The captivating film Changeling (2008) highlights the true story of single mother Christine Collins, portrayed by Angelina Jolie, in her desperate search for her nine-year-old son, Walter, who was kidnapped in the late 1920’s. Several months after Walter was announced missing, the Los Angeles Police Department (LAPD) seemingly found him and then returned him to Christine, only to her dismay upon realizing it was not her son. Chief of Police James Davis eventually sends Collins to the Psychopathic Ward of Los Angeles County, refuting her claims that LAPD returned the wrong child to her. Upon meeting lawyer S.S. Hahn, Collins was able to leave the ward and testify in court. With the help of Hahn as well as the state judiciary, Collins was eventually …show more content…
However, they possess the power to interpret the laws and judge what they believe constitutional and unconstitutional. In the context of the film, the lower district courts ultimately hear Collin’s case, as explained in great detail by her lawyer, S.S. Hahn. Although the judiciary does not possess the power to create any laws regarding her circumstances, they are able to hear the evidence brought forth by Collins and Hahn, ultimately leading the judiciary to decide that LAPD did, in fact, return the wrong child. Hahn and Collins brought forth evidence to the court including the fact that the child returned to her was three inches shorter than her actual son, Walter, the child returned to her also was not remembered by his teacher when he arrived back to school and could not locate his assigned seat in class. In addition, Walter’s dentist noted that Walter had a gap between his two front teeth, and yet the child who was returned to Collins had perfectly even teeth. Taking all of this evidence into account and later locating the mastermind who kidnapped Walter—Gordon Northcott, the court in the civil trial permanently suspended Chief Davis for incarcerating Mrs. Collins without a warrant, as Collins was unjustly and improperly thrown into the psychopathic
He believes that a kid from a place like that isn’t any good. The next character is Edward James Olmos (#11) for the first half of the movie he was very quiet and walked around, but once he changed his vote to not guilty he became very kind and helpful. Something he said when he was standing up for the kid was, “ to say one is capable of committing murder
Sahara Special, by Esme Raji Codell, is a shining piece of adolescent nonfiction that authentically and sensitively captures the Heart-Wrenching Life Story and Amazing Adventures of a two-time inner-city fifth grader. Inspiring and empathy inducing, Sahara Special exemplifies Russel’s guidelines for culturally and socially diverse literature as outlined in our textbook in many ways.
Everybody had an opinion on what happened at the Ramsey household on December 25, 1996. Most people believed that the family is responsible for killing JonBenet. Ever since that day, the public has held the Ramsey family under a cloud of suspicion. The family did everything they could do to defend themselves. They believe that an intruder must have done it, but most of the public believes that the family should be held responsible for the killing. The main suspect that police keyed in on was the mother of JonBenet. The reason for the suspicion of the mother was the 911 call made by Patsy Ramsey the day of the murder. In this 911 call, the mother seemed very suspicious. Patsy said “We have a kidnapping” ( McClish). “It seemed like she knew something she was not telling” (McClish 2001).
While John 's mother never confronted her husband about his actions, or went to the police before the murder she did eventually confront the police during the trial. " Sandra Telford had her husband served with divorce papers at Riker," (Locos Parentis"). While this was the right thing in the end, later everyone was debating on whether or not she should go to jail as well, but in this case I believe that she was just as much as a victim as John and Chris were. For all the jury and police know she could have been physically abused, and even gas lighted by her husband which makes it even harder to leave. These possibilities make it harder to leave someone and with a total of 4,000 deaths every year related to domestic violence she could have been attempting to protect her own life. While she personally was not convicted of any crime in this case, Robert took a deal and got two to six years in prison, his son was sentenced to ten plus years. This particular sentence is unjust due to the fact that John could have been dealing with the abuse from his father starting from the time he was born, so he may not know right from wrong. Due to this factor and evidence in the case I believe John should be put into a mental hospital so he can attempt to learn right from wrong and get the therapy he obviously needs. Looking at the evidence against Robert I believe
... I've lived among them all my life. You can't believe a word they say. You know that. I mean, they're born liars.” In this statement you can clearly tell his prejudice against the kid, just because of where he was raised. Juror # 10 and juror # 3 has prejudice against the kid. Juror # 3 has personal experience with a kid like the accused. “Reminded of his own family's personal crisis, Juror # 3 tells the jurors of his own disrespectful, teen aged boy who hit him on the jaw when he was 16. Now 22 years old, the boy hasn't been seen for two years, and the juror is embittered: "Kids! Ya work your heart out."” This is a direct example of juror # 3’s prejudice against the accused. When prejudice was in effect in the movie, it clouded the judgments of the jurors that were prejudice against the boy just because he was raised in the slums.
Around 20 years ago from our frame in time, from within the town of Robin Hills was an event of tragedy involving gruesome deaths of children. No matter the point in time the importance of the event that transpired has never changed. The film is based on the murders titled, Paradise Lost: The Child Murders at Robin Hills, focuses on the lives of the families before, during and after trials. Not only does it focuses on the deaths of the children, the film focusses on an internal theme that explores the riddle; “Is justice still served when given or taken from the undeserved?” Whether the accused teenagers are proven innocent or proven guilty that is what the directors were on the prowl for. Berlinger and Sinofsky documented every aspect they could to convey an honest and unbiased judgement into the trial. The methods the directors used is connected with how the audience will possibly judge the trial. Possibly meaning that the directors, no matter how hard they tried to be unbiased, grew emotionally attached and actually agreed at some point that the teenagers who committed the murders were actually either innocent or guilty. By the ways the filmmakers edited their film, on certain scenes suggest they had their opinions. As they
Wait Till Next Year is a book written by Doris Kearns Goodwin. Wait Till Next Year is a book written in Goodwin’s point of view set in Rockville Center, New York. The book begins with Goodwin’s father teaching her the scorekeeping rules of baseball in the summer of 1949. After her father taught her how to properly record a baseball game she would sit in front of the radio and listen to the game every day and would record everything each player did during that game. Then when her father would arrive home from work she would relay to him all that had happened during the game of that day. As Goodwin looks back on this in her book she begins to think that it is because of these times with her father that she has a love for history and for storytelling.
Steve Harmon is guilty of felony murder because he participated and had knowledge about a crime that ended up in the death of an innocent citizen. The judge stated the if you believe that Steve harmon took part in the crime than you must return a verdict of guilty. I believe that Steve went into the drugstore on that day for the purpose of being a lookout. Some of Steve’s journal entry’s lead to him feeling guilty or like a “monster”.
In the novel, I Am the Messenger by Markus Zusak, Ed Kennedy is just an ordinary bloke who’s grown up at the far north of town, also known as “everyone’s dirty little secret” (page 17). As the story progresses, Ed receives four playing cards that require him to do three challenges each. According to Ed, these challenges are like “missions” with harsh consequences if not completed. While progressing through each mission, Ed produces changes to the lives of many people.
Both of the boys accusations were very severe. Steve Harmon was being tried for bring an accomplice in a murder/robbery in a convenience store. Even though there's not much information on the arrest itself it was hinted that he was found around the neighborhood and was trying to film for his class when he was arrested .Whereas, Brenton Butler was tried as the killer of an older tourist that was white. Butler was outside by his house when police spotted him, they took him in for questioning just because the description of the murderer was that he was African American. Once arrested they were both introduced to the people who could change their fate in the courtroom.
Nesbitt and the robbery. “The states prosecute most crimes against the person, such as murders , assaults and many crimes against property, such as robberies and theft”(https://www.oas.org/juridico/mla/en/usa/en_usa-int-desc-guide.html). You can be prosecuted in any state for robberies and murders just like what Steve Harmon is put on trial for in the book. As previously mentioned this show that in any state you will be put on trial for robbery and murder. “Therefore, the role of judges in the investigation of criminal offenses is limited”(https://www.oas.org/juridico/mla/en/usa/en_usa-int-desc-guide.html) . They are just saying that judges don't really have any say whenever it comes to the investigation of criminal offenses but they do some extent. Judging by Steven Harmon’s case he is seen as just a young black man of trial for being an accessory to a murder and robbery that’s all the jury needs to know right? But that’s note true they need to look at all the facts of the case and all the facts tell you that Steve Harmon did in fact take part in the murder of Mr. Nesbitt and the robbery of his drug
The crime committed by Matt Fowler can be seen as justifiable, for there really is no greater pain than having to bury your own child, and seeing the culprit walk around seeming to have no care in the world. However, It is never right to take the law into our own hands, no matter the circumstances. In this case, once the authorities realize that Strout is missing and they find his body they will automatically look towards Fowler as the culprit, thus putting more strain and tearing his family apart even more.
George’s journey in the criminal justice system began when officers arrested her at her house in the presence of her children, which occurred rather in a calm manner, considering the nature of her charges. The detectives arrived at her house with a social worker to secure her children, and they refrained from making a brutal arrest scene by not
... believed in the innocence of the young man and convinced the others to view the evidence and examine the true events that occurred. He struggled with the other jurors because he became the deviant one in the group, not willing to follow along with the rest. His reasoning and his need to examine things prevailed because one by one, the jurors started to see his perspective and they voted not guilty. Some jurors were not convinced, no matter how much evidence was there, especially Juror #3. His issues with his son affected his decision-making but in the end, he only examined the evidence and concluded that the young man was not guilty.
My whole life, I have been presented to a single element called change. Change occurs in many different forms and is carried out in many different ways. However, just recently, I have come to the realization that change can be the deepest of all subjects. I always assumed that change occured when you moved to a new town or when you lost someone close to you. Those are elements to change, yes, but change doesn't have to occur over a single dramatic event. It can just happen overnight when your brain determines it's time to do something different.