Tim had kept eight cattle for his mother and him to eat and to sell. Sam had been warning Tim to butcher their cows and hide the meat before some of the soldiers stole them, but his warning came too late. Late one night two soldiers stole six cattle and Sam went out to catch them before they butchered them all and ate them. When Sam caught them, they knew that General Putnam would hang them to make an example to all the other soldiers. So, they beat Sam and took him to the training camp and told the guards that he stole cattle and they arrested him, never mind that it was his own family’s cows. Sam was tried in front of court-martial and found guilty. He was shot on February 16th,…
Merits: The respondent, Daniel Murphy, was convicted by a jury in an Oregon court of the second-degree murder of his wife. The victim died by strangulation in her home in the city of Portland, and abrasions and lacerations were found on her throat. There was no sign of a break-in or robbery. Word of the murder was sent to the estranged husband, Daniel Murphy. Upon receiving the message, Murphy promptly telephoned the Portland police and voluntarily came into Portland for questioning. Shortly after the respondent’s arrival at the station house, where he was met by retained counsel, the police noticed a dark spot on the respondent’s finger. Suspecting that the spot might be dried blood and knowing that evidence of strangulation is often found under the assailant’s fingernails, the police asked Murphy if they could take a sample of scrapings from his fingernails. He refused. Under protest and without a warrant, the police proceeded to take the samples. After this evidence was collected, Murphy was released and was not formally “arrested” until approximately one month later. The samples turned out to contain traces of skin and blood cells, and fabric from the victim’s nightgown. This incriminating evidence was admitted at the trial over defense objections.…
Koppersmith was charged with murder and convicted of reckless manslaughter. On appeal The Alabama Supreme Court reversed the conviction and sent the case back to the trial court because Koppersmith was denied the right to testify about his intentions. He went to retrial and was convicted of reckless manslaughter and sentenced to twenty years in prison. He appealed this conviction to the Alabama Court of Appeals on the grounds that the jury was not given instructions on criminally negligent homicide.…
2. The petitioner, Timothy Hurst, was convicted of first degree murder and the jury recommended the death penalty to the judge in Florida, who then sentenced Hurst to death. Hurst appealed to the Florida Supreme Court and was granted resentencing. The Florida Supreme Court rejected Hurst’s argument and reaffirmed his sentence. The Supreme Court of the United States granted certiorari.…
I John Adams is here today to address the jury of the innocence of the men that were involved in the killing of 5 civilians. On March 5, 1770 a riot broke out on the streets of Boston causing mayhem; British soldiers arrived on the scene to find the civilians out of control, and in order to gain order knowing the risk that was being taken they put their lives in danger to get a furious mob under control. No one man deserves to have his life taking and neither does he deserves to have it threatened and that is exactly what these men were experiecneing as they stood befor a raging crowd of civilians as they tore threw the streets of Boston. To have you're life threatened is just as bad as having it taken away from you ; Iam not saying that what they did was right but Iam saying that they were given no other choice considering the circumstances they were put under it was either kill or be killed and if they had not made the decision to take out the threat it would be civilians here today instead of these soldiers, If you were put in their shoes would you have not made the same choice? or is it just these soldiers who find that their life is valuable enought to protect? They were harassed, objects were thrown at them and they were threatened. Please allow these men to have a fair trial and please do not pass judgement upon them for they felt that they were doing something in defence of them selves as for every one of the world wants to be protected and when ever they feel threaten they will react the same way these men…
On all accounts, this crime is simply wrong and illegal. The morality and legality in "thou shall not kill" is a tenet that all citizens must abide, no matter the circumstances or personal beliefs of the individual. Though the situation of the men was tragic and stressful, a crime was committed and a man is dead. Brooks' life was deliberately taken by Dudley and Stephens, which signifies the punishable crime of murder. I recommend, pending a guilty…
The jury deliberated for less than an hour before acquitting Butler. This was a case that was all over the media and from the start had people thinking he had done it. While watching the video in class, it had me really thinking. I simply did not believe anything the prosecutors were saying. Nothing was making sense to me, the confession, and the eye witness. I just did not think that Brenton Butler had killed 65 year old Mary Ann Stephens.…
Based on the English Statute of Frauds, not every contract has to be in writing to be valid and enforceable, but some contracts should be. This agreement between State of Oregon and Pro DX, should be in writing because this contract involving the providing of services (repairs, replacements, maintenances, and others) exceeding a big amount of money. To avoid misunderstandings and disagreements and to reduce the possibility of perjury by one party or the other, this contract should be in writing. Furthermore, because it can be performed in less than one year, this kind of contract can be in oral form, and it requires involving the third party (a witness) who in case of the trial will bring a reasonable and effective evidences, otherwise one of the party might deny that the contract ever existed or might disagree on the terms of the contract. Besides that this…
The case of Edward Lee is significant because it shows that the process of Charge Negotiation can be abused to punish someone for a crime, even if they had not committed it. It was the 2nd time in NSW where a judge has refused to accept a manslaughter plea. Justice Hulme’s decision was applauded and attorney-general Chris Hartcher said it was “wonderful to see the court taking a firm stand”.…
“Gentleman of the jury, be merciful. For God’s sake, be merciful. He is innocent of all charges brought against him. But let us say he was not. Let us say for a moment he was not. What justice would there be to take this life? Justice gentleman? Why I would just as soon put a hog in the electric chair as this”. (Chap. 1, pg. 8) My analysis of this story weighs on multiple dynamics:…
In 1957 the Massachusetts General Court passed a resolution stating that No disgrace or cause for distress attached itself to the descendants of those indicted, tried, and sentenced. Declaring the proceedings to be the result of popular hysterical fear of the Devil, the resolutions noted that more civilized laws had superseded those under which the accused had been tried. It did not, however, include by name all those who had suffered, and it was not until 1992 that the omissions were rectified in a further resolution of the court. It had taken exactly three hundred years for the state to acknowledge its responsibility for all those who died.…
For the charge of homicide, all of the required elements are present in the facts of the case. The journal entries discussing the purchase of rope, rags, and a sharp hunting knife "to fulfill [his] destiny" prove mens rea. Actus reus is proven in the evidence that the victim was found with cloth stuffed in her mouth, arms and legs tied with rope restraints, and…
In an article by Matthew James Nance titled “A Mockery of Justice” he writes about an inmate’s tale of what happen to David Martin Long in the late 80’s. While David Long was still incarcerated there was a reporter that was interested in writing about his story her name was Laura Miller and in 1994 she came to the prison to interview him. She wrote about his injustice in which he wanted to be executed but because Texas law had an automatic appeal process his execution could not be carried out and therefore no matter how many times that he wanted to oppose this the state of Texas denied him his execution. He tells her about his trial and how short the deliberation was. He goes into great, detail in telling her of his wrong doing and how he knows…
We have all gathered here today to bring justice to a poor old man, who was murdered in his own house. Everyone in the court was brought here to decide if this man is guilty of being insane or guilty of murder. The murder confused to stocking this old man and claimed that he killed him because of his eye. The murders cut of all his limbs after killing him and hide him under the floorboard. When police came to his house he confused after a few minutes of silence. After a few days, lawyers, jurors, a judge, an expert, a witness, the murder, and I have all gathered here to bring justice to this old man. From my point of view, as the documenter, this trail seems like a tough decision. As of now I feel like the murder is guilty of 1st degree murder. Now at 1:44 PM the prosecution lawyer begins.…
The Australian judicial system comprises of different levels of court which hear criminal and civil matters in order to protect and promote human rights through a transparent and efficient justice system and by upholding the rule of law(cite) . The aforementioned notion was challenged upon observations made during visits to the Downing Centres' Magistrate and district court and the Supreme court of NSW. This paper will provide a reflective discussion analysing my experience and observations of court proceedings…