The forensic pathologist, Benerd Spilsbury, who claimed the tissue was a scar, helped prosecutors gain over 250 convictions in murder trials. He was expected to give the goods to the Jury, and indeed he did. No one second-guessed it, especially since this was the first act of forensic science. 8) Do you think Crippen killed his wife? Why or why not?
In the critical review of The Scarlett Letter, “The Scarlett Letter of the Law: Hawthorne and Criminal Justice”, by Laura Hanft Korobkin, Korobkin shows the reader the errors in the criminal justice system used throughout the book, and analyzes the various punishment choices that the magistrates employ. The raging political problems of the day are also discussed. Throughout the book, the magistrates are put in complete and total power over Hester Prynne’s destiny. Korobkin argues that in an actual Puritan society, a jury would have the real power and the magistrates would simply oversee the trial. She says that though the townspeople mutter and disagree with some of the magistrates’ choices, they ultimately have no say in the outcome of the trial and must always unhesitatingly obey.
A Few Good Men shows many examples of learning how to take responsibility for personal actions, but one of the last scenes with Colonel Jessep reveals two points most related to this issue of responsibility: responsibility to authority and responsibility of authority. In the first, Marines Dawson and Downey begin to understand why answering to authority was wrong in this situation, and in the second, Colonel Jessep is convicted for a murder in which he never feels he should be responsible for. Both of these situations allow others to see issues of morals, responsibility, and obedience. A Few Good Men gives several lessons, one of which can impact society as a whole if understood thoroughly: One must always know they are responsible for their own actions--always. It does not matter what the circumstances are, one is responsible for what they do personally, and what the outcomes can be when ordering others to do something.
Other witnesses enlightened the jury on the unusual position of John Diamond’s gun on the morning of the murder. It was loaded, cocked, and in the waist band of the experienced police officer and marine. The defense called upon witnesses that concurred in Mr. Diamond teaching Trudi ways in which to disarm a person with a weapon when she felt threatened. This statement brings up another point for why the second round went through her wrist, she was trying to disarm her lover in fear of her
English 102 8 September 2010 Exploring Capital Punishment in America Having grown up in a family of lawyers, I feel fairly confident in my knowledge of the American justice system. I have a vast understanding of how serious crimes are handled in a court of law and have witnessed several capital punishment trials in the state of California where I grew up. It is interesting to sit in a courtroom and listen to a Supreme Court judge ask the defendant whether or not he or she understands they are on trial for their life. Most of them appear stoic and void of life. On the other hand, it is difficult to watch the families of victims react to the gruesome photographs of crime scenes and listen to testimony from state witnesses describing
DESCRIBE HOW PERSUASION CAN INFLUENCE JURY DECISIONS Research has investigated the effect of having an expert psychologist who explains all the psychological variables that affect the accuracy of eye witness testimony which includes delay in identification, leading questions, weapon focus effect, feature and etc. overall eye witness will have an inaccurate or reconstructed version of the true event. Cutler aimed to investigate whether hearing about psychological research from an expert witness which casts doubt on the accuracy of eyewitness testimony would affect the jury’s decision. It was a lab experiment of 538 Psychology undergraduates whom were given extra credits. They watched a videotaped mock trial in groups.
The Magistrate also heard evidence from the defendants’ legal agent 3. for consideration. Prosecutors’ charges against the defendant were proven, and the defendant is found guilty, without a conviction noted on the defendants’ criminal record, and a punishment at the Magistrates discretion, is then delivered by the Magistrate. The two police prosecutors sat opposite each other at the left end of the bar table, one having his back to the Magistrate. Their role was to present the evidence against the defendant to the Magistrate, and the charges that the defendant had been charged with, and under what section they had been charged, and at times withdrawing charges after consultation with the defendants’ legal agent. I observed the police prosecutors consulting the defendants’ legal agent on many occasions discussing alternatives to a prison sentence and what the prosecutors felt was fair in way of punishment for this defendant.
Honors English 9 (1) 30 March 2011 Schutzstaffel: the Bad, the Worse, and the Heinous Unambiguously the most terrible group of torturers to ever exist, the Schutzstaffel, more commonly known as the SS, were the leaders of the infamous Holocaust. The SS was an exceptionally methodical group, working rhythmically and brilliantly and nearly never failing to accomplish what they wanted to, when they wanted to. Hitler originally raised the organization as a group of elite personal bodyguards, and they remained as so until Heinrich Himmler was chosen as their leader by Hitler himself (USHMM: SS and the Camp System). The SS quickly evolved into the egregious coalition known to so many today. They orchestrated the majority of the Holocaust; the solution to the “Jewish question” as it was called by German forces (USHMM: SS and the Holocaust).
Whenever a patient was accused of something, the patient always ended up looking guilty even if they were not guilty in the first place. Kesey observed this in our government when the civil rights sit in participants were jailed after being attacked. This is the exact thing that happened in the book but in a slightly different way. In the mental institution the patients were brought into conference with Nurse Ratchet to explain what happened during a curtain situation. Although a patient could be innocent, Nurse Ratchet asked particular questions to make them look guilty
After the Norman Conquest the jury system was imported to Britain. The jurors acted as witnesses and provided information about local matters, then, under Henry II, they began to deliberate on evidence produced by the parties. The judges would usually try to force the juries into convicting the defendants but in Bushell’s case (1670) the jury had the right to give a verdict accordingly to their conscience. In case R v Wang (2005) the judge directed the jury that they had to convict but the House of Lords said that it was wrong of the judge and they allowed Mr. Wang’s appeal. It is the jury to decide whether or not the defendant is guilty.