Abel Fields Case Analysis

362 Words1 Page
bulb-icon

Recommended: The nature of judicial precedent

Abel Fields was convicted for bank robbery along with two other men. While two men pled guilty, the respondent decided to plead innocent. Ehle then agreed to testify against Fields at the trial, to further incriminate him. From there, the Respondent called Mills to the stand. Although Mills wasn't involved with the robbery, he had spent time with Ehle in prison. Mills stated that while in prison, Ehle admitted that he would falsely testify against Fields for favorable treatment. The prosecution brought Ehle back to the stand to testify against Mills’ Credibility. Ehle stated that they all had belonged to an Aryan Brotherhood gang and they had all sworn that they would lie to help out a fellow gang member. The trial court allowed this testimony. In addition to his statement, he included that if he were to disclose and/or accuse another member of any crime could have an outcome of possible death. …show more content…

United Stated trial, I, serving as a Supreme Court Justice, have decided that Fields has been correctly convicted of his crime. A precedent that’s able to further support my decision goes back to the case of the New York Times v. Sullivan, which demonstrates the right to make false statements. This precedent has helped keep past cases consistent, liable, and precise. Within this certain case, the First Amendment comes in hand with protecting the publication of all statements, even false ones. Furthermore, Mills’ statement of Ehle admitting that he would falsely testify against Fields for favorable treatment was legal. The US Supreme Court had found evidence of the men’s association with the Aryan Brotherhood gang, which became an abundant source of evidence for Mills' possible bias against the respondent’s case. Therefore, Mills' membership in the gang is not exactly proof that he is lying, but considerable evidence that he is more plausible to lie. Basically, this precedent has shown that Fields has been rightfully prosecuted and

Show More
Related

  • Case Study: Marvin Pickering Case

    1447 Words  | 3 Pages

    The court stated the appellant’s statements were false concerned issues that were important to the public’s attention. The statements were neither shown nor could be presumed to interfere with the appellant’s performance of his teaching duties or the school’s operation (Oyez, n.d.). In the matter of false statements, the Supreme Court looked back at New York Times Co. v. Sullivan (1964). The school board was unable to prove the statements were malicious in nature.

    Read More

  • Dr. Jeffrey MacDonald's Fight for Innocence

    1458 Words  | 3 Pages

    Debated as one of the most misrepresented cases in American legal history, Dr. Jeffrey MacDonald still fights for innocence. Contrary to infallible evidence, prosecution intentionally withheld crucial information aiding MacDonald’s alibi. Such ratification included proof of an outside attack that would have played a major role in Jeffrey’s case.

    Read More

  • Gore And Waterfield: The Two Theories Of Killing Ancest

    640 Words  | 2 Pages

    Waterfield was charged with less crime because he wasn’t the leader of the pursuits, murders and attacker. I believe that he deserved the life sentence that he had, because he knew what he was getting involve with from the first victims and he decided to stay and keep following his cousin.

    Read More

  • The Norfolk Five: Case Study

    1846 Words  | 4 Pages

    The psychological abuse that the four suspects were exposed to made them make a wrong confession. In addition, being in an environment where the interrogation room is tight and dark increased the suspect’s anxiety. Moreover, the Frontline documentary stated that the suspects were held in custody for long hours with Robert Ford who used threatening language in order to make them confess. Not only that the suspects made a false confession, but they also told Ford different stories on how they murdered the victim. The coercive interrogatories, led Joe Dick to accept the label Ford put on him and the others. Although Ford was supposed to act just, he acted upon his self interest. Thus, he denied all facts because of fear of embarrassment of being wrong. However, after serving many years in prison, the four suspects were released to face stigmatization and labeling from the society. Indeed, this case proved that there is a malfunction in the justice system and that there’s a need for an immediate

    Read More

  • Katherine Watkins: A Quaker In The 17th Century

    440 Words  | 1 Pages

    Moreover, the slaves, mentioned in the accounts, during this trial were not deposed to testify in favor of or against Katherine’s claims. The accounts were all given by whites, depicting Katherine as a the culprit of the crime. However, as one of the eyewitnesses, John Aust, attempts to discredit Katherine’s claim of her rape, Humphrey Smith gave information that accuses John Aust of saying her lied under oath and saw Katherine with a busted lip and a bloody handkerchief. Humphrey also claims to have seen the mulatto ask for forgiveness, while the husband of Katherine Watkins threatens to shoot him if he crosses onto his property again.

    Read More

  • Curtis McGhee Case Exoneration

    1396 Words  | 3 Pages

    ... exchange for his testimony (Source). This case exemplifies that false accusations of informants can have a significant effect on someone’s life, and it can lead someone innocent to be committed for a crime that they never committed.

    Read More

  • Kyle V. Whitley Case Study

    1786 Words  | 4 Pages

    Whitley, Kyles was tried for murder, convicted and sentenced to death. However, upon review of his case, it was discovered that the prosecution had failed to give evidence about a witness, a man named “Beanie”, and several other pieces of material evidence. Since these were not given to the defense and the evidence was significant, he was given a new trial (United states v., 1976). What separates this case from the others is the fact that the evidence suppressed was witness testimony and the witness’ background and prior statements. The testimony of “Beanie” in this case was important, as it had “significant inconsistencies and affirmatively self-incriminating assertions (Kyles v. whitley, 1995)”. Because this information and prior testimony relevant to the case weren’t released, the conviction was overturned. This is relevant to the dilemma because one of the areas that had importance to the defense was that the witness wasn’t consistent in their testimony and that led to issues with their effectiveness as a witness. Referring back to the dilemma and the officer’s conduct, the officer wasn’t consistent in their testimony, namely that they denied wrongdoing and later confessed. This shows that the officer is an inconsistent witness and that if this is discovered, and the prosecution must disclose that information, he can be impeached as a witness. This will mean that he is not as effective in the criminal justice

    Read More

  • Dusky Vs. 402 (1960)

    1479 Words  | 3 Pages

    John smith, the accused, stood up in the courtroom and started yelling at the judge about what he thought of his innocence irrespective of the decision that the judge would make. He also cursed the prosecutor and kept quiet when his lawyer warned him of the negative consequences that would follow if he continued with the same behavior. Smith

    Read More

  • Branzburg vs. Hayes

    1967 Words  | 4 Pages

    After the article was published, Branzburg was immediately subpoenaed by the Jefferson County Court system. The court demeaned that he name the two individuals featured in the article, but he stood strong and refused to give up their names like he had promised them. Branzburg argued that the Kentucky Privilege Statute passed in 1962 protected him from having to give up the names.(1) He also argued that the First Amendment and Kentucky constitution, (Sections 1,2, and 8) protected his right not to disclose the information of the two individual’s identities.(2) However, the Kentucky courts fought back arguing that the Kentucky Privilege Statute didn’t allow a reporter to refuse to testify about things they saw, or not disclose the names of people they were in contact with. Branzburg then took his case to the Kentucky appeals court, which ruled against him once again. He continued to fight the good fight for what he thought was true and right; the case finally ended up at the Supreme Court.

    Read More

  • Rhetorical Analysis Of The Innocent On Death Row

    500 Words  | 1 Pages

    To support their conclusion the board tells the story of two men who were exonerated after spending thirty years in prison for a crime they did not commit. Days after the rape and murder of eleven year old Sabrina Buie, half-brothers Henry Lee McCollum and Leon Brown confessed to the crime. Not only were their confessions made under pressure without parents or an attorney present, but the prosecution failed to present multiple pieces of evidence to the defense lawyers, DNA evidence that proved McCollum and Brown were not responsible for the murder. In fact, the DNA belonged to a Roscoe Artis, who was a suspect all along and was convicted of a similar crime just weeks later.

    Read More

  • Tulsa Race Riots

    1683 Words  | 4 Pages

    “The trial was brought to a speedy conclusion. Not only did Judge Evans find the twelve guilty, fine them $100 each, and committed them to jail, but five people in the courtroom who had served as witnesses for the defense arrested. […] The police were then instructed to transfer the seventeen prisoners that night to the county jail”(30).

    Read More

  • Gabriel Fernandez's Case Study

    1330 Words  | 3 Pages

    The difficulty I had with this case, was I had multiple sources to turn to for information. I had to choose which source was reliable because I did not want misconduct information. The media sources had about the same variety of information about Gabriel’s case, but added small details that the alternative networks did not include. For example, each news network added more information on how Gabriel was found by the paramedics. The L. A. Times reported that Gabriel had a cracked skull and three broken ribs while the Huffington Post did not include this information. The L.A. times also elaborated more on the story by reporting more facts about who was involved in the investigating. They included names of teachers, and police officials that was involved. The differences between how news network presented the facts in the case proved the different ways we are influenced by the media, and the information we gather depends on where we get our stories

    Read More

  • Ethical Issues In Making A Murderer

    1859 Words  | 4 Pages

    On December 18th 2015 Netflix aired with great popularity a 10 part documentary series called “making a Murderer” The documentary, written by Laura Ricciardi and Moira Demo, present the case of Steven Avery; a convicted murderer exonerated on DNA evidence after serving 18 years for the assault and attempted murder of Penny Beerntsen. The writers present the series in a way that suggest that Avery was framed by the Manitowoc Country police department. and present that the police planted evidence to frame Steven Avery because he had been exonerated from the previous crime. The ethical problem with this as is presented by Kathryn Schulz in The New Yorker, is that the documentary argues their case so passionately that they leave out important

    Read More

  • oscar grant

    758 Words  | 2 Pages

    Johannes Mehserle was arrested on January 13th for the murder of Oscar Grant. Mehserle was granted bail; it was set at three million dollars (Bulwa). He testified that he thought that Oscar Grant had a weapon and was going to stock him with his stun gun but by accident he pulled out his gun. The prosecutors were trying to get him convicted of second-degree murder, by saying Mehserle was angry with Grant for resting the arres...

    Read More

  • Similarities Between Monster And Murder On A Sunday Morning

    1130 Words  | 3 Pages

    Crimes in America can be vicious and brutal, often leading to long, draw out trials, but it is only fair if you charge the right man. The only way that it can be fair is if you go by the facts and not the appearance of the accused. Many trials in America have men of color pointed out to be criminals. Many crimes are committed for a reason but many people label it as unknown. People are racist especially against colored people, they believe that white men are innocent but that is not always true. They always turn against the colored people for many crimes that could have been committed by a white man. The novel,Monster and the documentary “Murder On A Sunday Morning” are the same because,both cases have similar charges,both crimes were taken in a public place,and the both consist of racism either by the jury or police.

    Read More

More about Abel Fields Case Analysis

Open Document