This would typically include interviewing potential witnesses, determining what happened, and putting the pieces together. On an incident such as the Michael Brown slaying in St. Louis, witnesses couldn’t be taken as seriously as usual simply because of the uproar within the community. Any witness would automatically determine fault to be on the police officer. Investigators may read between the lines, though, often determining what truth is and what lies are. When video released of the Rodney King beating, South Central Los Angeles was
The police told Escobedo that his alleged coconspirator in the shooting of his brother-in-law had confessed and Escobedo was involved. The police were able to obtain a written confession, and Escobedo was eventually convicted of murder. Escobedo appealed his conviction, claiming his confession was obtained without his lawyer being present in violation of his right to counsel, and should be thrown out. DECISION/REASONING: The Supreme Courts decision held for the first time that defendants had a right to counsel even before they were indicted for a certain crime. Not allowing someone to speak with an attorney, and not advising them of their right to remain silent after they have been arrested and before they have been interrogated is a denial of assistance of counsel under the Sixth Amendment However, the decision was overshadowed by the court's Miranda decision two years later, and later decisions by both the Supreme Court and lower courts indicated the decision in Escobedo was to be limited to its facts.
Hernandez was charged with murder in the first-degree, unlawful possession of a firearm, and unlawful possession of ammunition. A first-degree murder conviction must rest on one of two theories; that he acted with premeditation or that he committed the crime with extreme atrocity or cruelty. In this case, premeditation would mean that Hernandez meant to kill Lloyd and/or cause(d) his death. A .45-caliber glock was used to kill Lloyd, but the murder weapon was never recovered. This charge has a maximum sentence of five years in prison.
The film Gone Baby Gone raises many deep moral questions surrounding our morality and our ability to make decisions based on ethics. The film, directed by Ben Affleck, centers around the investigation led by the police and two private investigators looking for an abducted girl. The girl’s family is distressed, although their ability to take care of the girl is questionable. It is made obvious that her mother has addictions to various drugs, and that her and her boyfriend owe money to a drug lord. We learn the backstory of a head of police; his daughter was also abducted and killed many years ago.
It is supported through murder of Mr. Were where the judge of the case accused the state of trying to cover up the murder by “cover up the DNA test results”( Judge Accuses State of Cover-Up in Were Murder) Also in the case of James (Whitey) Bulger was a big time crime lord but by being an “informant….government did not vigorously pursue during his trial” (Seelye, Katharine Q) Both of the stories had ways where their connections that allowed them to not be prosecuted for a certain period of time. Though in the Bulger case his connections in the CIA granted him immunity ran out as, he was then charged with all the murders that he committed over 50 years ago. Money and connections can only get you so far. The president used his connections to not be prosecuted what he thought was indefinitely was soon found out by Elise.
In regard to all the evidence that is presented before us it becomes apparent that there are only two plausible scenarios that happened to Roy Hoywood. The first scenario is that his death was due to a crime of passion in which he found his wife having an affair with her pro tennis friend. The other scenario that stems from the given evidence is that Rita, all the business associates, and Jonathan Simmons conspired to murder Roy in order gain the rights to the property in Los Angeles. But before discussing these scenarios we must observe and scrutinize all six of the suspects. Rita Hoywood seems to be the prime suspect not only because she seems to play a pivotal role in both cases, but also because she is closest to the victim relationship
The moral agents in this case know every indication points to the husband driving while under the influence of alcohol, and that the husband physically assaulted his wife, although she has no visible signs of it. If the officers just leave the residence, they might feel as though they are doing the wife an injustice by not charging the husband with domestic abuse, and feel as though they are letting the husband off the hook, since they know in all likelihood, he was driving while drunk. Political pressures could be such that the officers feel pressure to issue more citations to keep the department from downsizing. Identify each claimant (key actor) who has an interest in the outcome of this
Simpson in Los Angeles for the alleged murder of his ex-wife Nicole and her friend Ron Goldman. Regardless of Simpson's guilt or innocence, the trial clearly showed that class trumps race when it comes to the criminal justice system. At each step of the proceedings Simpson was able to obtain different treatment and results than he would have had he been penniless. This ranged from the obvious (the "dream team" of lawyers who represented him) to the not so obvious (the prosecution's decision not to seek the death
Whistler told the court that she pled guilty to an attempted murder charge. The person she attempted to murder was Mrs. Willson who is now in a coma. As part of Whistler’s plea bargain, she had to plead guilty to burglary and theft as an accomplice to Hopper. Also, part of the plea deal was that she had to testify truthfully against
Why did Brooks knowingly lie about what Spradley said? “She had been beaten, and one of her eyes was bloodshot and swollen” (“Justia US Law, 2011) when she came into the police station earlier that year. Brooks may have thought that by making those false statements, it would give justice to what had happened to her, even though he may have been innocent of the charges currently filed against him. The third and final context to consider is criminal justice. This view is that sometimes the criminal justice system fails and non-law-abiding citizens get away with certain acts.