On the case of O’Sullivan vs. Mr. Crow I hear by find the defendant guilty of taking property and for murder. He has taken the life of an innocent man who had a family. He has put the blame on god. We all know that people have the freedom of speech and religion according to the 1st amendment of the Bill of Rights, but he has seriously taken that to the extreme. Mr.O’Sullivan doesn’t have the right to take Mr. Crow’s home and rights of life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness from the Declaration of Independence.
After taken to trial, the prosecutor's case “consisted solely of his confession” to obtain a conviction. The Maricopa County Superior Court convicted Miranda of both rape and kidnapping and was then sentenced to 20 to 30 years in prison. Miranda appealed to the Arizona Supreme Court, claiming that “the police had unconstitutionally obtained his confession” as well as the absence of an attorney during the interrogation and should have been excluded from trial. The police officers involved admitted that they had not given Miranda any explanation of his rights. They argued, however, that because Miranda had been convicted of a crime in the past, he must have been aware of his rights.
Manslaughter is defined as the unlawful killing of another human being without malice aforethought. I. Discuss the evidence to sustain a charge of murder against Deft: To be liable for murder, the element of malice aforethought must be present. The evidence shows specific intent to kill, premeditation and deliberation in several ways. The facts tell us that Deft searched for several months but was unable to find the killer, Deft went to the 38th street pier in search of the killer, and that Deft pulled out a handgun and shot Kyle in the chest.
Simpson was accused of the double murder of Nicole Simpson and Ronald Goldman. O.J was subsequently acquitted of the crimes and walked off a free man. O.J’s attorney, Johnnie Cochran conducted a well-executed plan of defense against the allegations made. There was a strong lack of consistency and there were major flaws in the prosecution case. The LAPD violated the 4th Amendment when they searched O.J’s house without a search warrant.
If a jury fails or refuses to convict a defendant in a criminal trial even though there if proof of guilt, jury nullification takes place. This is because the jury believes the law is being biased or unjust. If jury nullification is used in an honest and appropriate manner, it is likely to favor minorities in the courtroom in terms of sentencing for the crime committed as opposed to it being based on race. Most people that are picked to be on a jury do not know about jury nullification. A jury, juror, or judge can nullify a case in almost any
Unanimous verdicts remain requirements in federal criminal trials. Another advantage of the unanimous verdict is that it provides a level of certainty and comfort, to the citizens, that the jury was completely convinced, in total, of the defendant’s guilt. Certainly, the fact that all the jurors arrived at the same decision (guilty) must mean the defendant is guilty; or does it? Incidents of hung juries were lower when a unanimous verdict was not required, than when it
It states that no one can be held for a crime unless a grand jury has indicted him or her for the crime, which the grand jury decides whether or not there is enough evidence to take them to trial. The Fifth Amendment also states that no one can be tried more than once for the same crime, which is called double jeopardy. Double jeopardy has been known to be decisive if a person is being tried for a lesser crime. Example, a person hits someone with a cast iron skillet and wounds him or her so extremely that he or she expires. 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.
Plea bargaining is a process within the criminal justice system and it takes place between the two parties involved in a criminal case that is the prosecutor and the defendant .The defendant is asked to enter into a guilty plea by the prosecutor in exchange for a lighter sentence and in some cases the prosecutor might even consider reduction of the charges as an incentive for the defendant to enter into a guilty plea (McConnell, Michael & Chester, 1999). According to McConnell, Michael and Chester (1999), plea bargaining has proved to be beneficial to the criminal justice system and for this reason I believe attorneys should be allowed to use this tool in settling their cases. Some of the benefits that have resulted in plea bargaining as a means of settling cases are discussed as under:
However, with the “due process an individual is allowed their day in court if suspected of a crime because of United States constitution. Therefore giving that individual a right to a fair trial with an option for a jury of his or hers peers. It is the responsibility of the courts system to provide strong evidence on an individual accused of committing a crime beyond reasonable doubt. Strong evidence is important to avoid sending an individual to prison if they are innocent (Siegel, J. L.,
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.