Wait a second!
More handpicked essays just for you.
More handpicked essays just for you.
Media influence on perception of crime today
Distortion of crime by media
The impact of media representations of crime on public perception
Don’t take our word for it - see why 10 million students trust us with their essay needs.
Recommended: Media influence on perception of crime today
The Documentary of Amanda Knox
The story of Amanda Knox is one that is well known by almost everyone around the world. In 2007 this young girl from the US was studying abroad in Italy when her whole world changed in the worst way. Her british roommate, Meredith Kercher, was viciously murdered in the house where they were living. This murder case made international news and was diversely controversial. The case and prosecution of Amanda Knox was most likely due to her gender, and was very different from the way we prosecute in the United States according to our laws and regulations. In my opinion, Amanda Knox was falsely accused and prosecuted and it was very well to do with the media attention this case brought along with it. The prosecution
…show more content…
When searching for DNA evidence they contaminated the crime scene in many ways. Some did not wear protective gear when inside the home where the murder occurred, possibly transferring DNA evidence into parts of the crime scene that was not originally there, and others examining the crime scene did not change gloves or booties when going from room to room, which could possibly transfer DNA as well. In the lab, they examined many pieces of evidence together, which could also transfer of DNA, and would immediately get evidence thrown out in US court. Also, when using DNA you have to be very precise and accurate. These people were not. They used DNA that was almost unidentifiable and unrecognizable as evidence. This would never happen in US court, and if it did the evidence would be thrown out almost immediately. Now, I am not saying that the US judicial system is perfect, but they are definitely more stick than that of Italy, and if things were the same in Italy I believe that Amanda Knox would have never been convicted of …show more content…
The media and her gender overdramatized the murder to make it look as if she was the murderer. This murder making international news caused the police to try and find a murderer very fast, which also caused several mistakes to have been made. Her confession was obviously coerced, and she still did even confess to the murder, and the DNA evidence used should have never been used in the first place. This documentary did a very good job in stating the facts, but it was also biased in the sense that it was based on Amanda Knox and her story. Seeing her cry and tell the story as she viewed it definitely made the audience, including me, feel for her and her innocence. Overall, the documentary was very well done and informative, influencing me to believe in the innocence of Amanda
According to the Innocence Project (2006), “On September 17, 2001, Chad wrote the Innocence Project in New York, which, in 2003, enlisted pro bono counsel from Holland & Knight to file a motion for DNA testing on Tina’s fingernail scrapings.” The state had tested the DNA that was under Tina’s nail from the first case but at that time it was inadequate and could not be tested. It was not until now that we have the technology capable enough to test it. In June 2004, the test came back negative to matching both Jeremey and Chain Heins but did come from an unknown male. The state argued that it was not enough to overturn the conviction so Chad’s attorney asked the state to do some further testing and to compare the DNA from under the fingernails to the hairs that was found on Tina’s body. It was in 2005 that the Florida Department of Law Enforcement confirmed that there was a match between the DNA under Tina’s nail and the pubic hair. According to LaForgia (2006), “this particular type of DNA, the report stated, was found in only about 8 percent of Caucasian American men.” During this process there was a new piece of evidence that Chad’s attorney had learned about during the appeals process, a fingerprint. There were some accusations that the prosecutors never disclosed this information about this third fingerprint and if they did it was too late. The jurors did not even know about this fingerprint and if they did this could have changed the whole case. This fingerprint was found on several objects that included the smoke detector, a piece of glass, and the bathroom sink. It was soon discovered that this fingerprint matched with the DNA found on the bedsheets that Tina was on. This was finally enough evidence to help Chad Heins become exonerated in
On July 15th 2008, Caylee Anthony was reported missing by her grandmother, Cindy, who claimed that she had not seen her granddaughter in 31 days. Cindy called the police after picking up her daughter Casey’s impounded vehicle, which smelled strongly of a decomposing body. Cindy found a bag of garbage in the trunk of Casey’s car but no trace of a body. Cindy had attempted to contact and visit Caylee over the past month, but Casey Anthony refused visitation, claiming that Caylee was with a nanny named Zenaida Fernandez Gonzalez, or at the beach or parks. Casey had given Cindy various explanations as to Caylee’s whereabouts before finally telling her mother that she had not seen Caylee for multiple weeks.
They found Casey Anthony, who was charged with first degree murder of her 3-year-old, not guilty. While she was not guilty of murder, she was convicted on counts four through seven for false information given to the police. The judge sentenced her to one year in county jail for each one of the four counts, but she was released 10 days after she received 1043 days credit. If I was part of the jury I would have said she was guilty of murdering her daughter. Even if she did not kill her, she is still part of the reason why she died. Casey neglected her child either way and did not report the crime to the police until someone else did. I am shocked that the visual evidence did not convince the jury that she was guilty. From the strand of hair in the trunk that matched the past child’s hair, to the extensive research on chloroform found on all web browsers, it was very evident that she did or was at least part of murdering her
When the FBI looked at it they thought that it was just right that she was getting convicted because they thought that she did it, too. They didn’t like Patty Hearst case because her father Randolph Apperson Hearst was a newspaper heir worldwide, so they kidnapped his daughter to get back at him that he was famous. The SLA wanted to be famous, so they kidnapped his daughter to be famous around the world. When they knew nobody would help her, they just convicted her because they thought she was the one that robbed the
The Casey Anthony trial has been arguably the most controversial case since the trial of O.J. Simpson and has been speculated over ever since the verdict had been given in July of 2011. It was decided by a jury of her peers that Anthony was not guilty of murder, for the death of her daughter Caylee. Many believe that Anthony should have been found guilty however, very little Americans actually comprehend the justice system.
The Casey Anthony case was one that captured the heart of thousands and made it to the headline of national TV talk shows, newspapers, radio stations and social media networks for months. The root of the case was due to a clash between the parental responsibilities, the expectations that went with being a parent, and the life that Casey Anthony wanted to have. The case was in respect to the discovering the cause of Casey’s two-year-old daughter, Caylee Marie Anthony’s, death; however the emphasis was placed on Casey and her futile lies, which resulted in a public outcry. The purpose of this essay is to delve into the public atmosphere and inquire about why the media and social media collectively attacked the case by uncovering the content of the case, the charges that were laid, and later dismissed, the “performers” of the trial and the publics reaction. It will further discuss how it defies universal ideologies and how the media represents this. The discussion of the complexities of the case and its connotations will incorporate Stuart Hall’s Representation and the Media, Robert Hariman’s Performing the Laws, What is Ideology by Terry Eagleton, The Body of the Condemned by Michael Foucault, and a number of news articles, which will reveal disparate ideas of representation in the media, and the role of the performers of the law and their effect on the understanding of the case.
The Andrea Yates murder trial was one of the most highly publicized cases of 2001. Perplexing and complicated, it appealed to the public audience for various reasons. A mother methodically, drowns her five children in the family bathtub after her husband leaves for work. Was this an act of a cold calculating killer, or was this the act of a woman who lost touch with reality. Is this a case of medical neglect, and psychological dysfunctions, or is this a battle of ethics and deviant behavior exploiting medical and legal loop holes?
The book itself was hard to follow. It is not the type of book I would normally choose to read. There was not much character development and way too many slimy characters too keep track of. The crimes were plentiful and the relationships between the characters were often unclear. The book seemed to jump around to numerous detailed incidents and crimes that occurred making it difficult to tie them together. The author of the book was a magazine journalist, so this type of writing was out of his comfort zone. Nevertheless, Brown must be given a great deal of credit for putting in years of dedication to investigate this story that police overlooked and possibly participated in. This book needed to be written because, without it, more women could have been murdered. Brown first published an article on the case before witting the book, the day the article came out the body of the last victim was
It took the United States court system seven times to finally convict Assata Shakur, and even after being finally convicted, the notion was under false information and misrepresentation. She was accused of multiple bank robberies that took place between 1971 and 1972 and the murder of a drug dealer in 1973(Shakur XIX). While most of the trials were dismissed, one trial did end with the conviction of Assata. The action that caused her conviction was the accusation of murdering a New Jersey State Trooper. Whether people believe Assata Shakur murdered a state trooper in 1973, the facts prove that Assata could not have possibly murdered a man in the condition that she was (Puryear).
The facts of the case are now more readily available thanks to the internet. When the story first broke in 1992 the internet was still in its infancy. Most of the media coverage at the time came from print and television coverage and most of that was not comprehensive at all. The initial jury award of almost 3 million dollars was sensational, grabbing headlines all over the world. Now with the advent of the internet in its modern form the facts are coming out about what actually happened. It turns out that Mrs. Liebeck was actually injured far more seriously than most realize and received far less money than was actua...
The court must find more evidence and not to depend on eyewitness testimony and to look for the best people as possible. Besides, there more evidence that DNA testing. Eyewitness must be proven in order to arrest the right suspect and question the suspect to get more evidence in steady of keeping in prison for false witness. The police for tracking everywhere the suspect went and people the suspect contact with that time. It will solve the problem by asking the eyewitness question and the suspect questions to see if both things they said
Crime is a common public issue for people living in the inner city, but is not limited to only urban or highly populated cities as it can undoubtedly happen in small community and rural areas as well. In The Real CSI, the documentary exemplified many way in which experts used forensic science as evidence in trial cases to argue and to prove whether a person is innocent or guilty. In this paper, I explained the difference in fingerprinting technology depicted between television shows and in reality, how DNA technology change the way forensics evidence is used in the court proceedings, and how forensic evidence can be misused in the United States adversarial legal system.
The Jodi Arias trial captured American attention very rapidly and soon become nearly the only thing on television news networks. The trial nearly monopolized Fox News for several months. There are several murders that happen every day in the United States, so how did this murder case gain so much attention? Because it contains many themes that are enticing to the American population. According to Elliott McLaughlin at CNN.com, “It's rife with sex, lies and digital images, many of them naughty, and the dueling attorneys are lively -- nay, bombastic -- in their arguments...
The ethical concern is a lack of prudence. Prudence is according to Aristotle the judgment and determination of right reason. This involves looking not only at looking at the ends of an issue but looking at the potential effects that their decision will have on others. The documentary appears to have the conclusion that is focused on the innocence of Steven Avery. The problem from this is that the effects appear to have little consideration if their position is wrong. The effect of their error is might have on the victim’s family is probably the highest concern because this involves the potential harm and emotional turmoil that the families feel when they have moved on or began to adjust to their lives without Teresa Halbach. The documentary bringing that back to the service could potentially cause harm to the Halbach family’s healing process. This is harm that needs to be mindful of when one is acting prudently. The family of the Averys needs to be considered, because it would also be unethical, if the documentary is supplying them with the false hope of Steven Avery being released from
The officers tampered with evidence and made a false discovery that he was the person and that is how he was convicted (Innocent Project N.D.). Many forensic methods have been implemented in research when looking for evidence, but the methods that are not scientific and have little or nothing to do with science. The result of false evidence by other means leads to false testimony by a forensic analyst. Another issue with forensic errors is that it is a challenge to find a defense expert (Giannelli, 2011).