The issue is whether Oren’s acquittal for the offence under section 304 of the Penal Code (PC) can be challenged.
Section 173(h)(iii) and Section 180(4) of the Criminal Procedure Code (CPC) stated that a prima facie case will be established when the prosecution has adduced credible evidence proving each ingredient of the offence and if unrebutted or unexplained, the accused shall be convicted. This means, in order to establish a prima facie case, there are 3 issues that have to be fulfilled namely the elements of the offence, the nexus between the offence and the accused and that there is no break in the chain of evidence.
Oren was charged with the offence of culpable homicide and under section 301 of PC it is provided that if a person, by doing anything which he has the intention or knowledge to be likely to cause death has committed the offence and even if he has no intention or knowledge himself to be the cause of death of any person. Oren has satisfied the element of culpable homicide as per his statement to Insp. Beta that during the sex, he had embraced Comel very tightly because she scratched him. Oren has no intention or knowledge that his act would cause the death of Comel. In addition, Comel’s cause of death was then declared by Dr. Medik was due to suffocation because her lungs had collapsed under pressure of being
…show more content…
Besides that, Section 173(h)(i) along with Section 180(3) of the CPC, asserted that when the prima facie case has been made out against the accused, the court shall order the accused to enter defence. Nevertheless, in this case at hand, Astro had reserved his judgment at the end of the prosecution case and was adjourned. Later, Oren was called to enter his defence at the resumption of the
3. Procedural History: This matter comes before the court on motions of defendants for judgment notwithstanding the verdict, for new trial pursuant to Rule 59 of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure, and for amended judgment. We have considered defendants' motions collectively and individually and conclude that neither a new trial, judgment notwithstanding the verdict, nor amended judgment is warranted. The evidence supports the jury's verdict.
offender) by using this law. Kumar explains of how the victim’s father said his dying
(3 points) What kind of defenses has the defendant raised? Or, if the case is over, what defenses did the defendant raise? If not clear in the article, what are the likely defenses?
Reasonable doubt plays a significant role in this particular case, as it requires a standard of unsurpassable evidence in order to be able to convict the plaintiff in a criminal proceeding. This is required under the Due Process Section in the Fifth Amendment of the American Constitution, allowing a safeguard and circumvention
Q1 THE COURT/S IN WHICH THE CASE WAS HEARD (OUTLINE THE CRIMINAL JURISDICTION OF THE COURT)
The court findings have finally come to a conclusion, to confirm regard to defendants Alexander, McCarthy, Caruso, and Correctional Medical Services Inc. because the Plantiff has poorly provided evidence specifying suspicious indifference. However, the court overturned the district court’s granting of summary judgment to Heebsh and Pausits, two defendants who return to custody for further actions because of sufficient evidence of deliberate indifference to survive summary judgment.
When a death occurs suddenly, unexpectedly and from unnatural or unknown causes, a forensic scientist has the duty to gather and analyze evidence to determine whether the victim died from a previously undiagnosed disease or infection or from a homicide, suicide or accident (Lurigio, 2009). When considering suicide as the probable cause of death, we are looking at the act of intentionally killing oneself through one’s own effort or with the assistance of another (Sever, 2009). The resolution of the manner of death by a forensic pathologist as suicide is based on a series of factors which eliminate natural causes of death, homicide and accident (Geberth, 2013, p.55). The cause of death is also determined by the medical examiner in conjunction with the crime scene investigator; however, it can only be determined after a thorough investigation is concluded. Therefore, in the complicated process of doing a death investigation there are several mistakes that should be avoided, which are discussed in Geberth’s article, Seven Mistakes in Suicide Investigation (2013). Mistakes in doing any death investigation affect the integrity of the evidence in determining the cause of death and in its admissibility in court.
Court will be announced. I believe that the case should be held at a later date
Gardner, T. J., & Anderson, T. M. (2013). Criminal evidence: Principles and cases (8th ed.).
Subsequently, one of the main components of the procedural limitation is innocent until proven guilty, which brings about the right to a Grand Jury- a panel that determines whether or not there is a need to go to trial. As a result, a guilty verdict in criminal cases is determined with evidence that is sufficient and that must be proved “‘beyond a reasonable doubt’” (pg.131), so there is an immense need to increase the chances for the respect of “reasonable doubt” (pg.
...tz et. al. 1997). “The standard of proof in a trial is one such fundamental tenet of criminal law.” (Horowitz et. al. 1997).
Gerald (Jerry) Gault, was arrest for an obscene telephone call to his neighbor, Mrs. Cook. Gault parents were not notified of his whereabouts, nor did the arresting officer leave a notice. The arresting officer file a petition with the court on the exact day of his initial court hearing. There was no petition given to his parents and it did not appear until two months later.(Facts and Case Summary-In re Gault, (n.d.). There was a challenge for the Appellant court in regards to the constitutionality of the Arizona Juvenile Code and procedure used in Gerald case, in which he was denied of a proper procedure of his due process. Therefore, a juvenile is required a due process in a court of law. In doing so there must be a written notice that states
In criminal justice, detectives need many skills that help capture the suspect. One of the important skills is finding and presenting evidence. This is significantly important because according to the Criminal Justice
The collection, custody and preservation of forensic evidence is a vital aspect of evidence integrity, without proper adherence to these procedures, crucial evidence that could potentially have great impact on a court case could be rendered useless. In the case of criminal proceedings, a skilled defence lawyer will look to scrutinise every step taken by forensic practitioners’ involved within the case in regards to the continuity of the evidence, in doing this they attempt to undermine the practitioner’s ability to properly carry out strict evidence collection, protection and preservation procedures and also look to find fault in the techniques they used to carry out these procedures.
Burden of proof is beyond a reasonable doubt. Beyond a reasonable doubt is standard of proof from the prosecutor, which must be surpassed to convict an accused.