Did Sacco and Vanzetti had a fair trial? Why not? Were they guilty of the crime? No , Sacco and Vanzetti didn’t have a fair trail as they didn’t commit any crime but they got arrested and sentenced to death just because they are anarchists and confessed that they hated the capitalism and the American system of the government. Also, the Americans who tried them are all biases and when the court case was trailed, it was the height of the red scare so all Americans were being so paranoid when they knew that a murder case had something to do with foreigners and they didn’t even find out what the truth was and just assumed that Sacco and Vanzetti were the attackers.
He once said, that it wasn’t ‘easy’ for him to send a boy off to die ‘without thinking about it first’. His approach of keep questioning were viewed as unknowledgeable and illogical, as all the evidences were against the defendant. ‘Facts’ were being thrown around the room without much thought. For 10th Juror, he kept using ‘facts’ to attack groups of people, claiming they were ‘born to lie’. But nobody knows if they really are.
During this case Ernesto Miranda a resident of Phoenix was charged with kidnapping, rape and robbery. Allegedly he confessed to committing these crimes, which the police had supposedly recorded. But because he had, had no counsel and he hadn’t been told his rights he was convicted and charged with 20 to 30 years in prison. But Miranda felt as if this was wrong, so he appealed the courts and got the case reviewed in 1966 by The Supreme Court. After the case was reviewed, The Supreme Court ruled 5-4 that the police couldn’t use the confession because they had failed to inform Miranda of his rights to consul and against self-incrimination.
Steve Harmon’s Verdict Steve Harmon is a young adolescent, who is without a doubt in my mind, innocent, until he is proven guilty. Steve Harmon’s innocence is being completely annihilated, and with lack of evidence, is being labeled as a “monster”, as Ms. Petrocelli characterizes Mr. Harmon, placing him with the delinquents who actually deserve the verdict of murder. Mr. Harmon is being charged with murder, with extreme deficiency of evidence, only just being a bystander, and is being withhold in prison, without even given a release on own recognizance (r.o.r) due for this being his first charge. Anyone who is in the same position as him is innocent, until actually proven evidence that the defendant had physical involvement in the crime. The evidence that is being held against Mr. Harmon is that he was in the drugstore, at the same time when his accomplices, Mr. Evans, Mr. King, and Mr. Cruz were robbing the store, which led to the homicide of Mr. Nesbitt.
The book To Kill a Mockingbird is directly comparable to the movie 12 Angry Men. Both Texts show the theme that true understanding takes time, study, and effort, but To Kill a Mockingbird shows what happens when people do not take the time to obtain a true understanding. In the book Tom Robinson is convicted for allegedly raping a teenage girl even though there was sensible doubt that Tom did not rape the girl and there was no concrete evidence. In the film a teenage male Puerto Rican was accused of murdering his father. All the evidence and the defendant weak testimony made him look so guiltily that 11 out of 12 jurors voted guilty in the preliminary vote.
Jonathan Carlisle Professor Strine Argumentative Paper October, 12, 2012 Was Carl Lee Hailey’s act of murder Justified? There is much controversy surrounding Carl Lee Hailey and whether or not his act of murder was justifiable. The real question though is whether or not there is ever a justifiable act of murder. Carl Lee Hailey murdered two white men who had raped and beaten his daughter to the point of near death. Its hard for anyone to say that they would not do the same thing if they were in his position but that is not the question at hand, people want to know is what he did ok.
Dominick Askew What’s the punishment for police brutality? What’s the punishment for defending yourself against police brutality? In the case of Troy Davis, Davis defended himself from being beating by two officers of the law leading him to kill one of them. With the actions of Davis in 1989 he was recently put to death in 2011 with no evidence of him committing that crime. Seven out of nine witnesses that testified against Davis said they were coerced into providing a false testimony.
Jack The Ripper Who doesn’t recognize Jack the Ripper as one of the most notorious killers of all time? He was never caught and was one of the first serial killers to prey on innocent citizens. I don’t believe that it was the fault of the police for not capturing Jack the Ripper for many reasons. Apart from the lack of technology which limited the police to witnesses there are many other significant reasons for never finding and stopping the Whitechapel murderer. Although there is overwhelming evidence to say that the police did their best there are still two sides to the argument.
Victor’s action to run away caused William’s death and made Justine look like the killer when the evidence was planted from the blood. I see it as Victor was never going to be truly happy because there was so much he really didn’t know and could not handle the whole situation. People during the Enlightenment tried to handle many things on their own but certain things should just not be touched or you will find out the hard way. It was like finding a million dollars in the street and keeping it thinking no one would ever trace back to finding you because it was something that huge. He paid his price and it was a great one, the role of God is not to be played
“No one knows whether death may not be the greatest of all blessings for a man, yet men fear it as if they knew it is the greatest of evils (Cahn 35).” The unexamined life is not worth living is first explained when Socrates speaks about the trial. He said that “it is not easy to dispel great slanders” and could not be reversed in a couple hours and “if it were the law with us, as it is elsewhere, that a trial for life should not last one but many days (Cahn, 39)” Since the jury, the trial, and the court did not take the time to truly examine Socrates’ life it resulted in the verdict of guilty. Ergo “the unexamined life is not worth living for men (Cahn