial practices than the others. The minds of police are often convinced that there are more tendencies towards crime in one ethnic group than the other. The biased police as well as justice behavior towards an ethnic group influences the court room proceedings and may result into unfair decisions. Muslims are for example considered extremists mainly after the events of 9/11 thus they are judged more critically than the others in court room proceedings. Katherine (2007) believes that despite liberal era of 21st century, the judicial system could not uproot…… [Read More]
Special Duties of Prosecutors
One of the major differentiating aspects of the United States of America is the fact that if arrested, you are innocent until proven guilty. This is a rare concept among legal systems. Most countries deem the suspect guilty until proven innocent. In the United States, it is the duty of the Prosecutor to find the defendant guilty, while the defense attorney is solely responsible for upholding his client's innocence. The prosecutor is seen in a special light by the public. Smith (2001) says that it is understood that prosecutors have the moral high ground, that they are the good guys and are on the "right" side. Prosecutors are representatives of the state and the government, in essence, the people. This responsibility gives the prosecutor a special light, almost making them seem noble, as they seek the truth and justice (Smith 2001). They prosecute villains, and seek…… [Read More]
Philosophy -- Plato's "The Apology"
"The Apology" is Plato's recollection of Socrates' trial, conviction, sentencing and last words to the jury. The Apology is divided into three parts. The first part, Socrates' principal speech to the jury, is his argument against old and new accusations. The second part, Socrates' "counter-assessment," is Socrates' rebuttal of the prosecutor's recommendation of the death penalty. The third part, Socrates' final words to the jury, consists of his speeches to the jurors who voted for his conviction and to the jurors who voted for acquittal.
Socrates' Principle Speech
Socrates first takes on the people who have slandered him over the years with "lying accusations" against him: that he is "a student of all things in the sky and below the earth" (Plato, Grube, & Cooper, 2000, p. 22) which is a physicalist or atheist; that he "makes the worse argument the stronger" (Plato, Grube, &…… [Read More]
Ultimately the use of multiple forecasting techniques serves to increase the knowledge of a market and minimize market entry risk.
How would you forecast sales force size in a specialized industry, for example, aircraft?
As the demand for aircraft is defined by a select set of customers who have highly specialized information needs, defining the sales force size for aircraft would be easily accomplished by looking at the average sales cycles in this specific industry (which happen to be quite long) combined with the project management skills necessary to ensure a design win. A design win is the event where the aircraft is designed into the broader program of an airline, or in the case of military aircraft, purchased by a branch of the Department of Defense. Taking the average length of sales cycles and the total population of potential customers for the specific aircraft, calculating the size of the…… [Read More]
Tax Research Memo
Personal Injury winning treatment and other issues research
John Smith tax issues
Treatment for purposes of Federal Tax Income of $300,000 fee received out of the amount awarded by Jury.
Applicable Law:Any winnings in a personal injury lawsuit that cover the treatment of physical injuries are not taxable except for attorney fees which are taxable. IRC SEC 104(a)(2).Taxability also depends upon the place of residence of the taxpayer.
$300,000 received by John Smith as fees from jury award is taxable for federal tax income purposes.
Treatment for purposes of Federal Tax Income of $25,000 expenses paid upfront and received out of the amount awarded by Jury.
Applicable Law: Any winnings in a personal injury lawsuit that cover the treatment of physical injuries are not taxable except for attorney fees which are taxable. IRC Sec 104(a)(2).Any expenses can be claimed as a deduction.Taxability…… [Read More]
Cognitive Bias in Jury Damages
Utilizing Cognitive Biases to Legal Advantage
Assuming that the putative view of an ordinary citizen, unaffiliated with the judicial system, is one that the merits of a case are based solely based upon a presentation of facts is common. However, several psychological predispositions illustrate the strategic role that attorney's assume in jury selection. Understanding the philosophy underlying the moral psychology of the mind offers insights into how both the case for plaintiffs and defendants are open to suggestive framing.
The determination and award of damages in cases that comprise compensatory damages is easily quantified, however considering pain and suffering compensation presents fertile ground for legal study. Empirical studies of jury awards demonstrate that the framing of damage by plaintiffs is influential to the outcome. Similarly, preconceived notions of sexual harassment and prior psychological trauma bear influence upon cases that counsel must be aware of to…… [Read More]
Post response questions, requires a position support position evidence assigned readings. Please correct sources APA. Each question 1.5 pages length. The reading attached. 1. Critics death penalty contend evidence wrongful conviction offenders sentenced death powerful evidence favor abolishing death penalty
One of the foundational principles of the American system of justice is that it is better to let a guilty man go free than it is to condemn an innocent man as guilty. The existence of the death penalty seems to belie this principle. Once someone has been put to death, there is no way to reconsider the verdict. No matter how heinous the crimes of the clearly guilty people put to death, there also have been innocent persons convicted of capital crimes. Despite all of the controls put into place within the American justice system, mistakes have been made in the past and fortunately many of these defendants were…… [Read More]
They also had the power to decide the merits of evidence and arguments. In the 19th century, judges gained greater control over juries and the role of juries became what it is currently; hearing evidence presented on both sides and determining the guilt or innocence of the accused.
The advantages of the jury system lie in the foundational elements articulated and supported by amendments and the Supreme Court. The Sixth Amendment provides that "in all criminal prosecutions, the accused shall enjoy the right to a speedy and public trial" (Landsman & Hastings 1992). A speedy trial was emphasized to avoid the accused languishing in prison for extended periods of time prior to a trial, or have the accused fate put off for an indeterminate amount of time. Further, the Sixth Amendment guarantees every citizens right to an impartial jury. The intent is that the prospective juries not enter into the…… [Read More]
In this vein, the EU judges in Strasbourg will be much more likely to respect guidelines that are set out in UK
courts and legislation. The European Court would, with the introduction of a British
Bill of Rights likely give greater leeway to British judges. The repealing of the Human Rights of 18 would limit the influence of British judges over the interpretation of pertinent legislation by enshrining the central features of the Act that reflect the English common law. At the very least, if
British judges feel that acts of Parliament are wholly incompatible with the European
Convention or with EU law.
To be effective as a complete solution to the problems which we have identified above a British Bill of Rights also would need to be accompanied by reforms which reinstate the British
Parliament's role as the sovereign authority over the whole legislative process. This would not be…… [Read More]
State vs. Stennett Case
This article in The Baltimore Sun serves as an outlet for many of the jurors involved in the "State vs. Stennett" case to speak out regarding what they feel are inaccurate accusations regarding their acquittal of 17-year-old Eric Stennett. April 20, 2000 was a night that many police officers will never forget, but it was also a night that saw the tampering of evidence, the mishandling of evidence, as well as the confusion among the police officers who were there regarding what had actually happened. Police procedure was forgotten, and that is just the beginning of the prosecutions problems when it came to building a solid case against their defendant. All the defense had to do was produce some reasonable doubt, which the jurors obviously felt the defense had done its job.
It would seem that there is no disputing the fact that Eric Stennett was…… [Read More]
The theory involving Christine being determined to put an end to Rhoda's life can be related to her ration intervening, influencing her to take action before Rhoda continued her killings.
Rhoda pays special attention to the way that her mother sees her, and, even though she knows that her mother has the power to denounce her, she does not attempt to murder Christine. The next in Rhoda's list of killings would have been Monica Breedlove, taking into consideration the fact that the women had been closely connected to her, and that it had been possible for her to endanger Rhoda with the information that she knew.
The ending of the movie is most probably intended to present the audience with what it wants to see, someone finally punishing Rhoda, not through putting her into a mental asylum (as should have been the case), but by physically hurting her.
Sidney Lumet's…… [Read More]
Trash covers represent an excellent technique in the investigation of terrorist organizations. Begin by listing those items that might typically be found in your discarded trash that would provide details regarding you personally; your interests, lifestyle, associates, family, business, income, debts etc. Be honest and be thorough in your response. Follow your response by listing items that investigators might be interested in locating in the trash of suspect terrorists and follow with a discussion of how such items could be used to benefit the investigation.
Items that might typically be found in my discarded trash that would provide details regarding me personally are my cell phone statements, my bank account statements, discarded product packaging, receipts, medical bills, envelopes, defunct art supplies, sketches and discarded snippets of poems or stories.
Likewise, in the case of a suspected terrorist, investigators would essentially be interested in most, if not all of the things…… [Read More]
"The criterion for the admissibility of a confession has thus evolved into the quality of voluntariness. The aim of admitting into evidence only voluntary confessions is to prevent the introduction of unreliable evidence. & #8230; the result is that judges may exclude confessions where the coercion is blatant and obvious but not exclude confessions where the coercion" is more subtle -- the jury is left to decide the confession's veracity in this case (akefield & Underwager 20009).
Discuss and provide examples pertaining to the waiver of privilege against self-incrimination.
The protection against self-incrimination does not apply to "non-testimonial evidence" such as giving examples of one's voice, police line-ups, blood samples or fingerprints (Lesson 12, 2009, Slide 4)
The principal restriction of impeachment by the use of evidence of misconduct can result in a conviction of a witness. Explain this concept and give examples.
Impeaching the testimony…… [Read More]
Judge roderick concluded that the Compulsory Process Clause of the Sixth Amendment does not give a defendant the right to require immunization of a witness, but that such a right is "probably" contained in the Due Process Clause of the Fifth Amendment. Id. However, he declined to accord the defendants the benefit of this "probable" Fifth Amendment right to defense witness immunity for two reasons. First, he ruled that the defendants' motion was untimely, since it should properly have been made at the beginning of the trial. Second, he concluded that defense witness immunity would be available only to secure testimony that was material and exculpatory and that the defendants had not shown that any of the witnesses for whom they sought immunity would give material, exculpatory testimony."
The only federal appellate decisions that have ruled in favor of defense witness immunity are stated to appear to be the Third…… [Read More]
The group of jurors brings out the best in them in terms of reaching a common target.
A group crisis is an event that has a high - impact and threatens the viability of the organization. Crisis/stress is a factor that helps group evolves from stage to stage, get through phases. Under conditions of crisis swift decision should be made and considered necessary.
The jury room turns into an emotional stage, the jury becomes a target for other frustrations members may be having in their family life. Juror number three makes the whole case very personal, he wishes to condemn the young boy because he believes that by doing this he will punish his own boy who deserted him.
The stress that they are stuck on a hot weather in a room and they can not get out because one of them is determined to change their votes makes them…… [Read More]
Murder Trial of Nicholas Lindsey, March 2012
Factual and Procedural Background
On the evening of February 21, 2011, Police Officer David Crawford of the St. Petersburg, Florida police department was fatally shot while investigating a report of a suspicious person or prowler in a residential neighborhood. After a 24-hour search expedition, police arrested and booked 16-year-old Nicolas Lindsey on charges of first-degree murder. Lindsey confessed to the killing in a taped statement to police shortly thereafter.[footnoteRef:-1] [-1: http://articles.cnn.com/2011-02-23/justice/florida.officer.shot_1_police-officer-fatal-shooting-petersburg-police-maj?_s=PM:CRIME]
Lindsey was arraigned in court the next day, and the judge ordered that he be held in custody without bail. A grand jury which convened the following week indicted Lindsey on first-degree murder of a police officer, whereupon the state Attorney General charged Lindsey as an adult based on the seriousness of the offense and that he was over age 14.
Jury selection began on March 19, 2012 and the jury heard…… [Read More]
Prosecutors are governed by a set of stringent ethical and legal rules meant to reinforce their justice-seeking duty, in addition to helping them fulfill their roles as advocates (Kurcias, 2000). One of these is the Brady ule, which requires the disclosure, by the prosecutor, to the defense, of all materially exculpatory (Brady) evidence in the possession of the state (Kurcias, 2000). Brady evidence refers to any material that would either go towards negating the guilt of the defendant and thereby reducing his potential sentence, or towards a witness' credibility. In a jury trial, the prosecutor is required to "disclose such evidence to the grand jury before seeking an indictment against" the defendant (Sands et al., n.d., p. 12).
The prosecutor's failure to disclose such material could lead to the automatic suppression of evidence, especially if prejudice has ensued as a result (Kurcias, 2000). In such a case, suppression…… [Read More]
As such, any valid arbitration agreement will be accordingly handled and implemented by the arbitrators on the case.
4) What specific steps can be taken effectively to change this legal outcome in future cases?
In the case of Clinton Cole vs. urns International Security Services, the Court decided against the plaintiff's request to render void the arbitration agreement signed by employee on the 5th of August 1991. In order to change the outcome of future similar legal cases, the employees need better arguments as to why the arbitration agreement should be considered null by the Court. Also, to convince the Court to rescind the agreement, the plaintiffs and their lawyers should focus on the issues that are not covered by the arbitration agreement.
For instance, employees could point out how the agreement refers to the "recruitment, employment and termination of employment by the Company; including, but not limited to, claims…… [Read More]
People of the State of California v. Conrad obert Murray
The involuntary manslaughter trial of Michael Jackson's personal doctor, Conrad Murray, was in the news seemingly every day for months. Even though the trial has concluded and the world knows that Dr. Murray was found guilty, it is important to look at the court proceedings and how the evidence led the jury to that verdict. Dr. Murray administered a powerful drug called propofol - an anesthesia drug that is only supposed to be used in closely monitored hospital settings - to Michael Jackson to help him sleep.
The argument by the prosecution was that Dr. Murray did this even though he knew the dangers, and that he administered too much of the drug to Jackson, resulting in a fatal overdose. At that point, Murray did not act quickly enough in calling the paramedics and did not do enough to save…… [Read More]
Miranda Rule -- Prohibits the introduction of any testimonial evidence elicited from criminal suspects while under arrest or in police custody unless police first advise them of their constitutional rights to remain silent, refuse to answer questions, and to be represented by an attorney before beginning any custodial interrogation. I have heard this term used frequently in television crime programs.
Prosecutor -- Is an attorney employed by the state whose responsibility it is to file criminal charges against individuals arrested by police and charge with crimes; typically, prosecutors represent the state at the criminal trial. The context in which I am most familiar with prosecutors is in their portrayal in television programs about criminal justice and news reports about criminal trials.
Pretrial Release Program -- Is a system of releasing criminal defendants from custody until their trials to reduce jail overcrowding; in principle, bond is one form of…… [Read More]
In recent times, no court case has attracted as much attention as that of George Zimmerman. In this text, I summarize the most significant facts of the said case and explore the key laws that were violated. Further, amongst other things, I will also summarize the outcome of the case and my opinion on the outcome.
The State of Florida vs. George Zimmerman
The Case in Brief: A Summary of Important Facts
Charged with second-degree murder in one of the most publicized court cases in recent times, George Zimmerman was on 13 July declared a free man after the jury deemed it fit to render a not guilty verdict. The charge in this case stemmed from the shooting to death of an individual by the name Trayvon Martin. Pursuant to the said shooting, the state charged that Zimmerman stalked and shot at Martin who was unarmed at the…… [Read More]
Manion himself finds it ironic that if he had caught Quill in the act and killed the rapist, he would have been exculpated from any guilt. The time lag between finding out about the crime and killing Quill seems like a mere technicality to the Lieutenant and morally justifies Manion's actions in his mind, even though he knows he murdered Quill according to the law.
According to the events presented as by Biegler, despite the fact that the Lieutenant was able to search for and find Quill, have enough presence of mind to arm himself, and then turn himself over to the authorities, he had obviously 'blacked out' during the commission of the crime, and had no recollection of the action. Biegler states to the jury that the Lieutenant "while he felt considerable loathing and contempt for the proprietor he had at no point has any intention of killing or…… [Read More]
Threat or perception of threat is best described by protection motivation theory:
This theory states that the extent to which people show preventive behavior in light of a threat depends on their protection motivation (. W. ogers, 1975, 1983). According to this theory, the level of protection motivation depends on the seriousness of the threat, the probability that the threat will manifest itself, the judged efficacy of the recommended behavior (called response or outcome efficacy), and the self-efficacy expectation relating to that behavior. (Wiegman & Gutteling, 1995, p. 235)
In a practical sense what this theory says about the perceived threat is that as incidences of observation occur in the lives of individuals, be they real or imagined they will likely become more protective and therefore attempt to engage in avoidance of behaviors that have been identified with the production of environmental threat. By doing so this the individual, and…… [Read More]
TV Criminal Procedure
Fluffy, unrealistic, demeaning, biased against the routine nature of many of the professional activities that can be expected if one chooses a criminal justice career: This is what reviewers of television shows on law enforcement and the courts of say. But time and again, Hollywood returns to these formats to give the public the chance to love and hate the pursuit of justice. There is probably no way around this because the ends and means of criminal justice will always be in conflict, and that can make for good entertainment.
For the most part police and law enforcement personnel get the best representation as pursuers of right and security, except for when there is a bad guy from these offices, in which case the shows demonstrate how these people hurt their fellow good guys. Somewhat of a change has occurred by the making of more entertaining defense…… [Read More]
Costand v. Cosby
The case against Bill Cosby has been brought on behalf of Andrea Costand who has accused Cosby of molesting her in 2004 by using drugs to induce her to have sex with him. Cosby, for his part, has denied the allegations of rape, saying that the sexual intercourse was consensual and that he told Costand what he was giving her and she accepted (Conti, 2015).
If I were prosecuting Bill Cosby, I would want a younger jury, whose conception of the comedian is informed more by the stories purported by modern media than the image of Cosby from his days of television success as good, family man on The Cosby Show back in the 1980s. So in terms of age, I would want younger jurors (even though jurors are supposed to be impartial and have no knowledge of the defendant, in this case that is likely to…… [Read More]
The court had adopted its own interpretations, which Mathorks felt were inaccurate. These inaccuracies, it was claimed, were material and detrimental to Mathorks.
The appeal also alleged several other errors in the original trial. Mathorks contended that the evidence presented by National Instruments did not support its claims. Several material differences between the SimuLink and LabVIE products were presented by Mathorks during the course of their appeal. Further, the jury in the original trial had overstepped its boundaries in issuing a permanent injunction against sales of SimuLink. This injunction, Mathorks contended, was excessive, in part because the SimuLink product had many uses that were non-infringing. That the product had been used to infringe was argued to be irrelevant. hat matters, Mathorks argued, is the intent of the product. In their case, they argued that the intent of SimuLink was not to infringe and that they should not be held liable…… [Read More]
*I uploaded material reference. BIBLIOGRAPHY: Stuckey, G., Roberson, C., & Wallace, H. (2006). Procedures justice system (8t Ed.). Upper Saddle River, NJ: Pearson/Prentice Hall. Case Study: Jon Doe individual left country effort make a life
Te case of Jon: Felony carges
In tis case of 'Jon Doe,' te suspect wo is accused of larceny was arrested because e began to make incriminating remarks wile being investigated. He was ten placed under arrest by te police. If te police ave probable cause to believe tat a suspect committed a crime, tey may place Jon under arrest witout a warrant, as tey did in tis specific instance. However, te police must read Jon's 'Miranda Rigts' before processing im (FAQ: Police interrogations, 2012, FindLaw). A suspect's Miranda Rigts include te rigt to remain silent and to ave an attorney, regardless of weter te suspect can afford an attorney or not. Also, "before…… [Read More]
Court Proceedings Experience
year-old Nicholas Lindsay was charged for the murder of Officer David Crawford. esides Lindsay's own confession to the murder, there is no other evidence that he committed the murder. Lindsay made this confession at the urging and in the presence of his mother, without a lawyer present. He told the police officers that he shot David Crawford after being apprehended by Crawford.
The official police report stated that, after apprehending Lindsay, Crawford was reaching for his notepad when Lindsay pulled out his own handgun and shot him five times in the chest. Hence, Lindsay was arrested and charged for murder. The prosecution, which included the State Attorney, decided to prosecute 16-year-old Lindsay as an adult.
Lindsay was indicted on the count of Murder in the First-Degree, which is defined by Florid State law as "The unlawful killing of a human being perpetrated from a premeditated design…… [Read More]
Statistics show that black murderers are far more likely than white murderers to get the death penalty, especially if the victim was white. Blacks make up 12% of the population but 40% of the population on death row, as noted. Georgia can serve as a case in point. Statistics show that a black man accused of killing a white person in Georgia is substantially more likely to receive the death penalty than a white person convicted of killing either a white or a black, and forty-six percent of the inmates on Georgia's death row are black, with most on death row for killing a white person. The situation is much the same in the 35 other states that have capital punishment. In Maryland, blacks make up nearly 90% of the prisoners on death row; in Illinois, 63%; and in Pennsylvania, 60%. The disparity nationwide is even greater when the race…… [Read More]
With his bold and sweeping statements about a divine mission to seek out and expose false wisdom, and his assertions that nothing short of death will stop him from completing that mission, Socrates makes it clear that, to him, the vocation of a philosopher is a dangerous one. He demonstrates an awareness that his practices have not only brought him enemies, but will likely lead to his death. However, Socrates repeatedly asserts that a true philosopher could not stop questioning, practicing, and sharing his philosophy any more than a true philosopher could willfully cease to exist. In fact, Socrates makes it clear that if he is given the option to live without philosophy or to die with it, that the only choice he could make would be to die. Socrates tells the jury, "either acquit me or not; but whatever you do, know that I shall never alter my…… [Read More]
It is possible to read Plato's Apology as the best extant textual representation of the legacy of Athens in the fifth century CE in law and politics. The fact is that the Athenians, although they voted to put Socrates to death, might very well agree on principle with this evaluation. The Apology is, after all, a representation of the Athenian system of trial by jury, and it is worth recalling that this judicial system was considered to be a founding myth of Athens itself. Earlier in the century, roughly a decade before Socrates was born, the tragedian Aeschylus in the Oresteia would represent the mythological and divinely-sanctioned origins of the Athenian jury trial, as a replacement for the endlessly bloody cycle of the lex talionis, when the goddess Athena invites a group of Athenian citizens to sit in judgment on Orestes, who killed his mother in revenge for her…… [Read More]
The image of the law arises, but like the woman, the captain has already experienced a kind of internal, moral shift. Like the woman the captain cannot bear to morally condemn the murderer, or reveal the fact that Leggatt is on his ship when the authorities arrive. Captain Archbold wants to act according to the law, like the men of the Glaspell tale, but Leggatt's protective captain pretends the ship is empty and points out that Leggatt's actions helped save the ship during a storm.
The captain, from a law-abiding man, has suddenly become a man who will evade the law, because he mysteriously perceives himself to be the same as another man. Unlike the feminist identification or mirroring that occurs in the Glaspell tale, the Conrad tale's sense of a "mirror image" of two psychologically united selves is far more mysterious. Eventually, the captain agrees to allow Leggatt to…… [Read More]
social loafing in many of my labs for science class. When we had labs with groups of just two, they would go pretty well. But if there were groups of more than two, it would take much longer to get the labs done. People would get into conversations or start goofing off and would lose focus. Or the people who weren't sure what they were doing would just sit on the sidelines and wait for others to do the work. I didn't notice this any more in the boys than the girls, though the people who tended to try to convince the group to focus were usually girls. I think that this phenomenon happened because people are less likely to be held individually accountable when they are in a group situation, so they don't perform as well.
Of the theories of love that we studied in class, I was most…… [Read More]
A transaction between Company M. And Company W. has caused some serious accounting problems and a complex legal scheme and law set is necessary to figure out how to resolve this issue. Company M. And Company W. have been tied up in a long and drawn out legal battle over some copyright and patent infringement argument. In May 2007, W filed a claim against M. And a verdict was reached in September of 2009. This jury found that M. must pay W $18.5 for their mistakes. M did not like this and called for an appeal in November of 2009. More than one year later, the appeals court ruled in favor of M. And the jury's verdict was overturned. W was still upset and filed a petition for a rehearing the next month. That request for appeal was denied and the matter was over according to all legal…… [Read More]
Criminal Law Due Process
Due process is an essential guarantee of basic fairness for citizens based on law. It has two basic goals; to produce accurate results through fair procedure to prevent wrongful deprivation of interests and to make people feel the government treated them fairly by listening to their side of the story (Procedural Due Process). Due process requires fair procedures when governments take actions against citizens, whether it is the federal government or a state government that is taking action.
Due process is divided into two categories, substantive due process and procedural due process (Due Process of Law - Substantive due Process, Procedural Due Process, Further Reading, 2013). Substantive law creates, defines, and regulates rights. Substantive due process makes the laws that give rights to citizens by due processes. Procedural law enforces those rights or seeks redress for violation of those rights. Evidence presented against a citizen will…… [Read More]