They processed it and later found out there was traces of his wife’s nightgown, skin, and blood all from the deceased victim. The evidence was then admitted at trial. Murphy then proceeded to appeal his conviction stating that they conducted an unlawful search and seizure which goes against his 4th and 14th amendment rights. Issue: Whether the taking of the substance underneath the defendants fingernail without his permission was unlawful. Decision of the Court: His charge was held and he was charged for the murder of his wife.
The Homicide Act 1957 has been criticised mainly under these following premises. The Mandatory life sentence for committing murder has been criticised for being too rigid in the cases of mercy killing, for example, a man may have helped to kill his terminally ill wife because she begged him to put an end to her pain. The court may feel considerable sympathy for the husband who carried out the act of a mercy killing, but would still be obliged to impose a life sentence. The mandatory life sentence for murder means that once convicted of the offence, the defendants face the same penalty whether they are serial killers, terrorists or mercy killers. This inflexibility prevents the court from taking into account motive or circumstances, both of which can make a significant difference to the way in which society would view the individual offence.
A case which shows the chain of causation is the case of R v White (1910) the defendant put cyanide into his mother's lemonade, however she died of a heart failure before she drank the poison. The answer to the question 'But for what the defendant did would she have died' is NO she would've died anyway. The defendant had the Actus Reus as he had put the cyanide in his mothers drink and he also had the Mens Rea as he knew that by doing this he would kill her. He was found guilty of
On December 1, 2008, an innocent woman, Trudi Doyle, was shot twice in the chest, causing her death. It has been determined that the rounds were fired from the gun of John Diamond, her alleged lover. Skepticism comes into play when concluding whether or not this shooting was malicious or involuntary. Based on the testimonies of multiple witnesses from both the commonwealth and the defense, I have declared the defendant, John Diamond, guilty of murder in the first degree. The commonwealth started off the trial with their first witness, Dr. Jane Pierce, the coroner who inspected Trudi Doyle’s corpse.
Most people believe George Chapman was "Jack the Ripper" because he hated women, killed three of his many wives, and because he was a surgeon. However, many people do not believe that he was the "Ripper" because Chapman poisoned three of his wives and enjoyed watching them suffer as they died. "Jack the Ripper" killed his victims quickly. Every serial killer has a specific signature to his murders, and Chapman's signature does not fit the "Jack the Ripper" profile. According to All Serial Killers, "In 1903, Frederick Abberline, a retired crack detective who had been in charge of the Ripper investigation at the ground level stated that he thought that multiple wife poisoner Severn Klosowski, alias George Chapman, might be Jack the Ripper.
That's why all suicides are morally questionable, because next to your family, and social-circle, the paramedics, the police, the coroner, they all lose something, in having to clean you up. To what extent is a police officer morally obligated to assess whether a person he or she shoots actually wants to be killed? I believe there isn’t an extent because if a person tries to point a weapon at you there intention is to kill not just to injury unless they want to commit suicide in this
Innocent people are getting murdered for a crime they didn’t commit. Gray Gauger was convicted of killing his parents but, after his conviction he was from innocent when the police heard the murders talking about the killing. Recently, Troy Davis was executed after convincing the judicial court he was innocent. There was no proof that he actually murdered the victim, and to this day the prosecutors don’t even feel guilty for executing the wrong person. To add to that most of the innocent people on death penalty were black.
Instead of him getting the poison to use it against his wife he got poisoned when the druggist slipped it in his coffee, so the when the druggist told him you already had the poison in him, he panicked so he asked how much for the antidote the druggist said 1000$ so Sangstrom didn't hesitate to buy the antidote. The violence that fits in this story is that he wanted to kill his wife with the poison, but instead the poison got to him. So it was almost like payback but nobody got poisoned accept Sangstrom. There was also some hatred with Sangstrom against the druggist. Sangstrom also was violent when he pulled out the pistol and was scaring the druggist.
She also cites facts, while maintaining an emotion, by mentioning George Sodini, who specifically targeted women in his shooting “killing three women and injuring nine others." This intends to bring out the moral woe within the reader. One of the strongest of Valenti’s uses of emotional tone is when she states that the leading cause of death for women who are pregnant are murdered by their partner. It is almost unthinkable: with so much emphasis in America on the sanctity of life, whether or not to allow abortion or the morality of stem cell research; the fact that “the
“Capital punishment is a legal process in which a person is put to death by the state because of a (very heinous) crime he or she has committed” (Michael). Is this not murder as well? In a 2007 study given by a popular Christian magazine, many extreme religious advocates voted that they were more in favor of the death penalty than they were of abortion. It is not fair of them to be against one thing, yet in support of another. It is said that capital punishment and abortion both result in the same argument: murder.