Wait a second!
More handpicked essays just for you.
More handpicked essays just for you.
Racism and discrimination examples
Employment discrimination examples
Discrimination examples in us
Don’t take our word for it - see why 10 million students trust us with their essay needs.
The case with Mike Tyson and Desiree Washington is a famous case that serves as an example of the intersectionality of race and sexism that conflicts with the experience of the Black rape survivor. On July of 1991, Desiree Washington, a beauty pageant traveled to Indianapolis to compete in the Miss Black America Pageant. There she met Mike Tyson, a worldwide boxing champion, while he was recording a commercial with many of the beauty contestants. Tyson invited Washington out with him and made a stop at his hotel room. Tyson asked Washington to go up to his hotel room with him, where he then raped her. Washington accused Tyson of rape and testified that she was forced to have sex. While Tyson testified that the sex was consensual, Washington …show more content…
was labelled as a Jezebel by the African-American community. Although Washington was eighteen at the time, the African-American community failed to see her as a young girl who was brutalized and sexually violated. Instead they created a foul image of her, labelling her as promiscuous and playing naïve. After an extensive trial, Tyson was convicted with rape and was sentenced to 10 years in prison. After serving three years Tyson was released for good behaviour. “When Tyson was convicted of rape, metaphorically speaking, Washington won the battle in the courtroom but Black women everywhere lost the war because the jezebel and sapphire archetypes were insidiously dispensed to dehumanize Black femininity” (Griffin, 84). After Tysons ruling, many remarks surfaced that indicated Washington had “wanted it/asked for it/deserved what she got” (Gillium, 79).
A newspaper came out that was titled “After the Verdict, the Doubts; Black Women Show Little Sympathy for Tyson’s Accuser”. In the article, there was a Black female close to Washington’s that also blamed the raping on her. She said “Eighteen-year-olds are not naive in this day and age, I know what guys want at 2 o’clock in the morning. Where has she been, living in a closet? … Even if he did do it, I feel no sympathy for her” (Gillium, 79). She was also accused of breaking a pageant rule that was put in her place for protection, Kevin Brown stated that if she had followed the rules, this whole thing would have not happened. Washington then categorized as a gold digger. She was also categorized as a sellout by the community, and if she in fact had been raped she should have been quiet about it in order to protect Tyson. During the trial, Washington was subjected to racist and sexist maltreatment. Washington was isolated by the public and dehumanizing comments made by Tyson were ignored. Washington was left to suffer alone and in silence while Tyson was defended by the public despite his history of objection and abuse of women
(Griffin,74).
In the controversial court case, McCulloch v. Maryland, Chief Justice John Marshall’s verdict gave Congress the implied powers to carry out any laws they deemed to be “necessary and proper” to the state of the Union. In this 1819 court case, the state of Maryland tried to sue James McCulloch, a cashier at the Second Bank of the United States, for opening a branch in Baltimore. McCulloch refused to pay the tax and therefore the issue was brought before the courts; the decision would therefore change the way Americans viewed the Constitution to this day.
Dan Locallo is a very contradicting man. When he began his career as a prosecutor he was anything but polite to the defense lawyers. Locallo himself describes himself as “kind of an asshole” towards defense lawyers (Courtroom 302, 59). During his time as a prosecutor, Dan Locallo became intrigued by the opportunity to become a judge. When Steve Bogira asked Locallo why he wanted to become a judge, his reply seemed simple. Locallo claimed that he never wanted to become a judge because of a “power-trip” he does claim that “the power of attraction was a great influence” (Courtroom 302, 59). However, Locallo admits that the real reason why he wanted to become a judge was because he would have the “ability to make decisions, to do justice” (Courtroom 302, 59). As a judge, Locallo seems to express three different personalities, which tend to change depending on the current case at hand. His personalities are being compassionate judge, being an understanding judge, or being a hard-nose tough judge. Each of these personalities are not only determined by the case, but also by whether Locallo will profit on the long run; whether or not he will get reelected as a circuit judge at the end of his term.
Her little boy wasn't expected to make it through the night, the voice on the line said (“Determined to be heard”). Joshua Deshaney had been hospitalized in a life threatening coma after being brutally beat up by his father, Randy Deshaney. Randy had a history of abuse to his son prior to this event and had been working with the Department of Social Services to keep custody over his son. The court case was filed by Joshua's mother, Melody Deshaney, who was suing the DSS employees on behalf of failing to protect her son from his father. To understand the Deshaney v. Winnebago County Court case and the Supreme courts ruling, it's important to analyze the background, the court's decision, and how this case has impacted our society.
Trayvon Martin was killed by a neighborhood watchman, George Zimmerman. He says that it was self defense, but after the tragic phone call was released to the media everything took a huge turn questioning if it was a hate crime. If Zimmerman would have stayed in his car that night then Trayvon would still be alive. It could not be self-defense if all Travon had in his hand were skittles and some tea. The whole thing blew up right after it was released to the news. Then when it was time for the trial it was live on television. During the trial and after the verdict is when the social media started to go crazy.
Not guilty was the decision made by the jury during the George Zimmerman vs. Trayvon Martin trial. That verdict may have been the most controversial one of recent time. Many people were upset by the decision and felt that justice was not achieved for the young victim, Martin who was seventeen years old when he was killed. This incident seems to be a tragic example of stereotyping and racial profiling. It is also an example of how a verdict, based on the strict interpretation of the law can be the wrong verdict.
'Choosing death before dishonor is seen by some philosophers and ethicists as a rational reason to commit suicide.' In the 1994 case of Glucksberg v. Washington (Otherwise acknowledged as Compassion In Dying v. The State Of Washington), Harold Glucksberg, alongside the right-to-die organization Compassion In Dying, filed a suit in opposition to the state of Washington for three fatally ill patients he treated.
Dupree’s case. Through DNA testing they were able to clear him and get him released on parole in 2010 because the rape and robbery in which he was convicted occurred in the same incident. I believe that there was sufficient evidence during the initial trial to provide Mr. Dupree due process and be exonerated of these crimes. However, the systemic nature of discrimination and racism prevailed in the case. The system has always been flawed, and justice has not always been a priority for some, especially when it concerns minorities. The attitude is usually that all Blacks are the same, and if they didn’t do the crime at hand, they have done something they were not caught for, so it doesn’t matter. Even though Mr. Dupree was innocent at the time, the fact that Massingill had a weapon on him, and was also a suspect of another rape which he was committed for, in the eyes of the police, I believe that they overlooked the facts of this particular case, simply because he was with Mr. Dupree, and the two assailants were two Black
In a handful of occasions such as in an interrogation it seems reasonable enough to lie to an individual in order for them to confess to a crime. A case law that shows this was Frazier v. Cupp in which according to Police Link, “ The case involved the interrogation of a homicide suspect who was falsely told that an accomplice had already implicated the suspect in the killing.” In the case of Frazier v. Cupp kept on getting integrated even after he asked to speak to a lawyer so as a result he ended up doing a written confession where he confessed about being part of the murder that was later used as evidence against him.
It was a mistaken identity case where the distressed raped women picked out the wrong black man. Even though the conviction was overturned due to DNA evidence, a mistaken eyewitness testimony led to a wrongful conviction that the Burlington Police upheld without question due to prejudice feelings toward determine Ronald Cotton (Thompson-Cannino, Cotton and Torneo 283). Ronald had his whole family testify that he had been home the night Jennifer was raped however because he had mixed up his dates when he originally confessed that police assumed he was lying despite what he and his family said. The other indication of racism on the police force was when the second rape victim did not pick Ronald Cotton out of the physical lineup; she claimed she was terrified of the black men standing in front of her and just needed to leave, even though she knew it saw Ronald that had raped her (Thompson-Cannino, Cotton and Torneo 129). Ronald was believed to be guilty and was trying to prove his innocence from the beginning. This simply cannot occur in a justice system where one is supposed to be innocent until proven guilty; racism played a part in convicting this innocent man. Even during the second court case when he was trying to prove his innocence he remembered feeling the jury turn and look at him, "every single one of their white faces" believed how terrible of a man he was (Thompson-Cannino, Cotton and Torneo
This makes comments by the chairperson of the woman’s group to be obsolete. She made many negative comments about Tyson and his personalty. However, she had no first hand experience with Tyson compared with Fenech and she was not entitled to establish obstacles for him just to do his job based on crimes committed long ago [be specific].
Dred Scott, an African American man who was born into slavery, wanted what all slaves would have wanted, their freedom. They were mistreated, neglected, and treated not as humans, but as property. In 1852, Dred Scott sued his current owner, Sanford, about him, no longer being a slave, but a free man (Oyez 1). In Article four of the Constitution, it states that any slave, who set foot in a free land, makes them a free man. This controversy led to the ruling of the state courts and in the end, came to the final word of the Supreme Court. Is he a slave or a free man?
... athletes to do as they please. However he does not do a good job of being non-partisan. He leads his readers to believe the only group of people who would do such things are “jocks”. This bias is not true. The newspapers report that University fraternities, and secret societies are as likely, if not more likely, to commit these very same acts. He also leads the reader to believe that all athletes and athletic teams are similar. The impression he leaves about the majority of teams and their members is prejudicial and unfair. It is very unfortunate and disheartening that members of a community that were so highly reguarded, would commit such acts. It is even more disturbing to hear about the scenario leading up to the rape, and the community which produced these troubled young men. It is more important to look at why the events took place rather than who committed them, because ultimately the only innocent person involved is the victim, a mentally handicapped young girl, named Lesli Faber.
“’He trusted me…. With my father, my reputation was solid,’” said Arthur Ashe, when he was falsely accused of destroying a cabin during a tennis competition in 1960 (Lazo 38-40). As an African American at the time, Ashe constantly faces discrimination and limited opportunities. However, despite having a more challenging childhood than his tennis playing peers, Arthur Ashe risen to become an admirable athlete and achieved his American Dream.
The jury was predominately white. Johnson was judged by people that were different from his in many ways. In the article, “ Black Body on Trial: The Conviction of HIV-Positive ‘Tiger Mandingo’,” Thrasher describes the jury by saying “Of the 51 potential jurors, only one appeared to be nonwhite — a female, African-American retired nurse — and all identified as straight. Most looked to be in their fifties or older. During questioning, about half of the would-be jurors said being gay was a ‘choice.’ Only a third agreed that being gay was ‘not a sin.’ No potential juror acknowledged having HIV. All said they believed HIV-positive people who do not tell their sexual partners that they have the virus should be prosecuted.” None of the jurors could relate at all with Johnson. He was all on his own and the jurors had already come into the courtroom knowing that they would prosecute Johnson for transmitting the virus. This wasn’t the only problem with the jury it was all because the opposing lawyer would as Thrasher explains in the article, “ Black Body on Trial: The Conviction of HIV-Positive ‘Tiger Mandingo’,” how Groenweghe would weed out the jurors by asking questions about homosexuals. The younger jurors that were pro-gay did not make it, which could be seen as choosing people that are biased towards the gay community. The jury was not on Johnson’s side from the very beginning making it very
This case was about the rape of young Jennifer Thompson, who suffered this brutal attack in college and wittily escaped and saved her own life. She immediately went to the police and told them of her attack. When interviewed she said, “I made sure to study