Jury Nullification CJA/344 May 2, 2013 Jury Nullification When juries believe a case is wrong or unjust they may acquit a defendant who has violated a law. This is known as jury nullification. In the United States, jury nullification has been an option for the jury. The jury plays an important role in interpreting and upholding the laws that the American government has outlined. Today’s society finds it necessary question to what range a jury can take the laws of America, change them, and make them their own.
Why gun control won’t stop crime After the tragedy in Newton CT, where twenty-six innocent people lost their lives gun control seems to be a hot topic again. The ideas of certain types of gun control have been all over the news and radio talk shows ever since the tragedy. But it’s my belief that gun control is not the answer to violent crime, and in my opinion gun control doesn’t make us safer, it just makes law-abiding citizens an easier target for crime. Many opponents for stricter gun control laws have stated it will cut down on violent crime, or mass shootings such as the one in Newtown. Politicians have stated thy will introduce new laws wanting tougher background checks, forced registration, and outright banning of military looking firearms.
Juvenile offenders are still very impressionable and interacting with the violent and hardened criminals does not give them the tools to survive in normal society and become productive citizens. My contention has been that if we catch these offenders soon enough we can prevent them from committing more serious crimes. Many states have implemented the death penalty, hoping that it would be a deterrent against crime. I do not think it works either. Many prosecutors use the threat of the death penalty as a way of getting a plea deal to get the offender off the streets.
Because the death penalty causes such a heated debate among interested individuals, politicians often use the conflict to acquire public support. There are many pros and cons pertaining to capital punishment.In 1972, the Supreme Court abolished the death penalty because it inflicted cruel and unusual punishment in violation of the Eighth Amendment of the Constitution. The number of people executed and later found to be innocent disturbed the Court. The Court also felt that the death penalty was being unfairly applied to minorities and poor people. In 1976, after the arrival of lethal injection and additional laws to protect the innocent, the Supreme Court reversed its decision and reinstated the death penalty.
David Phillips, who chairs the crime committee of the Association of Chief Police Officers, suggests that “someone manifestly guilty can evade conviction” under the double jeopardy rule. The amendments are able to alleviate this problem by allowing retrials provided that there is “new and compelling” evidence to be adduced. The first successful retrial case of R v Dunlop , which pleaded William Dunlop guilty to the murder of Julie Hogg in 1989, marks the reduction of legal gaps in the double jeopardy rule. Dunlop exploited the rule by confessing his guilt to a prison officer knowing that he could not be re-trialed. However, the amendments acted as a deterrent to such exploitation.
Simpson’s murder trial in 1995… Not guilty and cleared of all charges! Many adults agree that the evidence pointed to Simpson, but how is it that he escaped from the legal system? Was it the fantastic lawyers, a fluke of luck, or was he genuinely innocent? In order to answer that question, we must compare this case to other cases similar to this that happened. The death of Caylee Anthony comes to mind.
Patrice Foster Professor Hayaud-Din Government 2301-2406 Summer I 2012 Extra Credit Abolishing The Exclusionary Rule Word Count: Patrice Foster The Exclusionary Rule The Exclusionary Rule is a senseless rule. We should get rid of it and the police and prosecutors should be able to use the evidence even if it’s obtained in violation of the rule, because we could potentially let criminals go to satisfy this rule. This rule is so full of controversy, that it is hard to support. How can we as citizens embrace this rule? A rule that does so little to protect the law as it was made.
Gun Control Laws Are Ineffective Tracy M. Turner Gun Control Laws Are Ineffective In the wake of horrific shootings across America, more and more leftist politicians and commentators are calling for stricter laws on gun control. Certain gun control laws are in place in some states and in other countries, but are they actually putting a dent in crime? Limiting a citizen's right to bear arms violates our second amendment freedom and puts the unarmed person in danger by giving the criminal the advantage of owning a weapon. Gun control has proven ineffective in deterring crime. The Brady Bill imposes a five-day waiting period on the acquisition of firearms.
In this paper, I will discuss the effect that capital punishment has on deterring criminal activity. Capital punishment is the execution of criminals by the state, for committing crimes, regarded so terrible, that this type of punishment is the only acceptable punishment for the crime committers. For decades now, there has been an ongoing debate over the death penalty in America. The chief argument in favor of death sentences is the fact that it can be used as a deterrent. Deterrence is the idea that executing the murderers will decrease the rates of homicide by discouraging future murderers.
Death penalty VS Life in prison By Colin Robertson “Other states are trying to abolish the death penalty... mine's putting in an express lane.” – Ron White The death penalty, as it is commonly referred, is the penalty sometimes given to the criminals faced with the most horrific crimes possible. Many feel it is necessary in order to keep society safe because of how it permanently removes these select people from society, feeling that this will keep them safe from danger. It has been a part of the justice system since the beginning of human history, used primarily in cases of murder, treason and in military service, but just because something is old, doesn’t mean it’s what is right. The last several centuries have seen the emergence of modern nation states. Almost obvious to the concept of nation state is the idea of citizenship.