Throughout the years, a great number of movies have been produced that focus on lawsuits. One movie in particular that is centered around the law is A Time to Kill, which is based on the novel by John Grisham. The movie was directed by Joel Schumacher and released in 1996. In A Time to Kill, Matthew McConaughey plays Jake Brigance, a young lawyer who defends an African American man during a murder trial in Canton, Mississippi. Sandra Bullock plays Ellen Roark, a law student at Ole Miss, who assists Jake in the murder case. Samuel L. Jackson plays the African American man named Carl Lee Hailey who is charged with murdering the two men who raped his daughter. In A Time to Kill, two men rape and brutally assault an African American girl named Tonya Hailey. Tonya’s father, Carl Lee, confides in Jake Brigance that he fears justice will not prevail and needs Jake to be his lawyer …show more content…
The facts of the case are two men kidnapped and raped Tonya Hailey and then attempted to murder her. Tonya’s father, Carl Lee, then arrived at the courthouse with a gun and killed the two men who raped his daughter. In the process, he also wounded an innocent officer. This accusation is confirmed by Carl Lee’s fingerprints matching the ones on the gun used to kill the two men. The wounded officer also testifies that Carl Lee personally apologized to him for injuring him. The defense for Carl Lee pleads not guilty due to temporary insanity at the time of the killing. One doctor testifies that Carl Lee was sane at the time of the killing; however, his credibility is damaged when the defense discovers that the doctor has never diagnosed a person on trial as insane, even one who was later found to be insane. Another doctor testifies on behalf of the defense that Carl Lee was in fact temporarily insane when he murdered the men. His credibility is also damaged when it becomes known that he is a convicted
On the night of August 31st 1986, Angelique Lavallee a battered 21 year-old woman in an unstable common law relationship was charged with murder. She shot her spouse, Kevin Rust in the back of the head while he was leaving the bedroom. Angelique was in fear for her life after being taunted with the gun and was threaten to be killed. Hence, she felt that she had to kill him or be killed by him. The psychiatrist Dr. Shane, did an assessment and concluded that she was being terrorized by her partner. Dr. Shane concluded that Angelique was physically, sexually, emotionally and verbally abused. As a result, in the psychiatrist’s opinion, the killing was a final desperate act by a woman who seriously believed she would be killed that night. This in turn identify her as a
On the evening of Ms. Heggar¡¦s death she was alone in her house. Eddie Ray Branch, her grandson, testified that he visited his grandmother on the day that she was killed. He was there till at least 6:30 p.m. Lester Busby, her grandnephew, and David Hicks arrived while her grandson was still there and they saw him leave. They then went in to visit with Ms. Heggar. While they were there, Lester repaid Ms. Heggar 80 dollars, which he owed her. They left around 7:15 p.m. and went next door to a neighboring friend¡¦s house. David Hick¡¦s went home alone from there to get something but returned within ten minutes of leaving. Because he was only gone for 5-10 minutes, prosecution theorized TWO attacks on Ms. Heggar because he could not have killed his grandmother during this 5-10 minute period alone. At 7:30 p.m., 15 minutes after the two had left, an insurance salesman called to see Ms. Heggar. He knocked for about 2 or 3 minutes and got no reply. Her door was open but the screen door was closed. Her TV was on. He claimed to have left after about 5 minutes and then he returned the next morning. The circumstances were exactly the same. With concern, he went to the neighbor¡¦s house and called the police. His reasoning for being there was because the grandmother¡¦s family had taken out burial insurance three days before she had died.
On May 7th 2000, fifteen year old Brenton Butler was accused of the murder of Mary Ann Stephens, who had been fatally shot in the head while walking down a breezeway of a hotel with her husband. Two and a half hours later, Butler is seen walking a mile away from where the incident occurred, and is picked up by the police because he fit the description of the individual who shot Mary Ann Stephens. However, the only characteristic of the description that Butler featured was the color of his skin. Police then brought Butler to the scene of the crime in order for Mary Ann Stephens’s husband, James Stephens, to confirm whether or not Butler was the individual who had shot his wife. Almost immediately, Stephens identifies Butler as his wife’s killer.
Throughout the trial, defense attorneys attempted to argue Salvi was suffering from psychological disorders that would make him incompetent for trial. Ultimately, however Salvi was found competent to stand trial. After reading Salvi’s full psychiatric interview, the official court transcript of the four-day competency hearing, and the day-to-day summary; I have come to agree that the defendant, John Salvi was competent to stand trial.
R. v. Lavallee was a case held in 1990 that sent waves through the legal community. The defendant, Lyn Lavallee was in a relationship with her partner, Kevin Rust, in which he would abuse her both mentally and physically. On the night of the incident, Lyn and her husband got into a fight, her husband pulled out a gun and told her if she didn’t kill him now he’d be coming for her later. When leaving the room, Lyn shot Kevin in the back of the head killing him instantly. She was convicted of murder, but when brought before the Manitoba Court, she was acquitted of the charges. An appeal was made to the Manitoba court of Appeal on the grounds that expert testimony should not be admitted as evidence in the courts. They argued that the jury was perfectly
Everything is criticized at every level in this story, the people by the main character, the main character by the author and even the story by the author as well. The cruel egoistic personality of Anders is definitely identifiable through these different levels of criticism. I will prove that the inner motivation of this behaviour derives from Anders' egoistic personality which sometimes makes him cruel against others, sometimes against himself. Furthermore, I will prove that whenever Anders criticizes somebody or something he actually tries to punish because of the imperfectness of the object. In order to make the referring to the different part of the story easier I divide it into three parts. The first part ends when the robbers appear at the door of the bank, the second ends when one of the robbers shoots at Anders and the left is the third part.
John Grisham uses personal experience and cause and effect strategies for emotional appeals or also known as pathos to show the audience how movies greatly influence people and their decisions.
... others that as soon as they claim they hear voices or are claim they killed someone because they did not like the way a person’s eye looked that they can get off on a lighter sentence. The defendant has planned all of this out, and if it works out the way he has planned it, there will be a murderer released from a mental institution after a short period of time instead of being locked up for the rest of his life with the other criminals like he deserves. If this person were insane, he would have not have mentioned anything about the old man’s fortune if it were so unimportant that he would have never mentioned it at all. The States believes that the defense has failed to prove it burden of 51% and this man must be convicted and sent to a prison before he murders someone else and uses “insanity” as an excuse again.
In 1990, Brenda Koss shot her husband, Michael, while he slept and killed him consequently. Brenda Koss and a number of other witnesses testified about Michael’s ongoing abusive behaviors toward her. The Ohio Supreme Court recognized BWS as a defense in a criminal case. The Koss case is an example of how the law and perception on BWS evolved. In 1981, the state high court had refused to allow the admission of any evidence on BWS, believing that it had not yet been scientifically validated to sufficient extent. However in State v. Koss case, the court found that the professional literature and psychiatric understanding of BWS had very much improved; therefore, the court reversed itself and held that expert testimony on BWS could be admitted in a trial. The Court held that evidence of BWS was admissible through an expert testimony to help prove an element of self-defense —that is, Brenda Koss had a bona fide belief that she was in imminent danger of death or great bodily harm and that her only means of escape was the use of force (Bettman, 2011). This case illustrates how the court changed its opinion and perception on BWS as the public started to understand more about BWS and battered women. Unlike State v. Stewart (1988), BWS was positively used to support battered women’s acts of self-defense. Shortly after the Koss case was decided, the legislature passed a law recognizing and validating BWS; it permits the use of expert testimony in support of the defense.
Convicted for the murders of his wife and two kids, thirty-four years ago, Dr. MacDonald still endures the agony of being accused of killing his family. Even after twenty-four years of imprisonment and several unlawful court hearings, additional documentation continues to up hold Dr. MacDonald’s testimony.
In John Grisham’s, Bleachers, this fiction story takes us through a small town in Messina, Mississippi. Everyone who is anyone attends their local high school football games. Thousands of locals come to the Friday night football games to watch the Messina Spartans play each week. Bleachers takes place in a present time setting in which former players talk about past games. The legendary coach of the Messina Spartans is getting close to the end while the former players await his death. Former players from different years are sitting on the bleachers of Rake Field talking about past games and memories. Because this is a fiction story, none of the characters or events are real. There are characters in this book that could portray real people, because the things these characters go through are common in today's world. Characters like Neely Crenshaw, an all-American whose career ends up short with a career ending injury. Then there is Coach Eddie Rake, a coach that leaves a legacy in a small town by making an unbelievable winning streak during his prime years. Almost everyone who played for Coach Rake hated his guts. Fictional characters in this book are believable. Even events like a coach who hits their athlete, and starts a brawl seem believable. Although this book is fiction, the majority of the events and characters could exist and are believable.
When viewed from a strictly medical, psychological aspect, Andrea Yates medical history indicates that after the birth of her first child, she began to suffer from various forms of depression and suicide attempts. If one only examines the paper trail and doesn’t think beyond what the medical history does or does not indicate, then perhaps, Andrea would be innocent by reason of mental insanity as the 2006 acquittal suggest. However, when viewed form a legal aspect there are several inconstancies that challenge if this former nurse was insane or if she in fact premeditated the murder of her children as well as her acquittal.
The theme that is similar is, revenge. In A Time To Kill, Tonya Hailey, a 10-year-old African American girl is raped by two white racist rednecks. Her dad, Carl Lee Hailey soon seeks revenge on the two men, Pete and Billy Ray. Carl kills Pete and Billy Ray with a rifle as the two guys are headed to their courtroom for what they did to Tonya. In To Kill A Mockingbird Tom Robinson, an African American was charged for rape by two white women. Tom Robinson wanted to seek revenge, but not violent revenge. He wanted to get revenge in the courtroom, and to prove that not all African Americans are violent and
Usually when someone is murdered, people expect the murderer to feel culpable. This though, is not the case in war. When in war, a soldier is taught that the enemy deserves to die, for no other reason than that they are the nation’s enemy. When Tim O’Brien kills a man during the Vietnam War, he is shocked that the man is not the buff, wicked, and terrifying enemy he was expecting. This realization overwhelms him in guilt. O’Brien’s guilt has him so fixated on the life of his victim that his own presence in the story—as protagonist and narrator—fades to the black. Since he doesn’t use the first person to explain his guilt and confusion, he negotiates his feelings by operating in fantasy—by imagining an entire life for his victim, from his boyhood and his family to his feeling about the war and about the Americans. In The Man I Killed, Tim O’Brien explores the truth of The Vietnam War by vividly describing the dead body and the imagined life of the man he has killed to question the morality of killing in a war that seems to have no point to him.
The second condition to be established is whether the defendant had a “disease of the mind”. This condition is