Wait a second!
More handpicked essays just for you.
More handpicked essays just for you.
Racial discrimination in the justice system
Racial disparity in criminal justice
Racial discrimination in the justice system
Don’t take our word for it - see why 10 million students trust us with their essay needs.
Recommended: Racial discrimination in the justice system
On May 2, 1998, Cynthia Harrison’s body was found in a restaurant where she and Defendant Timothy Lee Hurst worked. She was found bound, gagged, and stabbed over 60 times and the restaurant safe was unlocked, open and missing hundreds of dollars. The trial lasted 4 days and the State offered forensic evidence that linked Hurst with Harrison’s murder. The State also had witnesses that testified that Hurst had discussed his plan to rob the restaurant. Hurst and Harrison were the only people scheduled to work at the time of the murder. Hurst used an alibi defense, claiming he never made it to work because his car broke down. The original trial court was located in Florida, where Hurst was found guilty of first-degree murder. The judge offered the jury two theories for finding Hurst guilty of first-degree murder: “premeditated murder or felony murder for an unlawful killing during a robbery.” The jury recommended the death penalty and the judge agreed with this recommendation. The Florida Supreme Court later vacated Hurst’s sentence for “reasons not relevant to this case.” At Hurst’s resentencing in 2012 the judge instructed the sentencing jury it could recommend the death penalty if it “found at least one aggravating circumstance beyond a reasonable doubt: that the murder was especially …show more content…
“In Ring, the court concluded that Arizona 's capital sentencing scheme violated Apprendi 's rule because the State allowed a judge to find the facts necessary to sentence a defendant to death.” In Apprendi the Court held that any fact that "expose[s] the defendant to a greater punishment than that authorized by the jury 's guilty verdict" is an "element" that must be submitted to a
John Bell made a complaint against Harry Brandy who was his colleague at the Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander Commission. Bell made a complaint to the Human Rights and Equal Opportunity Commission alleging verbal ill treatment and intimidating conduct by Brandy. HREOC found that Bell’s complaint was justified and
On the evening of Ms. Heggar¡¦s death she was alone in her house. Eddie Ray Branch, her grandson, testified that he visited his grandmother on the day that she was killed. He was there till at least 6:30 p.m. Lester Busby, her grandnephew, and David Hicks arrived while her grandson was still there and they saw him leave. They then went in to visit with Ms. Heggar. While they were there, Lester repaid Ms. Heggar 80 dollars, which he owed her. They left around 7:15 p.m. and went next door to a neighboring friend¡¦s house. David Hick¡¦s went home alone from there to get something but returned within ten minutes of leaving. Because he was only gone for 5-10 minutes, prosecution theorized TWO attacks on Ms. Heggar because he could not have killed his grandmother during this 5-10 minute period alone. At 7:30 p.m., 15 minutes after the two had left, an insurance salesman called to see Ms. Heggar. He knocked for about 2 or 3 minutes and got no reply. Her door was open but the screen door was closed. Her TV was on. He claimed to have left after about 5 minutes and then he returned the next morning. The circumstances were exactly the same. With concern, he went to the neighbor¡¦s house and called the police. His reasoning for being there was because the grandmother¡¦s family had taken out burial insurance three days before she had died.
Your honor, ladies and gentlemen of the jury, thank you for your attention today. [Slide #2] I would like to assert that separation is not the end of a relationship. Divorce is not the end of a relationship. Even an arrest is not the end of a relationship. Only death is the end of a relationship. In the case of defendant Donna Osborn, her insistence that ‘“one way or another I’ll be free,”’ as told in the testimony of her friend Jack Mathews and repeated in many others’, indicates that despite the lack of planning, the defendant had the full intent to kill her husband, Clinton Osborn.
The evidence presented to myself and the other juror’s proves that Tyrone Washburn is guilty beyond a reasonable doubt of the murder of his wife, Elena Washburn. On March 12, 1979 Elena Washburn was strangled in the living room of her family’s home. Her body was then dragged to the garage, leaving a trail of blood from the living room to the place it was found. Her husband, Tyrone Washburn, found her in the family’s garage on March 13, 1979 at 1:45 A.M. When officer Dale Chambers arrived at the scene he found her lying face down in a pool of blood. The solid evidence in this case proves only one person, Tyrone Washburn, is guilty of murder.
The Massie trial should be considered a trial of time because the trial consisted of the Hawaiian community being treated unfairly, majority of Hawaiians were characterized to be the rapist and not safe to be around. I also believe Thelma Massie wasn’t ever raped from the beginning I think she was mad because of the altercation she got into with the submarine at the club and wanted to blame it on someone else. And this trials shows how others didn’t agree with the trial decision and choose to take matters into their own hands, but also shows that when the rape test came back negative for during the first the courts should have checked for insanity in Thelma Massie.
They had an alibi witness, a gas receipt, a ticket on the day of the murder. A police officer who would not come unless the judge subpoena him and the judge of course refused and would not pay the $650 to summon him. There were also two jailhouse snitches who lied about their testimony. The police misconduct was used in how they charged these individuals originally and how they have been accused initially with robbery, which later turned into murder. The police created the story and intimidated an eye witness who refused to testify and threatened to charge her with the murder if she refused. The attorneys told a moving tale and Ron Keine and company ended up being convicted. This case was before DNA testing but what exonerated these individuals was the actual murder confessing to the crimes. The entire case seemed like a fluke and malicious attack on these people. A guy in Carolina, confessed to all charges and had an epiphany and told the police where the weapon was located and how everything happened and how he dragged the body. He had to fight to get the police to accept his confession because the police were acting as if they already had their
The Supreme Court developed the laws governing Victim Impact Statements based on what they thought was a constitutional conflict where the punishment may be enhanced when a statement made by the victim or family may have more of an impact on the sentencing authority than the severity of the crime (Stevens 2000). Or that the victim impact statement may draw the juries attention away from the evidence at hand and the case being decided through emotional not evidence based means. The Eighth Amendment requires that no excessive bail be required, nor excessive fines imposed, nor cruel and unusual punishments be inflicted.
Life. Life is what gives you the ability to think, to speak, to breath and to be a part of this world. It is worth more than any amount of money, your life is priceless. Without it, we would seize to exist; our world would be utter darkness. Honourable Judge, Ladies and Gentlemen of the jury, today Mary Maloney stands on trial before you. A woman who took the away the life of not just an innocent citizen, but her very own husband. She was thought to be an ordinary women, a typical housewife and a soon to be loving mother. However, the facts presented before you today conclude that Mary Maloney was not just an unordinary detective’s wife, but also a murder. On April 13th 1953, the life of Patrick Maloney came to a tragic end because of leg of lamb in the hands of Mary Maloney. For the following reasons, Mary Maloney, wife of the deceased, is guilty of 1st degree murder.
Opponents of the death punishment lauded the Supreme Court decision in the 1972 ruling that a jury's unregulated option to impose the death penalty led toward a "wanton and freakish pattern of its use" that was cruel and unusual. However, the anti-death penalty lobby was not the outright winners because the court failed to call the death penalty unconstitutional. Just a few years later, capital punishment was back with full force in the United States.
...he police because she would be imprisoned for child neglect. The defense not only came out and said George Anthony covered it up, but they also say that he sexually abused Casey as a child which later would cause her to hide her pain and lie. They also claimed that Caylee was George’s child.
Facts: Both Charles Boblit and John Brady were found guilty of first-degree murder and in turns sentenced to the death penalty in the sentencing phase in the state court of Anne Arundel County. Brady volunteered that he was involved in the robbery but did not involve himself in the homicide, he stated Boblit did act of killing. But since the prosecution kept the admittance Brady learned after sentencing that Boblit had confessed to the murder. On appeal, the Maryland Court of Appeals held that suppression of the confession denied Brady due process and remanded the case to reconsider the question of punishment
In the early 1950’s, the number of executions sharply declined. Opponents of the death penalty claimed that it violated the Eighth Amendment, which forbids cruel and unusual punishment. Opponents also claimed the death penalty violated the Fourteenth Amendment, which states that all citizens are entitled to equal protection under the law. In early 1972, William Furman was convicted of burglary and murder. While Furman was burglarizing a home, a resident arrived at the scene. Startled, Furman tried to flee, but tripped and fell in the process. The gun Furman was carrying discharged, killing the resident in the process. Furman did not believe he deserved the death penalty. The constitutionality of capital punishment in this circumstance was considered in the supreme co...
Many call capital punishment unconstitutional and point to the Eighth Amendment of the Constitution for support. The amendment states that, "Excessive bail shall not be required, nor excessive fines be imposed, nor cruel and unusual punishment be inflicted." Those who oppose the death penalty target the 'cruel and unusual' phrase as an explanation of why it is unconstitutional. Since the Framers of the Constitution are no longer with us and we base our nation on the words in which that document contains, the legality of the death penalty is subject to interpretation. Since there is some ambiguity or lack of preciseness in the Constitution, heated debate surrounding this issue has risen in the last ten years.
Don’t get me wrong, if a person proven guilty of murder, especially as heinous as this crime was, they deserve the death penalty but only if there was “no shadow of a doubt” hard pieces of evidence, more real proof, not circumstantial evidence, are connecting that person to the crime.
the second part of the trial, the punishment part. If then the jury considers the death