Due to lack of supervision many mistakes were made by Joynes and language was purposely put in the contract that led Hurt to escape liability and this caused the client to lose out on a great deal of money. Issue Whether Attorney Musselman acted neglieglently by assigning the case to Mr. Joynes and not supervising his. Whether Attorney Musselmwas negligent and breached his fiduciary duty as counsel to the Corporation. . Holding The trial court found that the defedant was negligent as both attorney and officer and fined him $243,722.99.
So, I should argue that Jacoby uses too many his own feelings about the dissatisfaction of imprisonment, which makes his claim weak and not credible. For instance, Jacoby states that “the criminal is out of control.” Yes, it might be a strong and persuasive way to get reader’s attention or even agreement, but it is not impersonal, and it is the claim based on his complaint, dissatisfaction and anger. It is inappropriate that reader can only feel his anger and dissatisfaction about the imprisonment. After all, Jacoby thinks “the criminal is out of control” is not a well-known fact. If
The argument is against those who committed theses crimes, they knew what they were doing was wrong and instead they continued to break the law. It does not support my position nor does it negate from it. I believe that these primary sources were not that reliable because they were just court case files. I think that no
James Wetzel CRMJ 101-52 Online Jury Nullification-Article 1 Jury Nullification occurs when a jury returns a verdict against the proof of guilt because the jurors believe the law to be unjust or unjustly applied. As a result, the defendant is declared innocent, or is given a lesser penalty, even though without an act of jury nullification they would have been found guilty. While this all seems great, jury nullification is a source of much debate in today’s society. Some maintain that it is an important safeguard or last resort again the wrongful punishment and imprisonment. While others often view it as a violation of the right of a jury and undermining that law.
In this case the judge would be handling this situation out of spit, because he would be ready to leave and not continue his work, which is very unprofessional. Taking kickbacks from private juvenile detention facilities for locking more juveniles up on questionable charges I believe this is unethical, because this is just a simple form of bribery and is very much known in the Criminal Justice field. Taking a kickback for more juveniles would be unethical because it would be ruining young adults lives by locking them up for their own personal gain. Banning one of the defense attorneys in a case from speaking during the trial I believe that this is unethical, because this will cripple the individual who is trying to win a case especially if they are not guilty of the crime that they are being accused of. Suggesting to persons appearing before him to contribute to certain charities in lieu of paying
Hostile Witnesses - a Menace to the Criminal Justice Administration Introduction: "Witnesses" as Bentham said: are the eyes and ears of justice. If the witness himself is incapacitated from acting as eyes and ears of justice, the trial gets putrefied and paralyzed, and it no longer can constitute a fair trial. The incapacitation may be due to several factors like the witness not being in a position for reasons beyond control to speak the truth in the Court or due to negligence or ignorance or some corrupt collusion. Time has become ripe to act on various experiences faced by Courts as a result of witnesses turning hostile very often, either due to threats, coercion, lures and monetary considerations at the instance of those in power, their henchmen and hirelings, political clouts and patronage and other innumerable corrupt practices ingenuously adopted to smoother and stifle truth and realities coming out to surface rendering truth and justice, to become ultimate casualties. Broader public and societal interests require that the victims of the crime who are not ordinarily parties to prosecution and the interests of State represented by their prosecuting agencies do not suffer even in slow process but irreversibly and irretrievably, which if allowed would undermine and destroy public confidence in the administration of justice, which may ultimately pave way for anarchy, oppression and injustice resulting in complete breakdown and collapse of the edifice of rule of law, enshrined and jealously guarded and protected by the Constitution.
Censoring art is also wrong in the fact that politicians and lawyers are telling how and in what way people should be allowed to express their concepts and feelings. Removing a
The sentence to be fair involves taking those things into account. But inevitably there is criticism. It is hard to get media coverage of the circumstances of the accused. The public does not want to know. The public is hard.” From that it can be seen that the public is bias towards the circumstances of the supposed victim and wants the accused punished without any regard to their situation.
They are merely concerned with the inconsistency that Meursault’s actions pose to the social norm. Due to his dissimilar behaviors, Meursault is ostracized an unanimously regarded as ‘the outsider’. The society and its members condemn him of his apathy at his mother’s death, but more essentially of the threat he poses to their so-called uniformity. If Meursault had shown the
George Keyworth was not a ethical person because he leaked confidential information and also let a investigation be opened, instead of being honest. CEO Dunn showed an ethical attitude and was forced to resign by board members, which describes the other board members to be unethical also. 2. Who are the stakeholders impacted by this situation? How would you rank their claims? Everyone related to this company is affected by this situation.