His reason- he felt that they were not giving him the rights he deserved by denying him access to the law library and the state Attorney Grievance Commission. Unlike Colin Ferguson, Stewart was able to prove his innocence and was acquitted of the murder charges. The Washington Post stated that the only thing left of this case was the prosecution thinking twice about the quality of their case, if someone who was a high school dropout was able to beat them. No one went back and asked if he was denied any rights, possibly because Stewart came out of the court room
Medical Law & Ethics Jamie Lawry Chapter 2 The Kevorkian Case In the Kevorkian case, Jack Kevorkian was charged with murder for helping Janet Adkins commit suicide. Charges were later dropped and Kevorkian got away with this case. Kevorkian was not behaving in an ethical manner. Either he did not want to continue to treat this patient anymore or he was trying to get some money out of it. The case never really states whether Adkins actually gave informed consent to Kevorkian, but even if she did, that still does not give him the right to assist her with suicide, and he still should be charged.
Criminal Defense Case Analysis Kelly Douglas CJA/354 Professor Winch April 14, 2014 Criminal Defense Case Analysis Self Defense The Trayvon Martin case is one of the more recent and widely known cases that addresses the issue of a self defense case being used. This case surfaced in February 26, 2014 in Orlando, Florida where a 17-year-old African American male was walking to a nearby convenience store and drew the interest of a neighborhood leader. The neighborhood watch leader was bleeding from his nose and the back of his head when law enforcement officers arrived, however Trayvon Martin was laying dead on the ground, shot by the neighborhood watch leader's 9mm gun. The neighborhood watch leader claimed that himself and Martin had gotten into a scuffle and that he shot the youth in self defense (Dahl, 2013). Florida developed a “stand your ground” self-defense law that is noted to be one of the strongest in regards to self-defense laws in 2005.
Following that Andrea Yates submitted a plea of guilty for reason of insanity. The criminal case a criminal defendant can claim insanity by simply saying that he or she should not be held criminally liable for the damages committed from his particular crime because he was insane at the time of occurrence. Acording to CBS News (2009) "Dr. Phillip Resnick, a forensic psychiatrist, testified for the defense that she did not know killing the children was wrong because she was trying to save them from hell.” Now because of the evidence used and the defense of insanity, the cases outcome did not meet very many people’s expectations, to include my own. Many felt that her being sentenced to a mental institute was an injustice at its finest. Acording to CBS News (2009) "No one should believe that she is getting off easy.
The identification was ruled too suggestive. I feel like eyewitness testimony is too unreliable for the simple reason that the identification is able to be so suggestive. Recently I have been doing a lot of research on wrongful execution, and there have been people wrongfully put to death due to eyewitness testimony. It is a miscarriage of justice for an innocent person to spend one day in jail, it is a tragedy for an innocent person to be put to death. One innocent person punished in any way for the crime of another is one too many.
But what most of you probably don’t know, is that this cop got away with murder, the shooting of john Williams was declared unjustified, and a normal citizen with this charge would do anywhere from 25 years to life in prison. Ian berk was charged with being negligent and got no reasonable punishment from the law, besides a short term suspension from duty. Washington state law makes it extremely difficult to press charges against any police officers around the state, and around the country it is nearly impossible for a police officer to get charged with a crime of injustices. So how will we ever catch the cops doing wrong if we can’t even charge them? Police officers around the country know this is the case, they know they can abuse their power and get away with it.
Also, criminals rarely “get away with it” by pleading insanity. When the defendant pleads insanity, it means they admit to committing the criminal behavior and is seeking a “not-guilty” verdict on a basis of his state of mind. If the jury does not agree with their defense, then the defendant will be convicted and generally serve a longer sentence than if they did not plead insanity. Most people also believe that the insanity defense is only used for murder, however, sixty to seventy percent of insanity pleas are for crimes other than murder. These crimes range from shoplifting to assault.
If the criminal is charged and tried for murder, but found innocent, then he or she cannot be charged with a reduced offense for the same crime, such as a serious assault. This is called double jeopardy. The Fifth Amendment promises that no one will be made to incriminate him or herself. When someone says they are pleading the fifth, it means they are refusing to answer the questions because he or she would incriminate himself or herself. No person has to incriminate themselves.
In the scenario of a murder, with a substantial amount of evidence that the convicted was in fact the offender. The right to be presumed innocent will not account to much in this case and it will be completely useless if the offender denies all involvement in the crime. This right should be adjusted and therefore would cause less complications with some trials. Third, the right to assistance of counsel. In previous years many restorative attorneys were not
III. Personal Reflection: Determining the cause, and who may be a potential serial killer is a very impossible task. Its true that many serial killers have had mental problems but others are very intelligent