CASE #0001 DEFENDANT: WALTER MCMILLAN CASE SUBJECT: WALTER MCMILLAN INNOCENT TIME: 10:15 AM. WALTER MCMILLAN V. BALDWIN COUNTY | COURTROOM ARGUMENT ESSAY Your Honor, jury members, my name is Bijou-Camille Sab, and I am representing McMillan in this case. My client Walter McMillan, an African-American, is being charged with the capital murder of Ronda Morrison, an 18-year-old woman who was sexually assaulted and shot several times at the back of her head. This case is brought under the 6th Amendment, which prohibits not allowing the suspect to be a required witness. Which is something that my client didn’t receive. In my perspective, Walter McMillan has been wrongfully accused and severely mistreated because he is a minority and also because …show more content…
Now, the facts of this case are pretty straightforward. I guarantee you that the following evidence will show you that my client, Mr. McMillan, has been wrongfully accused and deserves justice. To prove my client is innocent, I want to bring 4 witnesses to the stand, one being the store owner of the grocery store. When the cops interrogated Ralph Myers, he claimed to have seen Mr. McMillan near the crime scene at a local grocery store. But, the owner says that Mr. Myers searched for Mr. McMillan, asking the store owner which of the several black men in the store was him. “Months after the crime, the storeowner was adamant that Myers had never seen Walter McMillan before.” (Stevenson 131), so the question is, how could my client have possibly committed this heinous crime if he was never even spotted within the grocery store, or even knowing Ralph Myers at that? Mr. McMillan tried persuading his previous lawyers to speak to the store owner but was, unfortunately, ignored. Now, at the time of the first trial, the jury doubted Mr. Myers, which could’ve possibly created a reasonable doubt about Mr. McMillan’s verdict. But because of how rushed this case was, it wasn’t …show more content…
Proving how he’s been wrongfully accused and deserves justice, but I digress. Your Honor, I’d like to bring another witness to the stand, Ralph Myers. After speaking to Mr. Myers on this case, he admitted that Mr. McMillan’s first trial was a whole lie. On top of that, he mentions how he was coerced and pressured into lying and found out that Mr. Myers was involved in the murder of Vickie Pittman and he lied to cops saying he was involved in Morrison’s murder and that McMillan assisted him, which was false. Those same cops told Mr. Myers to lie on the stand and threatened to also receive the death penalty along with Mr. McMillan if he didn’t testify against him by Sheriff Tom Tate and ABI agents. “I lied to him. Everything I said at McMillan’s trial was a lie.” (Stevenson 135) This may sound pretty unbelievable and even worse as it comes from Mr. Myers. I’m aware his last trial cast doubt on his credibility, but what must be understood is that from the very start, nothing added up as even the storeowner stated that Mr. Myers had no clue who my client was. This can only mean that he was possibly coerced to give that note by the Sheriff and ABI agents at that time. To further prove my client’s innocence, I’d
This incident involved Victim Athena Marie Herbert being a victim of an attempt rape at Suspect Gayk Chuldzhyan’s residence.
Omar Abdul Ballard had admitted to the rape and murder of Michelle Bosko; his was the only semen found. Furthermore, Ballard tried to tell police that he alone had committed the crimes. Yet despite the physical evidence and Ballard’s statements, the courts decided to continue their cases against the other four men. Even the lawyers that should have been trying to defend the Norfolk Four did little to actually defend them against the charges and instead opted to try to get them a lighter sentence. Their own lawyers seemed unable to get over the fact that the men had confessed to the crime. Even with explanations of long interrogations, threats, and lies by the police these lawyers were unwilling to believe that innocent men would confess to such a heinous crime. Instead, they were urged to “cooperate” with the police and tell the “truth”. With this type of advice the men went up to the witness stand and committed perjury lying under oath and relaying their false confessions to the jury. The problem it seems is that the police and the courts were not interested in the truth or justice, they are looking for an easy way to close a case. They were looking for someone to blame and they were unwilling to admit that they were wrong when evidence seemed to show they had a made a
This case was subject to many errors throughout its duration. One of the largest immediate inaccuracies was that this case didn’t have many of the elements necessary to constitute a crime (Gaines & Miller, 2008). There was no proof of actus reus or mens rea, no concurrence, and the attendant circumstances did not incriminate Ryan Ferguson in any way (Gaines & Miller, 2008). Additionally, during the court proceedings Ferguson was not fully informed of his privilege against self-incrimination, and took the stand without being properly prepared for what was going to occur (Gaines & Miller, 2008). There were also many errors made under the supervision of Detective Kevin Crane, including eyewitness misidentification, false confessions, and law enforcement misconduct during the court proceedings (Gaines & Miller,
Even though there was a complete lack of physical evidence against Steve Titus and the victim’s initial description of the perpetrator did not match him, he was convicted based on the eyewitness testimony given by the victim. Titus was cleared of his charges before sentencing due to the actual perpetrator being caught and positively identified (Loftus & Ketcham, 1991). This case is a prime example of how pressure from the police and relative judgement conceptualization can attribute to misidentifications.
Anthony Hanemaayer was exonerated on June 25th, 2008 for being wrongfully convicted of assaulting a teenage girl on September 29, 1987, consequently being humiliated and wrongfully jailed for 16 months. Leading him to ask “What Life” has he been left with.
The opening scene is a re-enactment of R v Liam Cooley. Cooley is the suspect in an armed robbery. He pleads ignorance but investigators have found the accused’s fingerprints on a pair of sunglasses in the getaway car. The prosecution’s witness is a member of the NSW Forensics Squad. During the examination-in-chief, the prosecutor strategically confirmed the forensics officer’s extensive expertise and the scientific validity of the methodology used. This is permissible under s 29(1) which allows parties to proceed in any manner they see fit. Here the prosecutor used the credibility gap to his advantage, as the police officer’s technical statements, “rich in detail”, were seen as legitimate.
Wilbert Colin Thatcher was born August 25, 1938, in Toronto Ontario. Colin Thatcher studied Agriculture at the University of Saskatchewan, and later transferred to Iowa State University where he graduated with a Bachelor of Science and Masters in Agriculture. It was during this time at Iowa State University that he met his wife JoAnn Wilson. The couple married in 1962 and relocated to Moose Jaw, Saskatchewan. In 1971, during the grieving of his father’s death, Thatcher cultivated his interest in politics. Son of the Premier W. Ross Thatcher, Colin followed in his father’s footsteps emerging as a political figure in the Liberal party and later the Progressive Conservative Party. While JoAnn cared for their three children, and simultaneously
On January 1st, 2016 Travis Jonathan Miller fell down the stairs in his apartment building, injuring his his right hand and ankle. The medical report revealed that the injuries included a sprained wrist and ankle, and a fracture in the intermediate phalanx of the right digitus minimus, commonly known as the “pinky” or “little finger.” The fractured finger required a splint. The sprains that resulted from the injury only required ice, and anti-inflammatories for treatment. (Med. Exam. Report). During the client interview Mr. Miller claimed that he did not have any prior medical conditions that would provoke a fall. As well he provided some information that was not included in the medical report. The incident occurred at ten in the morning when he was carrying his laundry downstairs. While carrying his laundry his right foot slipped, as he fell he reached for the railing which was not there and he suffered a five foot fall which resulted in his injuries. Despite the doctor’s recommendation of waiting two weeks before applying pressure to the finger he was not able to return to work for four weeks. In addition to the four weeks of missed work Mr. Miller missed two
First of all, I’d like to greatly thank the jury for coming and serving on this trial. Today, Mr. James King is being tried of the felony murder of Mr. Nesbitt. Mr. Nesbitt’s death is a sad truth to his family and his community. However, to place Mr. King as the murderer without solid evidence is preposterous. Remember, I’d like to remind the jury that if there is any reasonable doubt in the claim of Mr. King, you must vote not-guilty. I urge you to realise that by placing Mr. King in jail for 25 years to life, you will be compromising this young man’s entire future. I hope you make an informed decision to keep Mr. King out of jail.
The problem that William Marbury had was that he wanted to be the judge and wanted the United States to support his decision by issuing a legal order.
Any of these reforms, if they had been done during Hayes’s and Matthews’s cases, could have prevented their wrongful convictions concerning the murder. Between interrogation reform and eyewitness reform, any change in the direction of validating what actually occurred or making sure information was presented in an unbiased manner would have shown great differences in what happened to these two men. These two individuals, wrongly convicted due to two of the six main faults in the process, are now part of 16 exonerated cases from the Innocence project that involved two people accused of a single crime.
According to, “Murder on a Sunday Morning”, Brenton Butler was accused of a murder of Mary Ann Stephens. During the trial, there has been some moral and corrupt evidence to prove whether this “suspect” was guilty or not. Many logical pieces of evidence were provided during the trial such as, photographs of the clothing that was worn by Mr. Butler to observe whether Mr. Stephens could identify it – and proving that Mr. Butler was accused because of his race. There has been biased argumentation during this trial such as identifying racial profiling (African-American), another eye-witness name Mr. Stevens discovered a bag of Mary Ann Stephens near the garbage, been accused by the police for “taking the gun” out of bag – but failed to fingerprint
B1.) Stride-Darnley assumed with younger children that rewards will promote good work, good behavior, and good choices. Technically, he is partial right. Giving younger children a reward from completing school work, behaving well, and making great choices has a positive influences on them; however, what you may consider a reward may not be so rewarding to them. In one interview, Stride-Darnley listened as a younger child reported to him that he would purposely get into trouble because he did not like being outside with a lot of children. For younger children they look at free time as being a reward but for that particular child it was a punishment because he did not feel comfortable around a large group of kids. The school social worker and other school officials may have blamed the child’s behavior on his mental disorder (ODD), but the child was very aware of his actions and choices he made. By not having options that would have catered to a better choice for the child, he had to act out to get the choice he wanted. In another observation, a reward produced good behavior and work. This child was redirected and was told his actions are the cause of him losing his computer time.
In today’s society, the excessive use and abuse of force is still an existing controversy. In this project the main adjective was to look at two incidents that have occurred in past years and pinpoint if there was any indication of abuse of authority. One which was the controversial Rodney King case that caused uproar in the civil rights activist community and a case that many are not so familiar with such as the Andrew Meyer case. In both cases, it appeared that there was evidence of abuse of authority. In both videos, it showed people of different ethnicity, settings and predicaments that set the tone for each video. Each video can be argued; “Well they should not have resisted”; while others can argue “it was just too excessive for there
Today in criminal convictions, it is prevalent and necessary that there is evidence collected in order to hopefully find and put away the people who committed the crimes. Serology is an important factor that allows this to occur. Serology is the study and identification of bodily fluids such as blood salvia and semen in order to proceed in criminal investigations and legal processes. Blood, saliva, and semen can be readily found in sexual assault and homicide cases. In the case of Dennis Maher, serology is something that should have been considered in order to make a conviction. Instead, none of the evidence that was collected was tested to exclude him, and he was put away in jail based on eyewitness identifications. The crimes that occurred in 1983 ended with Dennis Maher, a solider for the United States, being charged and convicted for rape, assault with intent to rape, assault & battery, and aggravated rape in the year of 1984 based on Eyewitness testimony (NEIP, 2011).